August 10, 2016 § Leave a comment
Indoor cultivation of marijuana takes lots of electricity, and mixed-light takes some.
Humboldt County, California, will decide in November on an environmentally friendly cannabis tax. The rates are:
$1 per square foot for outdoor cultivation area,
$2 per square foot of mixed-light cultivation area,
$3 per square foot of indoor cultivation area. « Read the rest of this entry »
August 9, 2016 § Leave a comment
Why did John D. Rockefeller, Jr., look for safe ways to deal with alcohol, and so commission the study, “Toward Liquor Control,” that recommended state monopoly sales?
My view, which I tweeted, is: “Rockefeller liked but couldn’t maintain alcohol Prohibition; faced reality with retreat to state liquor stores.”
My friend Kevin Sabet replied, “Actually, Rockefeller reversed support of alcohol Prohibition because of promise of lower corp tax. Didn’t work out!”
I think he is wrong. Many people did reverse support of alcohol Prohibition because of the promise of lower corporate and individual taxes. I think Kevin confuses Rockefeller with Pierre DuPont, « Read the rest of this entry »
August 8, 2016 § Leave a comment
To maximize marijuana revenue, a state might do what a Concord (NH) Monitor editorial – and Gubernatorial candidate Steve Marchand – suggest: “Legalize marijuana use and move its sale into state stores.”
New Hampshire’s government-monopoly liquor stores do now what the Monitor suggests for marijuana: “Locate outlets on its borders and structure pricing to maximize sales to nonresidents.” « Read the rest of this entry »
August 5, 2016 § Leave a comment
How much revenue might governments get from legal marijuana commerce?
In early 2013, I took a stab and said 80 percent of at $30 billion market, or $24 billion.
Now I don’t think we can tax marijuana at the 80 percent level Europe uses for cigarettes. But the market should be bigger than $30 billion. So I’m rethinking, and working on a more thoughtful estimate of what the market can bear, « Read the rest of this entry »
July 25, 2016 § Leave a comment
Primitive marijuana taxes start out “ad valorem,” that is, as a percentage of price. Many of my friends who are non-tax drug policy people gravitate toward these price-based taxes, because prices tend to increase with potency, and roughly with intoxication. I agree: Price-based taxes are a good first step in what the RAND report for Vermont calls the “tax-base march of progress.”
But price-based taxes are easy to manipulate. For instance, North Carolina’s new 7.5 percent sales tax on tickets (“admission charges”) is getting eroded by an affiliate of the state, the UNC-Chapel Hill repertory theater. For tickets, or medical devices, there is no analog to the useful weight base for marijuana taxes. But a ticket tax illustrates the flimsiness of taxes based on price, as explained below. « Read the rest of this entry »
July 25, 2016 § Leave a comment
Price-based taxes are easy to manipulate. For instance, North Carolina’s new 7.5 percent sales tax on tickets (“admission charges”) is getting eroded by an affiliate of the state, the UNC-Chapel Hill repertory theater.
When you order tickets, the theater separately states a ‘Web Handling Fee” that is not taxed. Here’s what an order looks like: