How High Is Too High? Crunching Marijuana Taxes
How high should marijuana tax rates be? That's a question more and more states are grappling with as they extend approval for medical marijuana use to adult recreational consumption. A consultant who worked on California's rate explains the "Goldilocks standard."
June 23, 2017 at 01:33 PM
8 minute read
In the campaign playbook for legalizing marijuana, one of the most potent arguments from proponents is the potential explosion of big tax dollars. Bringing the recreational market out of the shadows and taxing it, advocates say, will provide millions of dollars—maybe billions—for drug treatment, public schools and a host of other programs.
But just how high should that tax rate be? It's a question more and more states are grappling with as they extend approval for medical marijuana use to adult recreational consumption.
Just this week, the two houses of the Massachusetts legislature passed competing bills overhauling the state's recreational-use law. The House of Representatives wants a 28 percent retail tax and plans to spend the resulting revenue on substance abuse treatment when sales go legal on Jan. 1. State senators approved a 12 percent tax, worried that the House's higher rate would drive users to the black market or to nearby Maine, where recreational cannabis will carry a 10 percent tax. A conference committee will try to find a compromise by July 1.
“The tricky part is, how do you take into account what you consider to be necessary revenue generation with the realities” of market forces, said Taylor West, deputy director of the National Cannabis Industry Association. “There is just a remarkable amount of variables and we don't have a lot of historic data.”
Read more: Legal Marijuana: Budding Industry, Burning Questions
The authors of Proposition 64, California's November 2016 ballot measure that legalized recreational marijuana, included a 15 percent excise tax on the retail price. Consumers will also pay state and local sales taxes and any additional levies approved by local governments when legalized operations launch on Jan. 1. Cultivators will pay a $9.25-per-ounce tax on marijuana flowers and $2.75-per-ounce tax on leaves.
Jason Kinney, a consultant who worked on the Proposition 64 campaign, said setting the tax rates was an issue of “intense deliberation,” especially since political and constitutional constraints would make it difficult to change them in the future.
“Our objective was the Goldilocks standard—set the tax rate too high, the black market flourishes; set it too low, you flood the market with cheap product and it gets into the wrong hands [and] you don't collect enough revenue to offset the community impacts of the new industry,” Kinney said. “The goal then was to set a rate that was 'just right.'”
Given that cities and counties could add on additional taxes “15 percent seemed like the fairest, most balanced approach,” he said.
Pioneer legalization states have chosen different taxation paths.
The state of Washington imposes a 37 percent excise tax on retail sales in addition to the standard 6.5 percent sales tax. Washington originally imposed a 25 percent tax at three stages of the marijuana supply change. But in 2015 lawmakers moved to the single 37 percent tax to eliminate the complexity of the previous system. The state expects to collect more than $304 million in excise taxes for the fiscal year ending this month.
Colorado imposes a 15 percent excise tax on wholesale transfers of cannabis, a 10 percent special sales tax on marijuana plus the state sales tax of 2.9 percent. To generate more money for the state's roads and schools, the governor recently signed legislation that will boost the 10 percent special sales tax to 15 percent while scrapping the 2.9 percent state sales tax on marijuana.
Alaska forgoes special sales taxes for a $50-per-ounce tax on marijuana buds when they're transferred from a grower to a retailer or manufacturer.
Oregon collects a 17 percent sales tax on marijuana. Cities and counties can impose an additional tax of up to 3 percent tax if local voters approve.
Because the legalization of recreational marijuana is so new, the analysis is thin on what taxation approach works best, West said.
“That research is basically going on right now with these real-world attempts to get this right,” she said.
Related Articles:
|- Becerra Says Sessions Should 'Worry About His Own Problems,' Not Marijuana
- Six Key Updates in California's Latest Marijuana Regulatory Proposal
- California Prepares to Ramp Up Push for Marijuana Rules
- California Judges Are Told to Stay Away from Pot Businesses
- California Regulators Want to Open Doors for Marijuana Tax Payments
In the campaign playbook for legalizing marijuana, one of the most potent arguments from proponents is the potential explosion of big tax dollars. Bringing the recreational market out of the shadows and taxing it, advocates say, will provide millions of dollars—maybe billions—for drug treatment, public schools and a host of other programs.
But just how high should that tax rate be? It's a question more and more states are grappling with as they extend approval for medical marijuana use to adult recreational consumption.
Just this week, the two houses of the
“The tricky part is, how do you take into account what you consider to be necessary revenue generation with the realities” of market forces, said Taylor West, deputy director of the National Cannabis Industry Association. “There is just a remarkable amount of variables and we don't have a lot of historic data.”
Read more: Legal Marijuana: Budding Industry, Burning Questions
The authors of Proposition 64, California's November 2016 ballot measure that legalized recreational marijuana, included a 15 percent excise tax on the retail price. Consumers will also pay state and local sales taxes and any additional levies approved by local governments when legalized operations launch on Jan. 1. Cultivators will pay a $9.25-per-ounce tax on marijuana flowers and $2.75-per-ounce tax on leaves.
Jason Kinney, a consultant who worked on the Proposition 64 campaign, said setting the tax rates was an issue of “intense deliberation,” especially since political and constitutional constraints would make it difficult to change them in the future.
“Our objective was the Goldilocks standard—set the tax rate too high, the black market flourishes; set it too low, you flood the market with cheap product and it gets into the wrong hands [and] you don't collect enough revenue to offset the community impacts of the new industry,” Kinney said. “The goal then was to set a rate that was 'just right.'”
Given that cities and counties could add on additional taxes “15 percent seemed like the fairest, most balanced approach,” he said.
Pioneer legalization states have chosen different taxation paths.
The state of Washington imposes a 37 percent excise tax on retail sales in addition to the standard 6.5 percent sales tax. Washington originally imposed a 25 percent tax at three stages of the marijuana supply change. But in 2015 lawmakers moved to the single 37 percent tax to eliminate the complexity of the previous system. The state expects to collect more than $304 million in excise taxes for the fiscal year ending this month.
Colorado imposes a 15 percent excise tax on wholesale transfers of cannabis, a 10 percent special sales tax on marijuana plus the state sales tax of 2.9 percent. To generate more money for the state's roads and schools, the governor recently signed legislation that will boost the 10 percent special sales tax to 15 percent while scrapping the 2.9 percent state sales tax on marijuana.
Alaska forgoes special sales taxes for a $50-per-ounce tax on marijuana buds when they're transferred from a grower to a retailer or manufacturer.
Oregon collects a 17 percent sales tax on marijuana. Cities and counties can impose an additional tax of up to 3 percent tax if local voters approve.
Because the legalization of recreational marijuana is so new, the analysis is thin on what taxation approach works best, West said.
“That research is basically going on right now with these real-world attempts to get this right,” she said.
Related Articles:
|- Becerra Says Sessions Should 'Worry About His Own Problems,' Not Marijuana
- Six Key Updates in California's Latest Marijuana Regulatory Proposal
- California Prepares to Ramp Up Push for Marijuana Rules
- California Judges Are Told to Stay Away from Pot Businesses
- California Regulators Want to Open Doors for Marijuana Tax Payments
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCalifornia’s Workplace Violence Laws: Protecting Victims’ Rights in the Workplace
6 minute read'Basic Arithmetic': Court Rules in Favor of LA Charter School Denied Funding by California Education Department
Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero Says Recent Drop in Straight Grants Isn't Permanent
3 minute read'We Are Prepared to Fight': Governor Calls Special Session to Fund Legal Attacks on Trump Policies
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250