Beer tax proposed to curtail teen drinking
- Thread starter RedOctober
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
EdWort
Well-Known Member
It's just a money grab. It won't change anything except drive people across the border to buy beer.
Ain't that the truth. I mean cigarettes are like 3-4 times what I paid back when I started smoking. The cost is so outrageous now that I just don't understand how teens would ever start the habit. And yet they do. That tells me that increasing the tax on beer just wont have a much of an impact on teen drinking. Of course, like EdWort said: 'It's just a money grab'. The teen drinking thing is just an excuse for raising taxes.
Kids will still buy it. They'll find a way to channel this money into some other place eventually. I disagree with the idea that you can throw money at this kind of problem and make it go away. Like Bowie said, " And these children that you spit on as they try to change their worlds are immune to your consultations they're quite aware of what they're going through."
They don't want to hear a bunch of adults preaching to them about the evils of drinking.
They don't want to hear a bunch of adults preaching to them about the evils of drinking.
EdWort
Well-Known Member
It still boils down to poor parenting combined with an idiotic drinking age of 21.
You can vote when you are 18, though clueless. You can die for your country when 18, but you cannot enjoy a cold beer.
Germany lets 16 year olds drink beer and they do not have a problem. It's been like that for decades.
You can vote when you are 18, though clueless. You can die for your country when 18, but you cannot enjoy a cold beer.
Germany lets 16 year olds drink beer and they do not have a problem. It's been like that for decades.
flyangler18
Well-Known Member
Nice. I like how it's 25 cents on a 1.75L bottle of booze and 25 cents on a 12 ounce bottle of Budwater. Smart! Somebody should give this guy a dunce cap for Christmas.
daktruckie99
Well-Known Member
Considering kids will already overpay like crazy just to have access to it. I think it will just put more money back into the hands of the person buying for the minor.
Sad but true
Sad but true
camiller
Well-Known Member
During a similar discussion on a local talk radio show the host opined "I was never richer than when I was a teen ager -- I had a part time job, no rent, no car payment, all my take home pay was mine to spend." A small increase in taxes would not deter a teen and would be more harmful to working class adults.
EdWort
Well-Known Member
Ah, it's just "Spreading the wealth" you know. The concept is growing in popularity these days.
springer
Well-Known Member
It really is a money grab the State of NY will have a deficit of close to 15 billion in the next few years. Think this money will ever make it to the intended agencies for teen alcohol abuse. Damn they want to put a tax on all sodas that are not diet. What a bunch of morons
Pivzavod
Well-Known Member
Another good reason to home brew. Lets say they do pass this stupid law and as an average drinker you consume 1 12oz bottle of beer per day. Thats 30 bottles a month or an increase of $7.50/month. If you drink 2 beers per day thats $15/month more that you are spending. As long as the beer kit prices dont go up I will be ok.
EdWort
Well-Known Member
Make you wonder WTF the money is spent. More stupid programs, more waste, more taxes, all for what. ******** vote buying schemes to stay in power to spend even more money they don't have.
Pelikan
Well-Known Member
I was reading not so long ago about a panel of college academics that were getting together in an attempt to lower the drinking age to 18. Their argument was that drinking in college is so rampant among underclassman because of the allure. In other words, once students turn 21, they drink in a controlled bar environment for the most part, and drink less. But when they're under 21, they are much more likely to engage in risky behavior, as the process of obtaining alcohol is, in itself, a risk.
There was a much longer statement of purpose, but the basic point is that some of the country's greatest minds are advocating for an 18 drinking age. It'll probably never happen, but still.
There was a much longer statement of purpose, but the basic point is that some of the country's greatest minds are advocating for an 18 drinking age. It'll probably never happen, but still.
EdWort
Well-Known Member
I guess that's why 16 year old's can drink in Germany. They can't drive till they are 18, but they too can drink in a controlled environment and get it out of their system before they go to the university.
We tried to lower it here a few decades back. I guess the drinking problem skyrocketed.
I've also heard that some German exchange students that came here were constantly getting hammered at the local parties FWIW.
My 14 yo has refuse all offers of sampling beer. My 9 yo tasted an IPA I brewed, and will be many years before she tries another beer.
