Tanner Conley
Lawmakers in Wyoming voted down a bill which would have increased the state excise tax on alcohol for the first time since the Prohibition Era.
According to Nick Reynolds of the Casper-Star Tribune, this tax was meant to raise nearly two million dollars in funding for a series of new substance abuse programs across the state. If passed, this tax would remain in effect until July 1, 2024.
In this specific instance, the proposed bill was a doubling of the existing excise tax. According to a Legislative Service Office issue brief in 2007, the current excise tax is at “two cents per gallon of beer, 28 cents per gallon of wine and 95 cents per gallon of hard liquor.”
The prospect of doubling these taxes in support of substance abuse program funding will still total to pennies on the dollar. But proponents of this bill saw it as necessary.
Senator Charlie Scott, the main supporter of this bill, is the Republican co-chairman of the Joint Committee on Labor, Health and Social Services. According to a press release, Scott said he believes it is everyone’s responsibility to care for those afflicted with substance abuse.
“It’s a tax to me that makes a lot of sense,” said Scott. “And if we don’t do it, I’m afraid we won’t get the problem dealt with.”
David Aadland, Department Chair of the Department of Economics at the University of Wyoming, said people pay excise taxes almost every day and never even notice.
“Excise taxes are taxes based at the production level. That is usually embedded in the price, while the sales tax is on top of the price. Excise taxes are generally not even seen, they are just part of the price,” Aadland said.
Normally, the producer of the product pays the excise tax. But things are not that simple.
“Who usually pays [excise tax] is the producer of the item. That’s who literally pays it. But who effectively pays the tax, often is the consumer. [Producers] just raise the price to cover the tax,” Aadland said.
Scott submitted his own bill that would help fund government-run substance abuse programs 20 years ago but was rejected. This is not the first time that a bill considering using a special tax to pay for substance abuse programs has been shot down in legislature.
“It got defeated on the idea that it was a tax on the working man,” Scott said in the press release. “I think that’s an awful stereotype. It’s a tax on people who choose to drink that are running the risk of needing professional help to deal with it. It’s not a large risk, but they are running that risk. So why shouldn’t they pay for it?”
The vote to advance the legislation took place Nov. 6 and was narrowly defeated with a tally of 7-6. The main argument against the bill came down to the idea of fairness. It was seen as unfair to have responsible alcohol drinkers pay for substance abuse programs for those who are not as capable. As a result of the vote, Wyoming will continue to be counted among the states with the lowest alcohol taxes in the nation.
