Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: House Bill 1703 introduced establishing a tax on firearms and ammunition purchases

  1. #1
    Regular Member dwordinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    81

    House Bill 1703 introduced establishing a tax on firearms and ammunition purchases

    Bill can be found at: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=1703&year=2013#documents

    Read Bill in PDF: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/bil...Bills/1703.pdf

    $25.00/firearm.
    $0.01/round of ammunition.
    D Wordinger, Domestic Terrorist

  2. #2
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    A right cannot be taxed. The only reason the current tax is imposed is thanks to the "sportsman" groups to pay for hunting conservation efforts.

    Congress/states do not have the constitutional power to collect the current tax much less this proposed tax.
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  3. #3
    Regular Member rapgood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Bothell, WA
    Posts
    565
    Quote Originally Posted by dwordinger View Post
    A slippery slope. Not unexpected. Impose a de minimus tax, and then escalate it down the temporal road.
    Rev. Robert Apgood, Esq.

    A right cannot be lost by exercising it. McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025, 130 S. Ct. 3020, 3021, 177 L. Ed. 2d 894 (2010) (citing Near v. Minn., 283 U.S. 697 (1931)).

    Although IAAL, anything I say here is not legal advice. No conversations we may have privately or otherwise in this forum constitute the formation of an attorney-client relationship, and are not intended to do so.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Alpine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Mercer Island
    Posts
    661
    Get on the phones everyone, call your reps and sens early and often on this, let them know that voting for these bills have consequences come the next election.

    http://app.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Alpine View Post
    Get on the phones everyone, call your reps and sens early and often on this, let them know that voting for these bills have consequences come the next election.

    http://app.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/
    Tell them they'll be collecting some tax right after it gets passed .. wink wink

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Lakewood, Washington, United States
    Posts
    188
    you mean, at a rate of one cent per collection? Wonder if they would even understand that.
    Small Business Owner---> Forward Motion Performance. Auto Services, 2A supporter, your gun is welcome and gets you a discount!
    Gun Rights Advocate---> I'll stand up for your rights, even if you don't think it's important.

  7. #7
    Regular Member 911Grunt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Pierce County, WA
    Posts
    46
    Here is what I just sent...

    This bill is the creation of taxing scheme for a civil right and a funding source for government to convince non-ownership of firearms (since the use of a firearm does cause physical injuries on the person being shot).

    Doing some quick fact checking shows that of the figures shows that Suicide by firearms is actually 8.18% not the 49% mentioned in the bill.

    The homicide rate doesn't state but an important fact needs to be asked… does that include self defense and law enforcement shootings?

    The comment about abused women being at a higher risk of being killed again doesn't state if that figure includes information about the ex-spouse who may have used a firearm to commit the homicide?

    So the more you did into their statements the more it looks like a backdoor scheme to tax law abiding citizens who exercise a civil right. Since criminals are going to steal what they want not buy it at a store.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Whitney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Poulsbo, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    449

    Tax Schemes and your Wallet / Bet you didn't know....... Benefit Theory Taxes

    If the legislature really wants to fund these programs then they need to have the testicular fortitude to stand up to the Fed, end the abuse of the commerce clause, and tell them "no more soup for you" Some things this bill touts are already provided for in other programs, this is just another example of replacing something that works with something that sounds good.




    Following is some research I have done regarding this same tax scheme at the federal level.

    The unique Federal excise tax placed on ammunition, archery products, and firearms is taking significant revenue from the States in the form of a Firearms and Ammunition Excise Tax (FAET).
    This tax is collected as a “benefit theory tax” for the purpose of establishing a Wildlife Restoration Fund and according to the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act, authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to cooperate with the States, through their respective State fish and game departments, in wildlife-restoration projects. The State has to “opt in” to receive Federal monies.

    § 669b-1. Authorization of appropriation of accumulated unappropriated receipts
    There is hereby authorized to be appropriated, out of the Federal aid to wildlife restoration fund established by this chapter, for the 1956 fiscal year and for each fiscal year thereafter, an amount equal to 20 per centum of the accumulated unappropriated receipts in such fund on August 12, 1955, until the accumulated unappropriated receipts in such fund on such date have been appropriated and expended. Funds appropriated under the authority of this section shall be made available to the States in accordance with the provisions of, and under the apportionment formula set forth in, this chapter, and shall be in addition to the funds appropriated under section 669b of this title.

    § 669f. Payment of funds to States
    If a State has elected to avail itself of the benefits of this chapter by preparing a comprehensive fish and wildlife plan as provided for under option (1) of subsection (a) of section 669e of this title, and this plan has been approved by the Secretary of the Interior, then the Secretary may, in his discretion, and under such rules and regulations as he may prescribe, advance funds to the State for financing the United States pro rata share agreed upon between the State fish and game department and the Secretary.