I'm all for allowing younger drinking, but possibly only in the parents home, with supervision. Just allowing kids to buy booze and party is not a great idea. They WILL find a way to party hard and continue to do stupid things. At least if they are allowed to partake with supervision, then they can see that there isn't some magical transformation that happens when you party.
Just watched Superbad last night again. Funny show, but come on. Buying booze was never that hard for me!
I've also heard that some German exchange students that came here were constantly getting hammered at the local parties FWIW.
My 14 yo has refuse all offers of sampling beer. My 9 yo tasted an IPA I brewed, and will be many years before she tries another beer.
I'm all for allowing younger drinking, but possibly only in the parents home, with supervision. Just allowing kids to buy booze and party is not a great idea. They WILL find a way to party hard and continue to do stupid things. At least if they are allowed to partake with supervision, then they can see that there isn't some magical transformation that happens when you party.
Just watched Superbad last night again. Funny show, but come on. Buying booze was never that hard for me!
Pelikan
Well-Known Member
Did it, or is that just supposition? I'm guessing pressure from parent-groups got it raised.
Getting alcohol is much, much harder for kids these days than it was 20 or 30 years ago. It wasn't that long ago when I was underage, and getting booze really was a task. It got easier and easier the closer I got to 21, but still a PITA any way you look at it.
The funny thing is, I drank waaaay more underage. Indeed, I drank more my freshman year of college than I have in all the subsequent years put together.
Evan!
Well-Known Member
Well, I think we all knew that one kid at college whose parents had a zero-tolerance policy in high school. Once they got to college, you had two life-changing events coincide for a perfect storm: lack of parental supervision, and exposure to massive amounts of alcohol consumption. These are the kids who typically ended up smashed beyond recognition all the time, and unable to control themselves---thus becoming a danger to themselves and people around them. Now, this isn't a hard and fast rule, but I saw it too much to think it's just a coincidence. I'm sorry, but sending your child out into the world on their own with no experience with the substance that is going to be a huge part of their life for the next 4 years, is just idiotic. And no amount of dorkus malorkus after school specials is a substitute for a good old fashioned "chug a mad dog and then puke in the bushes" learning experience.
Ah, it wasn't easy either. Of course, you're a decade older than me, so maybe it was easier in the 80's. I mean, after the authorities shut down the Arabs' corner store where we used to get our bum wine, we had to resort to getting this funny short black dude who worked in the mc'd's drive-thru with my friend (and who was one of those black guys who thought they were the next Keith Sweat and sang R&B everywhere all the time, but I digress) to go into the ABC store to get us booze. Of course, I don't know where you grew up either. Here, you can only get distilled spirits from a state-run Alcoholic Beverage Control store, where they are very strict and demand 2 ID's if you look under 40.
Ah, it wasn't easy either. Of course, you're a decade older than me, so maybe it was easier in the 80's. I mean, after the authorities shut down the Arabs' corner store where we used to get our bum wine, we had to resort to getting this funny short black dude who worked in the mc'd's drive-thru with my friend (and who was one of those black guys who thought they were the next Keith Sweat and sang R&B everywhere all the time, but I digress) to go into the ABC store to get us booze. Of course, I don't know where you grew up either. Here, you can only get distilled spirits from a state-run Alcoholic Beverage Control store, where they are very strict and demand 2 ID's if you look under 40.
Orangevango
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2008
- Messages
- 596
- Reaction score
- 5
Im 22 and Ive been drinking since I was 16, There were very few times that I wanted to buy beer that I was unable to find someone to buy it for me. I am strongly opposed to such high drinking ages, criminalizing something so wonderful is a crying shame.
Well, I grew up in a small town in the middle of the lower peninsula. To get beer, you just ask any number of young adults who you knew would buy. I never bought hard liquor, but beer was purchased at the same place: corner store.
Lots of kids had parents who bought for them and their friends too.
On Friday and Saturday nights, if you wanted to drink, you just had to get someone to drive you to the party. There are a few places where parties happened. Why the local law enforcement didn't go out there and investigate, I'll never know.
After seeing a couple of these parties first hand, I wonder why the preg rate was not much higher! Now I was never one to go partying, but I always knew what was going on, and who was doing it.
