To the Counties from the Cities: We don't need no stinking Liquor tax

Aside from grumbling in their own county organization, the Pennington County Commissioners also are going to be facing some opponents to their alcohol tax measure. And not just the obvious ones.

Who else might be taking them to task for trying to increase their revenue base? Check out this statement from the South Dakota Municipal League's statement of policy:
Sales Tax

79. The SDML opposes any legislation that would reduce, remove, repeal or reallocate the municipal sales tax, liquor tax reversion or any other municipal revenues to any other unit of government or that would expand the power to impose a sales or use tax to any other unit of government. (T&R – 2000; 9)
This proviso to the Municipal League's Statement of policy has been hanging around since 2000, but it takes on new meaning when viewed in light of the effort to place a drink tax on the Ballot.

Because it very plainly states on it's face "The SDML opposes any legislation... that would expand the power to impose a sales or use tax to any other unit of government." The Drink tax is certainly a "use tax" or as it's described in the ballot measure "a consumption fee on the retail sale of alcoholic beverage."

It looks like the chunk of meat that the Pennington County Commission bit off is getting harder and harder to chew.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A note from Benedict Ar... Sorry. A note from Stan Adelstein why he thinks you should vote Democrat this year.

Corson County information on Klaudt Rape Charges

It's about health, not potential promiscuity.