Gunplummer
New member
Do you see state taxes used in the future to stop the flow of ammunition? It sure put a hurting on the smokers in some states. Instead of outlawing guns, they may try to out price them.
Ammunition tax
- Thread starter Gunplummer
- Start date
shootbrownelk
New member
I don't doubt that an ammunition tax will be considered. California has already proposed or perhaps passed a law requiring a background check for ammo purchases. The gun grabbers may feel that pricing ammunition out of reach may be a better plan than trying to ban the guns...IMO anyway.
carguychris
New member
IIRC gun rights groups took Seattle to court, but the initial court ruled in favor of the city, and the tax went into effect. WA State has a local firearms-ordinance preemption statute, and the gun-rights coalition argued that the tax was effectively a regulatory fee that violated the spirit of the statute, but the city successfully argued that it was primarily intended to raise money and was therefore a lawful tax.
This update and this update says that the gun rights groups have appealed, and that the city is resisting a FOIA request to disclose how much money the tax has actually raised. The opposition is hoping this will demonstrate that the city's revenue projections were wildly unrealistic, which would weaken the city's case.
This update and this update says that the gun rights groups have appealed, and that the city is resisting a FOIA request to disclose how much money the tax has actually raised. The opposition is hoping this will demonstrate that the city's revenue projections were wildly unrealistic, which would weaken the city's case.
Last edited:
buckhorn_cortez
New member
There is the federal tax on ammunition - The Firearms and Ammunition Excise Tax - Chapter 32 of the Internal Revenue Service Code (26 USC 4181).
The tax is imposed on manufacturers and importers on the sales price of the ammunition. It is currently 11% for ammunition. I'd speculate that the tax gets factored into the cost of the ammunition by the manufacturer or importer and the tax is ultimately paid by the end buyer.
The tax is imposed on manufacturers and importers on the sales price of the ammunition. It is currently 11% for ammunition. I'd speculate that the tax gets factored into the cost of the ammunition by the manufacturer or importer and the tax is ultimately paid by the end buyer.
It is still enforced. It so far has come through the courts.
On January 1, 2016 Seattle began imposing a $25 tax on every gun and a 5-cent tax on every round sold within city limits.
Essentially what this did was just move most every gun shop out of city limits and retailers who just sold ammo, just stopped selling ammo due to lack of sales. There are some holdouts hoping for a ruling to overturn the tax, but it does not look good.
It is important to note that this ONLY applies to Seattle city limits. This is a city law, not a county or state. If something like this was purposed state wide, it probably would not pass. Believe it or not, most of state is quite red with only certain counties/cities on the West coast that are ultra liberal. Unfortunately, the population in those areas is so dense that they can have a lot of influence and control of the rest of the state. WA state does have very good gun laws. They (anti-gun people) are learning to bypass the strong state preemption laws by controlling through taxes (sound familiar - Obama care?)
It would probably not pass the LEGISLATURE. But the anti's have discovered an end run around that. Ballot initiatives.
We defeated the stupidly written background check law, TWICE, (possibly 3 times) over several years IN THE LEGISLATURE.
When they made it a ballot initiative, only the 4 or 5 counties in the Seattle metro area passed it BUT that was enough to make it the law for the entire state. Simple numbers. A deliberately misleading and lying advertising campaign, (mostly funded by out of state interests) convinced enough people in the Seattle area that the law was a good thing, and needed, so it passed there, and ONLY there.
But the rest of the state rejected it. Machts Nichts, they got the numbers, and our rights didn't matter.
This is called democracy. 3 wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner is democracy. Democracy in the abstract is held to the high ideal, what is right, and just, and proper. The assumption is that the majority of people will vote to do the "right thing. But in practice, in the real world, it has a huge historical track record of not working out that way.
The majority can be mislead and manipulated, history if full of that.
The Nazis were ELECTED into power.
The majority of the US, at one time held that certain persons were legally PROPERTY (slavery)
The majority of the US at one time held that women did not have a right to vote...
The majority, at one time, held that homosexuality was a mental illness...
These are just a few,
History shows us again and again how a majority can make, and support a really bad decision.
