Colorado May Have To Refund As Much As $30 Million In Pot Taxes

BipolarFuk

Demoted
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
11,464
DENVER (AP) — Colorado's marijuana experiment was designed to raise revenue for the state and its schools, but a state law may put some of the tax money directly into residents' pockets, causing quite a headache for lawmakers.

The state constitution limits how much tax money the state can take in before it has to give some back. That means Coloradans may each get their own cut of the $50 million in recreational pot taxes collected in the first year of legal weed. It's a situation so bizarre that it's gotten Republicans and Democrats, for once, to agree on a tax issue.

Even some pot shoppers are surprised Colorado may not keep the taxes that were promised to go toward school construction when voters legalized marijuana in 2012.

"I have no problem paying taxes if they're going to schools," said Maddy Beaumier, 25, who was visiting a dispensary near the Capitol.

But David Huff, a 50-year-old carpenter from Aurora, said taxes that add 30 percent or more to the price of pot, depending on the jurisdiction, are too steep.

"I don't care if they write me a check, or refund it in my taxes, or just give me a free joint next time I come in. The taxes are too high, and they should give it back," Huff said.

Legal weed has collided with the tax limitation movement because a 1992 voter-approved constitutional amendment called the Taxpayers' Bill of Rights requires all new taxes to go before voters.

The amendment also requires Colorado to pay back taxpayers when the state collects more than what's permitted by a formula based on inflation and population growth. Over the years, Colorado has issued refunds six times, totaling more than $3.3 billion.

Republicans and Democrats say there's no good reason to put pot taxes back into people's pockets, and state officials are scrambling to figure out how to avoid doling out the money. It may have to be settled by asking Colorado voters, for a third time, to cast a ballot on the issue and exempt pot taxes from the refund requirement.

Republicans concede that marijuana is throwing them off their usual position of wanting tax dollars returned to taxpayers. But they also tend to say that marijuana should pay for itself — that general taxes shouldn't pay for things like increased drug education and better training for police officers to identify stoned drivers.

"I think it's appropriate that we keep the money for marijuana that the voters said that we should," said Republican Senate President Bill Cadman. His party opposes keeping other refunds based on the Taxpayers' Bill of Rights but favors a special ballot question on pot taxes.

"This is a little bit of a different animal. There's a struggle on this one," said Sen. Kevin Grantham, one of the Republican budget writers.

After legalizing marijuana in 2012, Colorado voters returned to the polls the following year and approved a 15 percent excise tax on pot for the schools and an additional 10 percent sales tax for lawmakers to spend.

Voters were told those taxes would generate about $70 million in the first year. The state now believes it will rake in about $50 million.

But because the economy is improving and other tax collections are growing faster, Colorado is obligated to give back much of what it has collected. Final numbers aren't ready, but the governor's budget writers predict the pot refunds could amount to $30.5 million, or about $7.63 per adult in Colorado.

"It's just absurd," said Democratic state Sen. Pat Steadman, one of the Legislature's budget writers.

The head-scratching extends to Colorado's marijuana industry. Several industry groups actively campaigned for the pot taxes but aren't taking a position on whether to refund them.

Mike Elliott of the Denver-based Marijuana Industry Group said it isn't pushing for lower taxes, but that's an option lawmakers don't seem to be considering. State law doesn't bar lawmakers from cutting taxes without a vote.

Lawmakers have a little time to figure out how to proceed. They'll consider pot refunds and a separate refund to taxpayers of about $137 million after receiving final tax estimates that are due in March.

When they talk about pot refunds, they'll have to figure out if the money would go to all taxpayers, or just those who bought pot. Previous refunds have generally been paid through income tax returns, but Colorado also has reduced motor vehicle fees or even reduced sales taxes on trucks.

Lawmakers seem confident that the refund mechanism won't matter because voters would approve pot taxes a third time if asked.

"This is what the voters want, and if we're going to have (pot), and the constitution says it's legal, we damn well better tax it," Steadman said.
 

fortsbest

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
3,763
IT just needs to go away. It's already causing problems in other states and I thought I read OK was suing CO over it.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
IT just needs to go away. It's already causing problems in other states and I thought I read OK was suing CO over it.
Yeah, it's so unsuccessful the state is making too much money and is overfunded. :jerk
 

fortsbest

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
3,763
It's a mixed bag, but my experiences in dealing with pot and potheads have not been good. Just because a state makes money off of it doesn't make it a good thing to legalize it. It is a drug and is different from alcohol. I have no issues with medical marijuana where it is regulated, having it available like tobacco is wring IMHO. They have candy and foods prepped with it in the stores. My guess is, the harms will eventually outweigh any benefit the taxes bring. Again, just an opinion.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/01/us/after-5-months-of-sales-colorado-sees-the-downside-of-a-legal-high.html?_r=0
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/05/colorado_s_pot_experiment_the_unintended_consequences_of_marijuana_legalization.html
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
Prohibition is a faulty and ineffective form of government control. We know this about alcohol, we know this about guns, we know this about weed.

If it worked we wouldn't be hearing about all the terrible pot heads out there because there wouldn't be.

Instead prohibition is putting money in the hands of cartels. Meanwhile everyone freaking ever has used marijuana. Of course if you happen to occupy a lower sociopolitical spot on the totem pole that experimentation or habit may cost you your future. Because at it's core prohibition screws over poor people who don't have the connections to get the "boys will be boys" treatment.
 

shane

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
1,191
Some Republican asshole lawyers in Oklahoma and Nebraska are suing to throw out the whole idea of divided powers and states rights because they are butthurt that Colorado legalized marijuana. Pieces of worthless trash.

Legalization will likely go down as the most popular and successful policy reform in history IMO.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,224
Some Republican asshole lawyers in Oklahoma and Nebraska are suing to throw out the whole idea of divided powers and states rights because they are butthurt that Colorado legalized marijuana. Pieces of worthless trash.

Legalization will likely go down as the most popular and successful policy reform in history IMO.
I would absolutely agree with this.
 

fortsbest

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
3,763
If it worked we wouldn't be hearing about all the terrible pot heads out there because there wouldn't be.
Some of what you said may be true, but this is nonsense. There will still be idiots that abuse pot and despite the argument that it isn't a gateway drug, I can promise you 90% of people I ever arrested for heavier drugs started with pot by their own admission.

You are right.
It is less harmful and ends up costing fewer people their health and lives.
This is supposition. While the method by which it intoxicates may not be known completed, the reading I've done indicates it's far more carcinogenic than cigarettes Give it 10 years or so when there is some basis for legitimate comparison. I don't think it's going away, I said I believe it should.
 

boozeman

28 Years And Counting...
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
122,825
This is supposition. While the method by which it intoxicates may not be known completed, the reading I've done indicates it's far more carcinogenic than cigarettes Give it 10 years or so when there is some basis for legitimate comparison. I don't think it's going away, I said I believe it should.
I wasn't referring to the individual risk.

I was referring to what someone who is drunk behind the wheel or pissed off at home can do versus someone stoned.

Sorry, but a stoned person isn't going to drive 60 MPH through an intersection, nor beat the ever living shit out of someone.
 

fortsbest

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
3,763
Yeah, actually they do drive 60 MPH through intersections. Hasn't happened as often obviously, but they do and have. Dopers aren't always high and do tend to be more up and down emotionally so again, they have their family violence incidents as well. It affects different folk differently and I have seen people non-cooperative and downright brutal when they are high. The funny, lackadaisical stoner isn't always the norm.
 

boozeman

28 Years And Counting...
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
122,825
Yeah, actually they do drive 60 MPH through intersections. Hasn't happened as often obviously, but they do and have. Dopers aren't always high and do tend to be more up and down emotionally so again, they have their family violence incidents as well. It affects different folk differently and I have seen people non-cooperative and downright brutal when they are high. The funny, lackadaisical stoner isn't always the norm.
I am willing to bet that a lot of the individual cases you are referring to aren't simply under the influence of marijuana.

The real drawback is that it is often used with other drugs, which I agree need to be kept illegal.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,224
Some of what you said may be true, but this is nonsense. There will still be idiots that abuse pot and despite the argument that it isn't a gateway drug, I can promise you 90% of people I ever arrested for heavier drugs started with pot by their own admission.
The thing is, though, if you make pot legal, you remove individuals from situations where the other drugs are. The only reason pot is considered a gateway drug is because when you go on the black market to find pot, you also find the opportunity for other drugs. That's not the case if you go buy pot at a store.
 

boozeman

28 Years And Counting...
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
122,825
The thing is, though, if you make pot legal, you remove individuals from situations where the other drugs are. The only reason pot is considered a gateway drug is because when you go on the black market to find pot, you also find the opportunity for other drugs. That's not the case if you go buy pot at a store.
It is pretty much a proven fact that making something illegal will attach crime to it.

Organized crime thrived during Prohibition and the so-called "War On Drugs" has caused more death and chaos than anything.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
The whole Gateway thing never made sense I know plenty of people who smoke pot and never did anything else and I know some people who will do any drug you put in front of them.

Alcohol should be considered a gate way because I bet that percentage is just as high.

I smoke and there are plenty of drugs I have never wanted to try.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
Weed is the most readily available drug. Odds are if you are going to be an addict you start with that. They also probably ate more chocolate than was strictly necessary as a child too. We should have arrested them then instead.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,965
Some of what you said may be true, but this is nonsense. There will still be idiots that abuse pot and despite the argument that it isn't a gateway drug, I can promise you 90% of people I ever arrested for heavier drugs started with pot by their own admission.
It's because weed is an illegal substance. When you go to a drug dealer to get weed, the drug dealer is there pushing harder drugs. When you legalize Weed you separate the two things. Suddenly when someone is going to a legal distributor they aren't being subjected to the harder drugs. The only thing available at the dispensary is weed.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
As an aside, I smoked pretty heavily in my late teens. Then quit the very instant I wanted to back in 2004 (just a few months before I joined this board for the first time) and never tried it again. It took me 3 years to quit smoking cigarettes, and I've never managed to outright stop drinking coffee, sodas, or beer. Most of the people I know in the Navy have at some point smoked weed. All my friends in College and High School smoked weed. Exactly zero of them are criminals to my knowledge.
The people I've seen screw up their life the most have been alcohol drinkers. Guys who got kicked the hell out of the navy because they drank too much and couldn't make it to work or racked up a ton of DUIs. Most of them are probably pot heads now. But it's not the substance that screws them up, it's at their core. I met a guy in the oil field who had gotten kicked out of the Navy for coke, still managed to land the same job I had with my clean record. The difference is he managed to blow it inside of a few months by throwing his bar tab on the corporate credit card. Guys like that can have a million chances and will manage to ruin their lives no matter what kind of substance is legal.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom