Calculating Colorado marijuana sales

July 18, 2014 § Leave a comment

My mistake:  I thought I could figure out the ratio of recreational marijuana sales to medical marijuana sales in Colorado (and gross sales) by comparing sales tax figures.  Both bear the same 2.9 percent sales tax, so I took sales taxes reported by recreational businesses and divided by .029 to get total recreational sales.  Then I did the same for medical marijuana businesses (which report separately in Colorado).

Not so fast!  Professional journalists got this right.  It turns out that those sales taxes cover not just marijuana, but everything sold in the stores – pipes, papers, T-shirts, trinkets, you name it.  (Thanks to Natriece Bryant of the Colorado Department of Revenue for confirming that treatment.)

It’s easy to calculate sales of recreational marijuana:  take the 10-percent retail tax reported by the State, and multiply it by 10 (divide it by .10).  (I thought my 2.9 percent method was close enough, and had the advantage of comparing recreational and medical marijuana sales directly.)

Getting it right alerted me to a phenomenon:  In January, only 2.5 percent of sales of recreational marijuana stores were accounted for by non-marijuana items (pipes and so on).   By May, that figure had risen to 6.5 percent.

Here are the figures: « Read the rest of this entry »

Quotas for intoxicant businesses in 1933

July 14, 2014 § Leave a comment

When Prohibition was repealed, the federal government was deluged with applications to import liquor.  Granting quotas to all applicants seemed likely to create a situation where “nobody would have got enough to do business with.”

There are various ways of dealing with excess applicants, like holding a lottery, as Washington state is doing; selling licenses to the high bidder; or, as the Roosevelt Administration did in 1933, considering each application on its merits and deciding yes or no for each application.  Here are details, with highlights bolded, stated by the head of of the Federal Alcohol Control Administration: « Read the rest of this entry »

Oregon Marijuana Initiative

July 11, 2014 § Leave a comment

I’m on the record saying the tax structure of the marijuana initiative in Oregon is a step forward.

Kopilak said the initiative reflects the work of not only advocates but also national tax experts, including Pat Oglesby, chief tax counsel on the U.S. Senate Finance Committee from 1988 and 1990.

On Oglesby’s advice, New Approach Oregon opted to tax marijuana by weight early in the production process instead of at the retail end. Washington, by comparison, taxes marijuana at three levels, from producer to processor, processor to retailer and retailer to consumer.

I’m not endorsing the rate or level of tax.  I suspect this tax rate, like others, will prove too high at first, too low later.

 

 

 

Colorado recreational and medical marijuana sales rise slowly? UPDATE

July 10, 2014 § 1 Comment

Sales of both recreational and medical marijuana inched up from April to May in Colorado, I THOUGHT.

Colorado marijuana sales                           Recreational                                 Medical
April $22,059,586 $31,718,207
May $22,142,207 $31,976,897

Those figures come simply from dividing the sales tax rate (2.9 percent) into officially reported (on highlighted links below) sales taxes received: « Read the rest of this entry »

Presbyterians blast tax havens and check the box

July 7, 2014 § Leave a comment

In “Tax Justice: A Christian Response to a New Gilded Age,” the Presbyterian General Assembly recently adopted some recommendations for international tax reform.  Here are two key points:

F.            International Corporate Tax Avoidance

1.    With respect to laws, including “transfer pricing” laws (described more fully in the background section), which today facilitate the movement of income by businesses to tax havens, the church should support work that has been begun to cause nations to change laws so that tax avoidance through income-shifting to tax havens is no longer permitted. This is to affirm the direction of charitable and religious organizations and research institutes seeking tax justice, as well as intergovernmental bodies including the OECD (Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development) and G-20 governments working for greater tax policy coordination. The toleration of today’s porous tax laws by countries around the world reflects a dangerous “race to the bottom” by which countries compete to offer tax favoritism to businesses; the result is to deprive governments, particularly of poor countries that depend especially heavily on revenues from international businesses, of funds needed for urgent social needs. « Read the rest of this entry »

Presbyterians oppose tax break for ministers

July 6, 2014 § Leave a comment

The Tax Code rule giving special treatment to “ministers of the gospel” (really) – exempting their housing from income – has found an opponent in the Presbyterian Church.  Looking at taxation in the context of social justice, the Church calls for a phase-out:

“6. Particular taxes or exclusions from taxes should treat religious organizations equally with charitable and nonprofit organizations; religious organizations should not be singled out for either penalty or privilege except for the exemption of property essential to the core functions of religion.

“7.  Special tax exemptions or burdens for the property and income of ministers or other church employees are inappropriate.  They should be phased out over a period long enough to accommodate the reliance of many churches on existing exemptions.”

Shortfall in Colorado’s 15 percent marijuana tax

July 2, 2014 § Leave a comment

Revenue from the 15 percent “wholesale” excise tax on recreational marijuana was supposed to run about $2 million every month ($13 million for the first six months, January through June 2014).  Instead, for the first four months, under $2 million was collected overall.

I don’t know the underlying assumptions behind that $2 million per month estimate, but four factors – beyond just the error inherent in any estimate – may contribute to the early shortfall: « Read the rest of this entry »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.