    The total number of handguns sold in Washington State in 2010 was 113,679 this does not reflect any other category, type, or class of firearm, nor does it include ammunition or other ancillary equipment such as bows and arrows subject to FAET. Handguns vary in price from $200.00 for a small caliber “plinker” to $1000.00 for the popular .45 caliber model 1911. Currently the Federal taxes imposed pistols and revolvers are at 10% of sales price while ammunition and other firearms are taxed at 11% of sale price. Using the nominal figure of $500.00., the Federal Government collected $5,683,950.00 from the sale of handguns in 2010. Washington State collected the appropriate sales tax.

    Following data was provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife with regard to Wildlife Restoration funding based on the Pitman Robertson Wildlife Act. The spreadsheet actually shows some information for grants open during the period form 2007-2010.
    In the case of grants funded under the Pittman-Robertson Act, Wildlife Restoration funding the state share is typically 25% and the Federal share is 75% of the total cost of each grant. The Federal share cannot be over 75% for Pitman Robertson grants.


    Grant# Segment Title Start Date Ending Date Federal Share State Share Private Share Total Cost Final Payment Closed Status Date
    W-11-L-5 Seed-Stock, Nesting Habitat Acquisition Project 04/22/2002 06/30/2015 $200,000.00 $66,667.00 $0.00 $266.667.00 N Null
    W-2-L-3 Oak Creek Wildlife Area 01/23/2009 01/23/2011 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
    W-2-L-4 Oak Creek Wildlife Area 04/28/2009 06/30/2011 $272,815.00 $90,938.00 $0.00 $363,752.00
    W-41-D-57 Habitat Development 10/01/2007 06/30/2009 $798,053.00 $266,018.00 $0.00 $1,064,071.00 Y 13-Nov-2009
    W-41-D-58 Habitat Development 07/01/2009 06/30/2010 $422,273.00 $140,759.00 $0.00 $563,032.00 Y 24-Jan-2011
    W-41-D-59 Habitat Development 07/22/2010 06/30/2011 $422,273.00 $140,758.00 $0.00 $563,031.00 N NULL
    W-42-L-57 Statewide Lease of Lands 07/01/2008 06/30/2009 $385,281.00 $128,427.00 $0.00 $513,708.00 Y 13-Nov-2009
    W-42-L-58 Statewide Lease of Lands 07/01/2009 06/30/2010 $421,628.25 $140,542.75 $0.00 $562,171.00 Y 24-Jan-2011
    W-42-L-59 Statewide Lease of Lands 07/15/2010 06/30/2011 $429,148.00 $143,049.00 $0.00 $572,197.00 N NULL
    W-59-L-1 Weyerhauser Company Property Acquisition (Johns River Game Range) 06/17/2010 12/31/2010 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 N NULL
    W-83-HS-38 Hunter Education 07/01/2008 06/30/2009 $858,321.00 $286,107.00 $0.00 $1,144,428.00 Y 13-Nov-2009
    W-83-HS-39 Hunter Education (Section 4 and 10) 07/01/2009 06/30/2010 $961,321.00 $0.00 $0.00 $961,321.00 Y 24-Jan-2011
    W-83-HS-40 Hunter Education (Section 4 and 10) 07/01/2010 03/31/2012 $1,296,334.00 $19,500.00 $0.00 $1,315,834.00 N NULL
    W-94-D-26 Wildlife Area Program 07/01/2008 06/30/2009 $1,372,258.00 $457,420.00 $0.00 $1,829,678.00 Y 13-Nov-2009
    W-94-D-27 Wildlife Area Program 07/01/2009 06/30/2010 $1,372,258.00 $457,419.00 $0.00 $1,829,677.00 Y 24-Jan-2011
    W-94-D-28 Wildlife Area Program 07/01/2010 06/30/2011 $1,812,716.00 $604,239.00 $0.00 $2,416,955.00 N NULL
    W-96-R-17 Statewide Wildlife Management 07/01/2008 06/30/2010 $6,319,247.00 $2,106,416.00 $0.00 $8,425,663.00 Y 24-Jan-2011
    W-96-R-18 Statewide Wildlife Management 07/01/2010 06/30/2011 $4,144,139.00 $1,381,380.00 $0.00 $5,525,519.00 N NULL
    W-98-E-10 Hunter Education Shooting Range Program 07/01/2010 09/30/2011 $156,657.00 $52,219.00 $0.00 $208,876.00 N NULL
    W-98-E-8 Hunter Education Shooting Range Program 07/01/2008 09/30/2009 $56,657.00 $18,886.00 $0.00 $75,543.00 Y 03-Feb-2010
    W-98-E-9 Hunter Education Shooting Range Program 07/01/2009 06/30/2010 $56,657.00 $18,886.00 $0.00 $75,543.00 Y 24-Jan-2011
    W-99-L-1 Wildlife Lands Conservation 09/02/2010 06/30/2012 $804,000.00 $268,000.00 $0.00 $1,072,000.00 N NULL
    $22,562,036.25 $6,787,630.75 $0.00 $29,349,667.00



