Louisiana House Bill HB169

Louisiana 2014 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/10/14
• Refer: 3/10/14

Caption

Dedicates a portion of the state excise tax levied on beverages of low alcoholic content to the La. Wounded Warriors Fund (OR -$5,325,000 GF RV See Note)

Impact

The implementation of HB 169 directly impacts state tax policy by dedicating a specific portion of tax revenue for the welfare of veterans. The law seeks to ensure that sufficient funding is directed to support the needs of veterans requiring rehabilitation services after their military service. As a result, the bill aims to enhance the state's responsibility towards its veterans, acknowledging their sacrifices and providing necessary resources for their recovery.

Summary

House Bill 169 focuses on the establishment of the Louisiana Wounded Warrior Fund, which is funded by a portion of the state excise tax on beverages of low alcoholic content. Specifically, the bill mandates that 15% of the tax revenues collected from these beverages must be allocated to the fund. This is intended to support the rehabilitation of Louisiana veterans who were wounded while serving in the U.S. military during various wartime periods, including the Persian Gulf War. The fund is structured as a special fund within the state treasury.

Sentiment

Overall, the sentiment surrounding this bill appears to be positive, particularly among veteran advocacy groups and supporters of military personnel. Legislators advocating for the bill emphasize its importance in recognizing the contributions of veterans and providing them with essential care and rehabilitation services. However, there may be mixed feelings regarding the allocation of tax revenues and its implications for the state budget and other potential funding needs.

Contention

While the bill is largely seen as beneficial for veterans, some contention may arise from the source of funding, specifically regarding the reliance on excise taxes which could impact businesses selling low alcoholic beverages. Critics might express concerns over whether this funding mechanism is sustainable or whether it might adversely affect local economies dependent on such businesses. The debate may also touch on prioritizing veteran rehabilitation versus other funding responsibilities of the state.