Looking back, I see it was all a big waste of time for us. Lots of kids were excited all week to get out and get drunk. I'm going to get so drunk!! WTF? Even back then I didn't see the reason, or the enticement.
Now, drunk girls, who would do lots of things you only dreamed about... That was a different story. Good thing I was too chicken to do anything with them!
Lots of kids had parents who bought for them and their friends too.
On Friday and Saturday nights, if you wanted to drink, you just had to get someone to drive you to the party. There are a few places where parties happened. Why the local law enforcement didn't go out there and investigate, I'll never know.
After seeing a couple of these parties first hand, I wonder why the preg rate was not much higher! Now I was never one to go partying, but I always knew what was going on, and who was doing it.
Looking back, I see it was all a big waste of time for us. Lots of kids were excited all week to get out and get drunk. I'm going to get so drunk!! WTF? Even back then I didn't see the reason, or the enticement.
Now, drunk girls, who would do lots of things you only dreamed about... That was a different story. Good thing I was too chicken to do anything with them!
Frankly, I'll never know. The explanation I got came from my friend's older sister, who was able to drink at 18, but lost it again before she turned 21. I took her word for it since she would have no reason to tell me a different story. Where she got her info from, I don't know. Could have been newspapers I guess.
I'm not sure what the law is regarding giving beer to your own underage kids.
Panzermann
Well-Known Member
HaHa!
America always attempts the most ignorant **** known to mankind. LMAO @ thinking a Beer tax is going to curtail teen drinking. haha
Just like prohibition stopped alcohol consumption, the ware on drugs has taken drugs off our streets.
Bwahahahahaha!
Very amusing to say the least...
America always attempts the most ignorant **** known to mankind. LMAO @ thinking a Beer tax is going to curtail teen drinking. haha
Just like prohibition stopped alcohol consumption, the ware on drugs has taken drugs off our streets.
Bwahahahahaha!
Very amusing to say the least...
Pelikan
Well-Known Member
Heh, is it really that funny?
Kinda sad, almost. Speaks to our grip on reality, at the national level (tenuous at best, in other words).Regarding ignorance, America is up there, but Deutschland has pulled some whoppers in its time...
Evan!
Well-Known Member
The war on booze and the war on drugs have claimed many otherwise innocent people in their quests to protect people from themselves. I don't find it amusing in the least. There's nothing humorous about this man spending the rest of his life in prison because the gubmint doesn't like people getting medication for their chronic pain.
OP
OP
RedOctober
Well-Known Member
Guys please I love to rant (more than most actually) but please don't miss the real issue here.
As previous posters have already said, this is nothing more than a ploy to put the government hand in your pocket.
I'm sure these politicans do not believe that this will help any problems other than revenue issues.
If teenagers getting drunk and doing crazy/bad stuff would help them stay in office than they would find a way to start a government sponsored Octoberfest!
Free Beer yall, woohoo!~!!
As previous posters have already said, this is nothing more than a ploy to put the government hand in your pocket.
I'm sure these politicans do not believe that this will help any problems other than revenue issues.
If teenagers getting drunk and doing crazy/bad stuff would help them stay in office than they would find a way to start a government sponsored Octoberfest!
Free Beer yall, woohoo!~!!
Evan!
Well-Known Member
But that's just it---the real issue is the "real issue" because we as a people still harbor this fear/aversion to booze---latent prohibitionism if you will---which means that politicians are able to get away with nearly anything when it comes to demonizing alcohol.
This has nothing to do with saving the children or legislating morality. It has everything to do with raising revenue. This is NY after all where figuring out ways to raise revenue has been turned in to an art form.
ohiobrewtus
Well-Known Member
HA! Good to see that someone else has 'Super (mentally challenged) Ninja' in their avatar arsenal. :rockin:
Panzermann
Well-Known Member
Of course it is to nickel and dime everyone, its just funny the pathetic guises they utilise to do so. "It's for the children" lol...anytime you hear that..it is time to stop and look into the issue more because more thank likely it is complete BS!
Funny how Europe has allowed minors to drink beer, marijuana is legal in Amsterdam...how come they aren't going around mass murdering everyone or why isn't the death and violence caused by alcohol bringing the nations down?