    Benefit Theory Taxes
    Many present law excise taxes are imposed to distribute some or all of the cost of particular government expenditures among persons thought to benefit from them. About half of all excise tax receipts are benefit theory taxes. Proceeds from these taxes are typically dedicated to a trust fund so as to earmark the revenue for a particular purpose. Taxes supporting the Highway Trust Fund are the most familiar examples. Benefit theory excise taxes need to be distinguished from user fees.
    User fees are imposed as part of a voluntary transaction between the government and a private person. Excise taxes arise from the exercise of a government’s sovereign power and are imposed on transactions between private persons, or on other taxable events to which private persons are a party. User fees are imposed on transactions between private persons and government entities, such as admission to a national park. The conceptual distinction is not always observed in practice. For example, the “fees” imposed beginning in FY 1991 on boat owners were not enacted as part of the Internal Revenue Code (the Code) and were treated as a user fee in the Budget even though no voluntary transaction occurred between boat owner and government agency. In another instance, the Code imposes an excise tax on the value of certain cargos to support the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund.

    In terms of legislative process, the distinction between an excise tax and a user fee is of major significance. Constitutionally, tax legislation must originate in the House of Representatives, which in practical terms means that it must originate in the Committee on Ways and Means. Characterizing a legislatively determined payment to the federal government as a user fee permits committees of the Congress other than the tax-writing committees to assert jurisdiction. If unchallenged by the Committee on Ways and Means, or if successful in securing a ruling from the House Parliamentarian that the measure is not a tax, other committees of the Congress may be successful in enacting a user fee provision that, analytically, is no different than an excise tax. 1


    END NOTES


    1 TAX EXPENDITURES IN THE FEDERAL EXCISE TAX SYSTEM
    National Tax Journal Vol. 47, no. 1, (March, 1994), pp. 39-62


    ~Whitney
    The problem with America is stupidity.
    I'm not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    East Wenatchee, Washington, USA
    Posts
    132
    I got replies from 1 of my reps (Cary Condotta) and my senator (Linda Evans Parlette). Nothing from Brad Hawkins, my 2nd rep, yet.


    Quote Originally Posted by Rep. Cary Condotta
    Alan,



    I will not support this bill in any shape or form. PERIOD.


    Best Regards,

    CARY CONDOTTA
    12th District Representative

    Visit My Website: www.houserepublicans.wa.gov/condotta
    Sign up for my e-mail updates

    Quote Originally Posted by Linda Evans Parlette
    Alan,

    Thank you for sharing your opposition to HB 1703, promoting firearm safety through an education program funded through fees on firearms and ammunition and creating a sales tax exemption on gun locks. This measure was introduced today in the House of Representatives and has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee. If the committee fails to take action on this measure before Friday, February 22nd, HB 1703 will be considered dead unless necessary to implement the budget.

    I will continue to monitor this measure as it progresses through the process. I have added your opposition to HB 1703 to my constituent matrix, which I use when voting on bills that are before the full Senate. If you are interested in getting the latest news from our state capitol during legislative sessions, you can sign up to receive my weekly email update. To do this send an e-mail to Parlette.Linda@leg.wa.gov , and type your name, address, and phone number in the message. If, in the future, you wish to be taken off the distribution list - just send me an email saying this. If you have already received this message about signing up - please disregard.

    Thank you for contacting me!

    Sincerely,

    LINDA EVANS PARLETTE
    12th Legislative District
    Washington State Senate Majority Coalition Caucus Chair
    Phone: (360) 786-7622

  10. #10
    Regular Member xxx.jakk.xxx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Port Orchard, Washington, United States
    Posts
    504
    "Ammunition" means cartridge cases, primers, bullets, or propellant powder designed for use in firearms.

    So it's equal to 1 cent per round of ammunition. I wonder how they'll figure that out. Would you be charged $.0025 for the amount of powder used in a single pistol round or rifle round? What's the exact price per grain? Would one part of the round cost more than the rest? Should the bullet be more since it's what enters a person or the powder since it propels the bullet? I'd like to see their complete plans.
    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Psalms 23:4

    "Sell not virtue to purchase wealth, nor Liberty to purchase power." Benjamin Franklin

    “It’s always open season on criminals in Mason County, and there’s no bag limit.” Sen. Tim Sheldon (D)

    Molōn labe!

