Posted on 04/19/2011 2:57:00 PM PDT by dragnet2
The action in question is a carbontax. It is taxing the co2 emission of the coke or pepsi.
Beer is next and all fermentation processes including bread baking will be taxed for CO2 emissions
We'll all work for the government in the end...Were almost there anyway...Expect unlike government employees, we won't be receiving lottery style government medical benefits and gold plated government pensions.
Er...Except...
Certain children.
The bill would put a one-cent tax per ounce of regular or diet soda sold in retail stores.
Will double the price of a Big Gulp. Sodas are also a huge profit margin item at restaurants - no more! And how exactly will they audit the sodas for customary refills at most places?
Interesting. Went and researched “Pigouvian Taxation” - I thought it was pronounced “pig” when actually it’s “peeshj” - French guy???? Anyway, informative read albeit heavy reading.
Per ounce?...
I misread it. It thought it was a 1 cent per can.
wow..
Man, ain’t that the (sad) truth.
I wonder if they have ever thought about taxing condoms?
Yep...
Sales at restaurants would be exempt (presumably this would include your Big Gulp as well).
Excerpt from S.B. No. 1004
CHAPTER 163. TAX ON DISCRETIONARY DRINK ITEMSIt appears to me that this tax would also apply to sports drinks like Gatorade, Powerade, etc.
SUBCHAPTER A. GENERAL PROVISIONSSec. 163.001. DEFINITION. In this chapter, "soft drink" means a carbonated or noncarbonated nonalcoholic beverage that contains natural or artificial sweeteners. The term does not include a beverage that:
(1) contains:
(A) milk or milk products;
(B) soy, rice, or similar milk substitutes; or
(C) more than 50 percent of vegetable or fruit juice by volume; or
(2) is intended by the manufacturer for consumption by an infant and is commonly referred to as "infant formula."
[Sections 163.002-163.050 reserved for expansion]SUBCHAPTER B. IMPOSITION AND COLLECTION OF TAX
Sec. 163.051. TAX IMPOSED.
(a) A tax is imposed on each sale at retail of a soft drink.
(b) The tax rate is one cent on each ounce or fractional ounce of soft drink sold.
(c) The tax imposed under this chapter is in addition to any other tax imposed by state law.
Sec. 163.052. EXCEPTIONS TO APPLICATION OF TAX. The tax imposed under this chapter does not apply to:
(1) a beverage sold in or by a restaurant, lunch counter, cafeteria, hotel, or other business for consumption on the premises of the business; or
(2) a beverage if the receipts from the sale of the beverage are taxable under Chapter 183.Sec. 163.053. RULES. The comptroller by rule shall prescribe the manner in which the tax imposed under this chapter is administered, imposed, and collected.
We've always had crazy democrats that will propose stupid taxes on just about anything. That doesn't mean this bill has a snowball's chance in Brownsville in July.
Funny how the government ruling class just pulls this taxation out of thin f'ing air, makes it look all proper and legal appearing, then ((shazamm)) they tell everyone, "This is now the law, pay up or else."
It's really unbelievable.
Damn yankee immigrants.
Well it’s not the law yet. It’s a proposal, and I can guarantee you that the republican majority in the Texas Senate will not let this bill see the light of day unless they decide to debate it and let the democrats go on record voting for a huge tax on your Coke and Dr. Pepper and Gatorade. Either way, this bill has zero chance of becoming law in Texas, and if it somehow managed to attract enough RINO’s to pass, Governor Good Hair will veto it in a heartbeat.
Got bad news for you. Once government starts down this road, of there is no turning back. Seems there doing everything except laying off thousands of government employees.
A better bet for about any State is to turn a lot of their misdemeanor offenses into big fines. With a twist.
When a police officer arrests someone for a listed offense, if there are no extenuating circumstances, they should be given a choice: to go through the typical court process, from which they might get jail time and a court fine; *or*, they might agree to a “civil fine”, that is substantially larger than the typical court fine, and must be paid in cash, or equivalent, and cannot be appealed.
So say some fool gets drunk and urinates on a building in public. After he spends the night in the drunk tank and sobers up, he can either face a court date, jail and a $200 fine; or he can shell out say, $1000 (first offense) in cash and walk out of there, with no “stain”, as it were, on his record.
Now, the State might decide on doubling or tripling or more the fine for repeat offenders, multiple offenses at once, or especially ‘scofflaws’ who are wealthy and see it as a free pass to offend, based on the judge’s discretion. And if the offender is “contemptuous”, a judge may deny them the payment option.
The bottom line for doing this is twofold. First, putting such people in jail after a trial is terribly expensive. And second, doing things this way could provide States with a huge source of pain-free income.
Some of these optional fines might be pretty impressive. For example, a first time, non-accident DUI offender has created a serious risk to public safety, though no one was harmed. So they should have the option to pay a premium of say $20,000-$30,000, without all the permanent damage that comes from having a DUI on their record.
But that should only be a one-shot. Second offense and they go to jail. And if only a fraction of first time, non-accident DUI offenders took this option, it could wipe away much of a State’s debt.
By having this done for a whole range of misdemeanors, most States could be back in the black for the foreseeable future.
This is what they're dancing around. Same in CA.
Instead of dramatically downsizing government and government spending, they want to raise fines, fees, and taxes.
Of course not. But if I was in the TX legislature, I’d slap a new number on such a bill and roll it out for debate every time somebody else introduces something like this soda tax. Let them explain why it’s OK to target other groups for new taxes but not such rich juicy targets as excessive government employee pay and benefits.
Remember, a tax sidesteps the whole issue of their union contracts — they still get the pay and benefits they negotiated into their contracts, and nobody ever promised them it wouldn’t be subject to new taxes.
They won’t stop until the force new tax after new tax on the private sector.
Control, regulate, tax, fees and fines.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.