I'm just saying America does not have a grip on reality. War on Drugs, Alcohol Laws, Tobbaco is legal although it kills millions (lol)...all this is a joke. The bottom line is we have morons raising morons, that is a bigger problem then retarded legislation.
Funny how Europe has allowed minors to drink beer, marijuana is legal in Amsterdam...how come they aren't going around mass murdering everyone or why isn't the death and violence caused by alcohol bringing the nations down?
I'm just saying America does not have a grip on reality. War on Drugs, Alcohol Laws, Tobbaco is legal although it kills millions (lol)...all this is a joke. The bottom line is we have morons raising morons, that is a bigger problem then retarded legislation.
OP
OP
RedOctober
Well-Known Member
As they say on Fark: FAIL How does raising a tax on something prevent people who are using it illegally from continuing to use? Illegal substances are already priced above the open market and an additional tax on the channel is only a money grab.
This can only lead to ... more homebrewing!
This can only lead to ... more homebrewing!
OP
OP
RedOctober
Well-Known Member
GOV'S TAX & SPEND SHOCKER
http://www.nypost.com/sev..._spend_shocker_144629.htm
ADDS 137 HIKES WHILE INCREASING BUDGET TO $121B
By BRENDAN SCOTT Post Corespondent
Last updated: 4:02 am
December 17, 2008
Posted: 4:01 am
December 17, 2008
ALBANY - Gov. Paterson yesterday socked New Yorkers with a mind-boggling 137 proposed new and hiked taxes on everything from beer to cab rides to iTunes downloads and movie tickets.
The doomsday, $121.1 billion plan represents the biggest tax hike in state history and slashes services across the board - while still increasing spending by $1.4 billion.
The Draconian plan calls for:
* An "iTunes tax" of 4 percent on videos, music or pictures downloaded from the Internet.
* A 4 percent tax on taxi, limo and bus rides. That means a $10 cab ride would cost 40 cents more.
* A 4 percent entertainment tax on tickets to movies, concerts and sporting events. That would add nearly 50 cents to a $12 movie ticket or $1.80 to the cheapest $44.50 seat at a Knicks game.
* The tax on beer increases 24 cents per gallon, or more than double the current rate, which means about 30 cents a case.
* An 18 percent tax on nondiet soft drinks, which aims to reduce child obesity. A $1.50 can of Pepsi would then cost at least 25 cents more.
* A 4 percent tax on cable TV and satellite services, raising a $100 bill by $4.
* Hiking the cost of "personal" services - including haircuts, manicures, pedicures, massages and gym memberships - by 4 percent.
* A 4 percent sales tax on clothing and shoes under $500, except for two weeks out of the year.
* Elimination of the law that caps the state sales tax on gasoline at 8 cents per gallon.
* Boosting the average vehicle registration fee for drivers by $11, from $44 to $55. Fees for new or renewed licenses also would increase 25 percent, or increase from $50 to about $62 to renew a license over eight years.
In addition, all drivers would have to get new, "reflectorized" license plates at a fee of $25 each.
The plan also calls for the state to allow wine to be sold in grocery stores.
It would introduce video slot machines at Belmont Park.
New York could also join other states in their lottery games.
State officials estimate the plan would raise $4.6 billion annually - or the most in "revenue actions" in state history.
On the flip side, it calls for cuts of $9.5 billion, including radical reductions to hospital and school subsidies and the elimination of more than $1 billion in aid that City Hall hoped would help it weather the worst economic downturn in at least a generation.
Despite all the taxes and cuts, spending still would increase by 1.1 percent over last year's $119.7 billion budget.
In delivering his budget to lawmakers, the governor said Albany's overspending - not Wall Street's downturn - was to blame for the $15.4 billion budget gap he promised to close.
"Unfortunately, we have lived beyond our means," the Democratic governor said. "We have to recognize that we've made too many promises and unfortunately asked for too few sacrifices. We are going to have to change our culture as we know it."
His plan immediately came under fire from both the left and the right.
"The pain in this budget seems to be strictly for the middle class," said Sen. Martin Golden (R-Brooklyn). "You name it, [Paterson] taxes it. If anybody's contemplating leaving the state of New York, this should push them over the top."
