Connecticut Senate Bill SB00295

Connecticut 2013 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/23/13
• Refer: 1/23/13
• Refer: 2/21/13
• Report Pass: 3/13/13
• Refer: 3/19/13
• Report Pass: 3/26/13
• Refer: 4/24/13

Caption

An Act Authorizing Municipalities To Collect The Marijuana And Controlled Substances Tax.

Impact

If enacted, SB00295 would enable municipalities with a population of less than 75,000 to collect taxes on controlled substances seized by law enforcement, thus giving local governments a more significant role in the regulation and taxation of these items. This authorizes them to retain any acquired tax revenue and sets up a framework for hearings regarding disputes from the taxed dealers. Such provisions aim to ensure compliance while potentially enhancing local fiscal capabilities.

Summary

SB00295 is an act that allows municipalities in Connecticut to impose a tax on marijuana and controlled substances. The legislation specifically outlines the procedure for taxing substances acquired or possessed within the state and defines the responsibilities of dealers regarding tax stamps. The tax rates are set at $3.50 for each gram of marijuana and $200 for each gram of a controlled substance, which has the potential to create a new revenue stream for local governments while regulating the sale and distribution of these substances.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB00295 appears to be cautiously optimistic among supporters who see it as a pragmatic approach to managing marijuana and other controlled substances. Initially, proponents argue that it will generate necessary funds for municipalities and promote better regulation. However, there are concerns regarding the implications of local control over tax collection, potentially leading to disparities between communities with varying tax rates and enforcement policies.

Contention

Despite its potential benefits, the bill also faces criticism and contention. Opponents may argue that it complicates the existing regulatory landscape and could create a patchwork of tax laws that vary by municipality, undermining any efforts towards a standardized approach to substance control in the state. Additionally, the enactment of such a law might raise questions about accountability and the efficacy of enforcing tax collection on seized items, which poses challenges for law enforcement and local governments alike.