- Strong quake hits Japan, triggering tsunami
- Sniper heaven: Pentagon’s self-guided bullets leave enemies nowhere to hide
- Violent gang taking advantage of immigration crisis, using border as recruiting hub
- Medicaid enrollment continues to soar under Obamacare, administration says
- Michelle Obama to Latinos: ‘We cannot afford to wait on Congress’ for immigration
- White House urges GOP to act ‘urgently’ on $3.7 billion request for illegal immigrants
- Politicians, criminals using ‘right-to-be-forgotten’ law EU courts forced upon Google
- Combat fatigue: elite special forces troops are ‘fraying,’ Gen. Joseph Votel warns
- German foreign minister to meet Kerry to discuss spying claims
- Florida police spokesman tells citizens: ‘Get yourself some firearms’
MINTON: Assault on alcohol
Proposed Maryland tax would cost drinkers and nondrinkers alike
Question of the Day
A dime a drink may not sound that bad, but the deceptive name of Maryland’s proposed new beverage tax hides its real impact on local businesses, jobs and the state’s economy. The proposal would require wholesalers to pay the “dime per drink” tax on all of their liquor sales upfront and then pass along the cost to retailers and restaurants, which presumably would pass it along to consumers per drink. But the upfront cost to wholesalers and retailers could be overwhelming.
The proposal would raise the tax on beer from 9 cents to $1.16 per gallon, the tax on wine from 40 cents to $2.92 per gallon and the tax on distilled liquor from $1.50 to an astonishing $10.03 per gallon. The tax would increase wholesalers’ inventory costs by 700 percent to 1,300 percent.
Proponents of the tax argue that it would raise revenue for the smarting state budget, but they underestimate its impact on businesses. In the end, the tax increase would hurt, rather than help, the state’s economy.
The taxes on alcohol are imposed directly on distributors, so the increase in the upfront cost of purchasing alcohol could bust their budgets. Distributors may have to purchase less inventory, fire workers or raise prices - or possibly all three.
Assuming that restaurants can cope with the increased costs, they are then left with two options: Absorb the cost and keep prices the same or increase prices in order to pass on the tax to their customers. Most restaurants likely would increase their prices, not just on alcohol, but also on food. This means that all potential patrons, even teetotalers, would end up paying for the tax increase - that is, if they continued eating and shopping in Maryland.
One unintended consequence of the tax increase could be a reduction in purchasing and spending in Maryland. With the District of Columbia a short train or car ride away, Marylanders, like Virginians, seeking better options to their state’s liquor sales monopoly might begin to do the majority of their alcohol shopping in the District. That would further hurt Maryland businesses struggling to recover from the economic downturn and stall the projected revenue bump the tax was intended to generate.
Worst of all, the tax increase would hurt those who can least afford it: workers in the service industry. Increasing taxes could result in less foot traffic, leading to more business failures and lost jobs. The per-drink tax would affect waiters and bartenders in a more subtle way - decreasing their tips.
Most customers at bars and restaurants calculate the tip they give to servers by rounding up - the so-called “keep the change” method. If the cost of a drink increases by 10 cents, customers aren’t likely to alter their “keep the change” calculation. Thus, the tax would be coming almost directly out of the tips of the already low-wage service-industry worker.
In tough times, it is understandable that lawmakers look to tax luxury items such as alcoholic beverages to increase state revenue rather than cut “essential” services. However, the proposed increase would end up costing the state of Maryland businesses, jobs and customers - ultimately resulting in fewer tax dollars, fewer patrons and an overall decline in the quality of life in the Free State.
Michelle Minton is the director of insurance studies with the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
TWT Video Picks
By Robert N. Tracci
Congress must use its appropriations power to secure the border
Get Breaking Alerts
- Violent gang MS-13 taking advantage of immigration crisis, using border as recruiting hub
- Pentagon's self-guided bullets leave enemies nowhere to hide
- Michelle Obama to Latinos: 'We cannot afford to wait on Congress' for immigration
- A 'new Cold War': China's top paper warns of 'slippery slope' towards conflict with U.S.
- Armed militia sets up Texas command center to 'fight for national sovereignty'
- DOJ investigates Norfolk parade float critical of Obama
- 'Be a leader' Perry tells Obama to confront border crisis
- Eric Holder on Palin: 'She wasn't a particularly good vice presidential candidate'
- Hamas orders civilians to die in Israeli airstrikes
- NASCAR TV contract back to NBC in 2015, leaving ESPN, Turner Sports
Recent Letters to the Editor
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: How many boondoggles to break the bank?
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: The problem is unenforced borders
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Where are condolences for Jewish teens' deaths?
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Obama welcomes illegals, ignores Americans
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Obama has no intention of repatriating illegals