Paterson laid out dramatic cuts to education and health care, which together make up more than half of the state budget. Powerful lobby groups for both sectors quickly lined up to fight the proposal in the Legislature.
"These are staggering cuts that will shatter New York's health-care infrastructure," said SEIU 1199 President George Gresham and Greater New York Hospital Association President Kenneth E. Raske in a joint statement.
Billy Easton, who heads the Alliance for Quality Education, added, "The governor has shifted the unbearable burden of closing the budget gap onto the shoulders of school children while sparing the wealthiest New Yorkers."
Additional reporting by David Seifman
http://www.nypost.com/sev..._spend_shocker_144629.htm
ADDS 137 HIKES WHILE INCREASING BUDGET TO $121B
By BRENDAN SCOTT Post Corespondent
Last updated: 4:02 am
December 17, 2008
Posted: 4:01 am
December 17, 2008
ALBANY - Gov. Paterson yesterday socked New Yorkers with a mind-boggling 137 proposed new and hiked taxes on everything from beer to cab rides to iTunes downloads and movie tickets.
The doomsday, $121.1 billion plan represents the biggest tax hike in state history and slashes services across the board - while still increasing spending by $1.4 billion.
The Draconian plan calls for:
* An "iTunes tax" of 4 percent on videos, music or pictures downloaded from the Internet.
* A 4 percent tax on taxi, limo and bus rides. That means a $10 cab ride would cost 40 cents more.
* A 4 percent entertainment tax on tickets to movies, concerts and sporting events. That would add nearly 50 cents to a $12 movie ticket or $1.80 to the cheapest $44.50 seat at a Knicks game.
* The tax on beer increases 24 cents per gallon, or more than double the current rate, which means about 30 cents a case.
* An 18 percent tax on nondiet soft drinks, which aims to reduce child obesity. A $1.50 can of Pepsi would then cost at least 25 cents more.
* A 4 percent tax on cable TV and satellite services, raising a $100 bill by $4.
* Hiking the cost of "personal" services - including haircuts, manicures, pedicures, massages and gym memberships - by 4 percent.
* A 4 percent sales tax on clothing and shoes under $500, except for two weeks out of the year.
* Elimination of the law that caps the state sales tax on gasoline at 8 cents per gallon.
* Boosting the average vehicle registration fee for drivers by $11, from $44 to $55. Fees for new or renewed licenses also would increase 25 percent, or increase from $50 to about $62 to renew a license over eight years.
In addition, all drivers would have to get new, "reflectorized" license plates at a fee of $25 each.
The plan also calls for the state to allow wine to be sold in grocery stores.
It would introduce video slot machines at Belmont Park.
New York could also join other states in their lottery games.
State officials estimate the plan would raise $4.6 billion annually - or the most in "revenue actions" in state history.
On the flip side, it calls for cuts of $9.5 billion, including radical reductions to hospital and school subsidies and the elimination of more than $1 billion in aid that City Hall hoped would help it weather the worst economic downturn in at least a generation.
Despite all the taxes and cuts, spending still would increase by 1.1 percent over last year's $119.7 billion budget.
In delivering his budget to lawmakers, the governor said Albany's overspending - not Wall Street's downturn - was to blame for the $15.4 billion budget gap he promised to close.
"Unfortunately, we have lived beyond our means," the Democratic governor said. "We have to recognize that we've made too many promises and unfortunately asked for too few sacrifices. We are going to have to change our culture as we know it."
His plan immediately came under fire from both the left and the right.
"The pain in this budget seems to be strictly for the middle class," said Sen. Martin Golden (R-Brooklyn). "You name it, [Paterson] taxes it. If anybody's contemplating leaving the state of New York, this should push them over the top."
Paterson laid out dramatic cuts to education and health care, which together make up more than half of the state budget. Powerful lobby groups for both sectors quickly lined up to fight the proposal in the Legislature.
"These are staggering cuts that will shatter New York's health-care infrastructure," said SEIU 1199 President George Gresham and Greater New York Hospital Association President Kenneth E. Raske in a joint statement.
