11% excise tax

[MajorSideburns]

Have similar taxes been tried in other states before? I vaguely recall reading about something similar in Washington or Oregon a few years back which was defeated in court as unconstitutional. Am I misremembering or do we have a chance at getting this law repealed with lawsuits?

[Raptor3000]

It will be great if it's repealed

[NikePenguin]

[harbormaster]

FWIW all I can tell is they (stores) are advertising you must DROS by 6/19 or 6/20 and have pick up before the end of the month to avoid the 11% - could be real could be a sales pitch IDK

[DuckDawg22]

FWIW all I can tell is they (stores) are advertising you must DROS by 6/19 or 6/20 and have pick up before the end of the month to avoid the 11% - could be real could be a sales pitch IDK

I've always paid in full prior to running the DROS, but now that I think about it, my LGS gave me the option to pay on pickup. If the transaction closes prior to July 1 I don't see how they can charge you the tax after the fact. Gotta be a sales tactic

[kenl]

Sorry if smarter people already answered this. I haven't seen anything definitive yet. With that, I've been told by 4 LGS that yes you can avoid the tax as long as everything is paid for before July 1, regardless of dros and delivery date. Others, notably Turners, say that they need to be delivered by the 1st. Who is right, and is this just a money grab from the shops? I don't know, but knowing the shops, I don't think its a money grab. In my very un-lawyerly reading of this "law", I believe the LGS's.

But as always, do your own research.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Sorry if smarter people already answered this. I haven't seen anything definitive yet. With that, I've been told by 4 LGS that yes you can avoid the tax as long as everything is paid for before July 1, regardless of dros and delivery date. Others, notably Turners, say that they need to be delivered by the 1st. Who is right, and is this just a money grab from the shops? I don't know, but knowing the shops, I don't think its a money grab. In my very un-lawyerly reading of this "law", I believe the LGS's.

But as always, do your own research.

I don't believe anyone can provide a definitive answer. If they can, it won't be a simple one.

There's a thread where it's been talked about, but I'm not finding it at the moment. The 'conclusion' (as such) which was broached is that it may depend on the shop and how they report their earnings.

In short, there may not be a 'right' and 'wrong' answer so much as an 'it depends' version, not so much based on the law itself, but based on how the shop does its accounting.

[Zenderfall]

[DuckDawg22]

This little tidbit was in today's WBT Guns email. "Place your order ASAP to ensure delivery to your FFL in time to DROS. Each FFL has a different policy."
Screenshot 2024-05-31 at 8.17.30?PM.png

[Enthused]

FWIW all I can tell is they (stores) are advertising you must DROS by 6/19 or 6/20 and have pick up before the end of the month to avoid the 11% - could be real could be a sales pitch IDK

It has worked on me. I've purchased 3 firearms and thousands of rounds of ammo in the last 3 months. If this upcoming 11% tax didn't exist, I probably only would have purchased a few boxes of ammo instead. I know thousands of Californians across the state have been doing the same thing.

Congrats Gavin and the rest of the morons in Sacramento!

[Preston-CLB]

I don't believe anyone can provide a definitive answer. If they can, it won't be a simple one.

There's a thread where it's been talked about, but I'm not finding it at the moment. The 'conclusion' (as such) which was broached is that it may depend on the shop and how they report their earnings.

In short, there may not be a 'right' and 'wrong' answer so much as an 'it depends' version, not so much based on the law itself, but based on how the shop does its accounting.

Here's the discussion thread on AB 28. Be sure to read Librarian's post #29 with the quote from CRPA.
-P

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Here's the discussion thread on AB 28. Be sure to read Librarian's post #29 with the quote from CRPA.
-P

This was the thread - Thirty-day DROS - I was actually thinking of as it directly addresses the question...

Sorry if smarter people already answered this. I haven't seen anything definitive yet. With that, I've been told by 4 LGS that yes you can avoid the tax as long as everything is paid for before July 1, regardless of dros and delivery date. Others, notably Turners, say that they need to be delivered by the 1st. Who is right, and is this just a money grab from the shops? I don't know, but knowing the shops, I don't think its a money grab. In my very un-lawyerly reading of this "law", I believe the LGS's.

But as always, do your own research.

[OCEquestrian]

Not at all...California is a captive market...there are no LEGAL alternatives.

[Steve G]

Not at all...California is a captive market...there are no LEGAL alternatives.

Not sure is serious? LOL

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Have similar taxes been tried in other states before? I vaguely recall reading about something similar in Washington or Oregon a few years back which was defeated in court as unconstitutional. Am I misremembering or do we have a chance at getting this law repealed with lawsuits?

It depends. 'Similar taxes' = yes. Excise taxes on guns/ammo = only at the municipal level that I'm aware of.

Seven States Move to Tax Guns and Ammo

three municipalities have also done so: Seattle and Tacoma, Washington, and Cook County, Illinois. Pennsylvania also adds a $3 surchargesince 1919, imposed a national excise tax of 10 to 11 percent on the import and production of firearms to support wildlife conservation; the state taxes would be in addition to the federal tax...

There have been 'similar taxes' on things like alcohol and cigarettes. But, this isn't the first time California has tried... California Democrats have long failed to tax guns, ammunition. Could this year be different?

Likewise, other states are now, actively, pursuing it... STATE FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION EXCISE TAXES PROPOSED IN WA & NM

What is going to be... interesting... is to watch SCOTUS try to 'balance' their decision on Obamacare and any decision imposing a tax on an enumerated Constitutional Right which doesn't have a direct benefit to that right.

?

?