If that isn't clear enough, just look at some of the people we have elected, by majority vote.....And what they have done!
just because the bulk of the people, by numbers, think something is right, doesn't mean it is. Ask any minority group about it....
You are correct, I should have been more clear.
I would like to think that it would not pass on an initiative either though, but given what happened on I-529, it probably would.
The difference is that I-529 did have an amazing amount of support by people who own "a" gun (or so we were told), and would only have any effect on a person if they ever bought a new gun or sold what they own gun or allowed anyone else to "borrow" it (don't want to get into the grey area or enforcing issues now). So in theory, this does not effect every gun owner.
A tax on ammo would effect everyone that owns a gun. Ammo is a disposable the effects anyone that does not reload (in general). So, in this theory, the more that are effected by a TAX, the less would support it. However, those that only own one gun, don't typically shoot too much, so this would not be a big burden for them in addition to those that fit that demographic, typically (from my observation) fit the more liberal/socialist definition and would see that an ammo tax for "the greater good" would be a great thing.
Yes, a statewide initiative might have a good chance at passing.
Unfortunately, it is the "grey area" of that law that DOES AFFECT EVERY GUN OWNER.
Under that law, as written it is arguable that simply handing a gun to a friend to look at, in your living room, violates the law, and him handing it back violates the law again. And TWO violations is a felony offense.
As to an ammo tax, of course most of us would see it as an ADDITIONAL infringement, but we pay tons of taxes on all kinds of everyday things, usually without thinking about it.
The problem is, its another of those slippery slopes. A $0.05 tax PER ROUND?? Can turn into a $5.00 per round tax with a stroke of a tax hungry legislator's pen.
And probably that tax would go to buy ANOTHER sports stadium or pay for Seattle's ferry service, which are of such great social benefit to the people on the east side of the Cascades...
Grrrrrr...death by a thousand cuts....
I ACTUALLY have slightly more respect for those anti folk that don't mince words and come right out and say they want to repeal the second amendment and ban ALL guns. Yep. Every single firearm out there. THOSE folk at least have the courage of their convictions. I don't have to worry about them sneaking around my back they come right up to me.
Phoebe Maltz Bovy is one...
https://newrepublic.com/article/125498/its-time-ban-guns-yes-them
P.S. ANYTIME the anti folk trot that old tired cliché 'Nobody is trying to take your guns away' line hit back with this article or almost any article on guns from 'The New Republic'.
I ACTUALLY have slightly more respect for those anti folk that don't mince words and come right out and say they want to repeal the second amendment and ban ALL guns. Yep. Every single firearm out there. THOSE folk at least have the courage of their convictions. I don't have to worry about them sneaking around my back they come right up to me.
Phoebe Maltz Bovy is one...
https://newrepublic.com/article/125498/its-time-ban-guns-yes-them
P.S. ANYTIME the anti folk trot that old tired cliché 'Nobody is trying to take your guns away' line hit back with this article or almost any article on guns from 'The New Republic'.
Don't hold your breath for justice in this world.
The Seattle tax law will likely stand, because its "NOT" a gun control law (which would violate the state preemption law - something they have tried before, and LOST) but because its "just" a TAX law. And, a LOCAL tax law, at that.
It OUGHT to be struck down, but I'm not holding my breath...
The Seattle tax law will likely stand, because its "NOT" a gun control law (which would violate the state preemption law - something they have tried before, and LOST) but because its "just" a TAX law. And, a LOCAL tax law, at that.
It OUGHT to be struck down, but I'm not holding my breath...
Hopefully the ammo tax will be recognized for what it is, taxing a human right. Poll taxes were eventually struck down. Bans on certain groups of people from having children were removed. Censorship of the press and airwaves has been essentially removed. We'll see if it happens.
Roll your own. Start your own distillery. Buy an electric car. Reload your own ammunition.
The above does not eliminate all taxes but it puts a damper on some Federal, State and local taxes.
I don't smoke, drink or have an electric car. I sure do load all my ammunition except for rim fire.
The above does not eliminate all taxes but it puts a damper on some Federal, State and local taxes.
I don't smoke, drink or have an electric car. I sure do load all my ammunition except for rim fire.