Billy Easton, who heads the Alliance for Quality Education, added, "The governor has shifted the unbearable burden of closing the budget gap onto the shoulders of school children while sparing the wealthiest New Yorkers."
Additional reporting by David Seifman
remilard
Well-Known Member
Interestingly the typical argument against sin tax increases is that they are a poor method of raising revenue since they result in decreased consumption and no net tax increase. You guys seem to think they opposite, that they don't affect consumption at all and are wildly successful fund raising tactics.
I think reality would disagree.
When you tax something you invariably get less of it. I would much rather see an alcohol tax (or any consumption tax) than a tax on work, investing or saving.
I think reality would disagree.
When you tax something you invariably get less of it. I would much rather see an alcohol tax (or any consumption tax) than a tax on work, investing or saving.
EdWort
Well-Known Member
While they do affect consumption, they also affect WHERE they buy them. Punitive and arbitrary taxes drive people to purchase from the black market or in neighboring states.
It's the neighboring states that will enjoy a spike in tax revenue.
TroubleBrewing
Active Member
They did the same thing here in Australia, except on "alcopops", basically premixed spirit drinks. The whole way through, it was "no totally, it's to stop teenage binge drinking, really! are you saying you support teens getting drunk?". They're pocketing $3 billion a year from it...
Don't let them do it to you. Get political on their asses, make enough of a noise and they'll know it won't fly. And then they'll try and think of something else they can tax...
Don't let them do it to you. Get political on their asses, make enough of a noise and they'll know it won't fly. And then they'll try and think of something else they can tax...
OP
OP
RedOctober
Well-Known Member
Daily News Article:
NY gov proposes tax on drinks, downloaded music
29 mins ago
ALBANY, N.Y. - Gov. David Paterson's first state budget threatens to affect just about every New Yorker. Even those online.
Paterson proposed Tuesday a 2009-10 budget that would increase spending by 1.1 percent, or $1.3 billion, to create a $121.1 billion spending plan.
Much of the growth is revenue from 88 new or higher fees and will hit New Yorkers in many areas, from downloading music to sipping drinks to fishing.
One of the proposed hikes is a so-called "iPod tax," which would tax the sale of downloaded music and other "digitally delivered entertainment services" by 4 percent.
There also would be higher taxes on gas, taxi rides, cable and satellite TV service, cigars, beer, movie and sports tickets, and health spa visits, to name a few items.
Paterson seems to be fighting both obesity and budget deficits with a proposal for an 18 percent tax on soda and other sugary drinks containing less than 70 percent real fruit juice.
"People don't really realize the amount of calories they're ingesting through liquids," said Joe Baker acting deputy secretary for Health and Human Services to the governor. "They say, 'Oh, it's just a drink.'"
The idea is to discourage consumption of high-caloric beverages - health officials estimate a 5 percent drop - and to raise $404 million in fiscal year 2009-2010 toward the state's multibillion dollar budget gap. Paterson said the proposal would raise $539 million in 2010-2011.
The American Beverage Association opposes the tax, saying it would most harm the middle class. The group also argued that it doesn't make sense to single out a single food product as the cause for obesity.
"There is no science or logic that justifies it," the association's statement said. "Rather, we need to focus on promoting balanced eating habits and more physical activity. Until we get our kids exercising more the scales will be tipped against our next generation."
According to state officials, almost one in four New Yorkers under age 18 are obese, and at higher risk for dangerous, expensive illnesses like diabetes and heart disease.
The famous Minuteman statue stands at the ready in the predawn hours in Lexington.
NY gov proposes tax on drinks, downloaded music
29 mins ago
ALBANY, N.Y. - Gov. David Paterson's first state budget threatens to affect just about every New Yorker. Even those online.
Paterson proposed Tuesday a 2009-10 budget that would increase spending by 1.1 percent, or $1.3 billion, to create a $121.1 billion spending plan.
Much of the growth is revenue from 88 new or higher fees and will hit New Yorkers in many areas, from downloading music to sipping drinks to fishing.
One of the proposed hikes is a so-called "iPod tax," which would tax the sale of downloaded music and other "digitally delivered entertainment services" by 4 percent.
There also would be higher taxes on gas, taxi rides, cable and satellite TV service, cigars, beer, movie and sports tickets, and health spa visits, to name a few items.
Paterson seems to be fighting both obesity and budget deficits with a proposal for an 18 percent tax on soda and other sugary drinks containing less than 70 percent real fruit juice.
"People don't really realize the amount of calories they're ingesting through liquids," said Joe Baker acting deputy secretary for Health and Human Services to the governor. "They say, 'Oh, it's just a drink.'"
The idea is to discourage consumption of high-caloric beverages - health officials estimate a 5 percent drop - and to raise $404 million in fiscal year 2009-2010 toward the state's multibillion dollar budget gap. Paterson said the proposal would raise $539 million in 2010-2011.
The American Beverage Association opposes the tax, saying it would most harm the middle class. The group also argued that it doesn't make sense to single out a single food product as the cause for obesity.
"There is no science or logic that justifies it," the association's statement said. "Rather, we need to focus on promoting balanced eating habits and more physical activity. Until we get our kids exercising more the scales will be tipped against our next generation."
According to state officials, almost one in four New Yorkers under age 18 are obese, and at higher risk for dangerous, expensive illnesses like diabetes and heart disease.
The famous Minuteman statue stands at the ready in the predawn hours in Lexington.
I know this isn't beer related but...
How are i-tune taxes to be enforced? I've never purchased any audio/video download so I don't know the proceedures of download purchases. But I just question how a state can enforce such a tax? Normally sales tax is only enforced on online purchases if the online store has a physical presence in the state. Does some i-tunes division have a brick and mortar store in NY? Or perhaps some sort of apple related store is counting as the physical presence? Are they then just adding the 4% i-tunes download tax there? What about other mp3 downloads? I assume they would be taxed as well. Certainly not every mp3 download site has a presence in NY. How will the tax be enforced for them? Wouldn't people just be driven to those other sites?
And the tax on non-diet pop... Thats just so stupid given the huge amount of research that says that diet drink consumers tend to consume more calories elsewhere. Not to mention the questionable ingredients replacing the sugars in those drinks. Its just messed up.
Ultimately I'm just glad I homebrew. As I add more fermentors and bottles I think I will be able to eliminate most, if not all, purchases of store bought beer. Might even make my own soda too some day.
How are i-tune taxes to be enforced? I've never purchased any audio/video download so I don't know the proceedures of download purchases. But I just question how a state can enforce such a tax? Normally sales tax is only enforced on online purchases if the online store has a physical presence in the state. Does some i-tunes division have a brick and mortar store in NY? Or perhaps some sort of apple related store is counting as the physical presence? Are they then just adding the 4% i-tunes download tax there? What about other mp3 downloads? I assume they would be taxed as well. Certainly not every mp3 download site has a presence in NY. How will the tax be enforced for them? Wouldn't people just be driven to those other sites?
And the tax on non-diet pop... Thats just so stupid given the huge amount of research that says that diet drink consumers tend to consume more calories elsewhere. Not to mention the questionable ingredients replacing the sugars in those drinks. Its just messed up.
Ultimately I'm just glad I homebrew. As I add more fermentors and bottles I think I will be able to eliminate most, if not all, purchases of store bought beer. Might even make my own soda too some day.
Moonpile
Well-Known Member
National Teach a NY Kid to Brew Day.
Just kidding, of course.
Just kidding, of course.
Pelikan
Well-Known Member
Eves: If you use a credit card, you have to put your billing address. If you live in NY, iTunes (or other such services) will add the tax.
remilard: I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but do you have anything to back that up (I ask not as a wise-guy, but because I'd be curious to read it)? I agree with EdWort, in the sense that a savvy user of whatever substance (be it softdrinks or crack), will buy them wherever the price is best. So on the books it might appear that these taxes curb use, but in practice it means that the user is sourcing from beyond the book's reach (if that makes sense).
remilard: I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but do you have anything to back that up (I ask not as a wise-guy, but because I'd be curious to read it)? I agree with EdWort, in the sense that a savvy user of whatever substance (be it softdrinks or crack), will buy them wherever the price is best. So on the books it might appear that these taxes curb use, but in practice it means that the user is sourcing from beyond the book's reach (if that makes sense).
Similar threads