  11. #11
    Regular Member Difdi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    996
    Given how many domestic terrorists have used chemistry to commit their evil deeds, I wonder if a $25 tax on books and a $0.01 tax on every use of the words bomb in online communications, the funds used to promote good citizenship and civics classes, would pass constitutional muster?

    I suspect it would not. So how on Earth can a similar tax on another constitutional right be constitutional? What's next, having to pay a fee to not have to incriminate yourself, or a subscription being needed to be eligible for a trial by jury?
    Last edited by Difdi; 02-06-2013 at 09:55 PM.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Port Orchard, WA
    Posts
    11
    I wrote all the sponsors of this bill today, voicing my opposition to HB1073.

    I noted this is a veiled attempt toward controlling firearm ownership. The Poll tax was set up to prevent a segment of the population from voting, now the bill sponsors are attempting to suppress another Right using a similar tactic.

    Taxing a right is something they should ALL be opposed to. I asked if they would sponsor a bill taxing 1st amendment use to fund graffiti education? A per word tax to use the 1st amendment?
    Would they sponsor a use tax of the 5th amendment? I Think not

    I received a phone call from Representative Jan Angel's Office this afternoon as a response to my opposition of this bill.

    "Not one Republican sponsor on this bill. I feel you are right in your take of this bill. There are so many crazy bills floating around here right now on guns, you May see a lot more of this type."

  13. #13
    Regular Member Alpine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Mercer Island
    Posts
    661
    Given that this would be a new tax, is this covered by the 2/3 super-majority requirement?

  14. #14
    Campaign Veteran slapmonkay's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    1,267
    Quote Originally Posted by xxx.jakk.xxx View Post
    "Ammunition" means cartridge cases, primers, bullets, or propellant powder designed for use in firearms.

    So it's equal to 1 cent per round of ammunition. I wonder how they'll figure that out. Would you be charged $.0025 for the amount of powder used in a single pistol round or rifle round? What's the exact price per grain? Would one part of the round cost more than the rest? Should the bullet be more since it's what enters a person or the powder since it propels the bullet? I'd like to see their complete plans.
    When I first read it this morning this is what pop'ed in my head.
    I Am Not A Lawyer, verify all facts presented independently.

    It's called the "American Dream" because you have to be asleep to believe it. - George Carlin

    I carry a spare tire, in case I have a flat. I carry life insurance, in case I die. I carry a gun, in case I need it.

  15. #15
    Regular Member TechnoWeenie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2,086
    Why are so many politicians insisting on not making it through the next election?

    Are they that happy to give up their seat, after being voted out for introducing such BS?
    Evangelical lessons are provided upon request. Anyone wishing to meet Jesus can just kick in my door.

  16. #16
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by xxx.jakk.xxx View Post
    "Ammunition" means cartridge cases, primers, bullets, or propellant powder designed for use in firearms.

    So it's equal to 1 cent per round of ammunition. I wonder how they'll figure that out. Would you be charged $.0025 for the amount of powder used in a single pistol round or rifle round? What's the exact price per grain? Would one part of the round cost more than the rest? Should the bullet be more since it's what enters a person or the powder since it propels the bullet? I'd like to see their complete plans.
    For many of us it just means we'll take a "vacation trip" to a nearby State where ammunition and components for reloaders aren't taxed as much.

    Based on the latest firearm sales, most everyone will be pretty well stocked up by the time the tax takes effect. No way they'll collect the kind of bucks the cash hungry Legislators think.
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    East Wenatchee, Washington, USA
    Posts
    132
    Quote Originally Posted by TechnoWeenie View Post
    Why are so many politicians insisting on not making it through the next election?

    Are they that happy to give up their seat, after being voted out for introducing such BS?

    The problem is, it seems like for the most part we (not us necessarily, but our fellow citizens) keep voting the same jokers back into office who got us into so many of the messes we find ourselves in today. By the time the next election comes around, most people will have forgotten all about this current batch of horrible bills and will only be thinking about what has happened in the last month or so prior. I swear, most voters have no long-term memory at all. The price of gas goes down a couple weeks before the election and they all become euphoric and can't possibly imagine changing who is in office.

  18. #18
    Regular Member jt59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Central South Sound
    Posts
    1,025
    Quote Originally Posted by Alpine View Post
    Get on the phones everyone, call your reps and sens early and often on this, let them know that voting for these bills have consequences come the next election.

    http://app.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/
    No, they don't....just look at the incumbent re-election rate....
    Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the grey twilight that knows not victory nor defeat....Teddy Roosevelt

  19. #19
    Regular Member bmg50cal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    WA - North Whidbey/ Deception Pass
    Posts
    307
    They would stand to make a lot more money putting a $25 tax on all mobile phone purchases.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •