Tax on Beer to Increase 1,500%?!
Apr 14., 2008 
5 Comments
Photo by: Texas Mustang
If Assemblyman Jim Beall has his way, that’s exactly what would happen. Beall has proposed this tax increase because, as he states, “The people who use alcohol should pay for part of the cost to society, just like we’ve accepted that concept with tobacco.”
For the record, I’ve always been against the incessant increase of taxes on smokes. As an avid fan of all things beer, this proposal is blasphemous, unjust and, at the very least, a grievous crime against humanity.
Seriously, though, let’s look at the issue from a Pro-Con viewpoint.
Pro
The San Jose Democrat on Thursday proposed raising the beer tax by $1.80 per six-pack, or 30 cents per can or bottle. The current tax is 2 cents per can. That’s an increase of about 1,500 percent.
Beall said the tax would generate $2 billion a year to fund health care services, crime prevention and programs to prevent underage drinking and addiction.
Source: The Mercury News
Beall does have noble intentions for where the extra tax revenue will go towards. I mean really, who doesn’t want to help prevent crime and actually give funding to our local hospitals?
Con
Dan Gordon, co-founder of Gordon Biersch Brewing Co., calculated that the tax on a barrel of beer would go from $6.40 to $89. “We would all be looking for jobs,” he said.
Source: The Mercury News
Does the end justify the means? If an increase in tax revenue means other tax revenues may potentially be lost, due to layoffs and bankruptcies, how does that benefit society?
Any thoughts?
Related posts:
Author Info
The main question I come up with from reading this is “Who’s running against this douchebag, and where do I send money to that guy’s campaign?”
It’s an age-old maxim that if you want to encourage something you subsidize it, and if you want to discourage something you tax it. Drastic changes like this just stir up political resentment. A better approach would be to legalize recreational use of marijuana and then tax it at rates similar to beer and other vices.
Is this Jim Beall even relevant? With the current war(s), foreclosures, smoking ban, lay offs, stock market ups and downs, KU winning the National Championship, inflation and recession I think NOW is the best time to stick it to people who like to drink up the spirits.
I think it’s apples to oranges comparing smoking with alcohol. Both kill, but one is way more devastating than the other and it’s another form of control our local government wants us to obey. F**k that. *See political resentment*.
There’s already enough taxes to pay for stuff…and the PRO you mentioned would be great if that’s where the money actually went…but it simply doesn’t. It would be a legal way to gouge and pillage the companies monies into the pockets of the governments.
Yes, legalize marijuana.
Sorry, I know this is an older post but I just link jumped here for the first time.
So, anyway, my initial response is “No f#$*ing way”.
But to be fair, I am not totally against sin taxes. I have little to no sympathy for smokers (despite knowing and liking several) and am not one myself. But I myself AM a beer drinker. If they could find a way to make more without breaking the industry, I would grumble and pay it. This however is an exercise in overkill.
Besides, as said so much better above, this money never ends up where it is really needed.
While a buck-80 isn’t enough to keep me from buying beer, it’s a huge jump all at once.
If this dude wants to tax things that are unhealthy for you, there are a ton of other things that could be taxed, to come up with the intended amount in tax revenue.
Spread out that $1.80 across items such as coffee, alcohol in general – not just beer, candy, etc.