Proposed repeal of Pittman Robertson Act - Thoughts?

[Boxcab]

The .gov is never efficient with tax money. I really wonder where these monies go. How many hands take a piece of the pie?




.

Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk

 

[Inigoes]

You cannot tax a right.

Tax abortions instead.

The tax is paid for by the manufacturers. Yes, that cost is passed onto the consumers.

If what you say would be the golden rule, then guns, ammo, archery equipment, etc would be sales tax exempt also.

 

[Uncle Duke]

I've always seen Pittman Robertson as being the one tax that is used as intended. I also see it as hunters and firearms users putting their money where their mouths are, and funding the outdoors areas that are amenable to hunting and general firearms use, where others would very quickly disallow either practice. Neither freedom comes without a cost, and this might be the one area I can point to where I see value received.

 

[teratos]

The tax is paid for by the manufacturers. Yes, that cost is passed onto the consumers.

If what you say would be the golden rule, then guns, ammo, archery equipment, etc would be sales tax exempt also.

MINNEAPOLIS STAR AND TRIBUNE COMPANY, Appellant v. MINNESOTA COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE.

www.law.cornell.edu

 

[Brickman301]

I don’t want to see the Pittman Roberson act go.
With that be stated, they say this tax is unconstitutional because you can’t tax a right.
If that’s the case sales tax on gun and ammo sales is also unconstitutional.

What about the tax stamps for NFA items? That is definitely a tax on a right for sure.

 

[bcr229]

I thought P-R was assessed on more than just firearms. It also applies to fishing equipment, camping gear, etc.

If what you say would be the golden rule, then guns, ammo, archery equipment, etc would be sales tax exempt also.

Sidebar - those are exempt from sales tax in WV.

I also thought that other products were subject to P-R taxes.

Also if P-R taxes are a violation of the Second Amendment then what about transfer taxes on Title II firearms?

 

[teratos]

I thought P-R was assessed on more than just firearms. It also applies to fishing equipment, camping gear, etc.

Sidebar - those are exempt from sales tax in WV.

I also thought that other products were subject to P-R taxes.

Also if P-R taxes are a violation of the Second Amendment then what about transfer taxes on Title II firearms?

If those arms are suitable for militia service, they should be.

 

[Devonian]

I’m against repeal. But I would support lowering the tax while expanding the scope to include general outdoor goods like camping equipment and hiking gear.

 

[gtodave]

You cannot tax a right.

Tax abortions instead.

They aren't. Nothing in this tax hinders you from owning or carrying a firearm. It just adds cost to NEW firearms. There's all kinds of ways to utilize the 2A without buying a new gun.

This isn't a tax on a right...that's a lame argument.

 

[gtodave]

The .gov is never efficient with tax money. I really wonder where these monies go. How many hands take a piece of the pie?




.

Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk

I addressed that in post #22

 

[teratos]

They aren't. Nothing in this tax hinders you from owning or carrying a firearm. It just adds cost to NEW firearms. There's all kinds of ways to utilize the 2A without buying a new gun.

This isn't a tax on a right...that's a lame argument.

So an EXTRA tax on buying a new gun isn't a tax on an implement used to exercise a right? What if it's your first gun?

It's a valid argument. You just don't like it.

 

[gtodave]

Question to the hive: What if they kept P-A but eliminated Firearms from the tax? That would eliminate the question of "taxing a right" (even though it isn't), but still keep important revenue from other outdoorsy sales.

 

[teratos]

Question to the hive: What if they kept P-A but eliminated Firearms from the tax? That would eliminate the question of "taxing a right" (even though it isn't), but still keep important revenue from other outdoorsy sales.

Did Justice Roberts tell you it wasn't a tax? Like Obamacare?

It says it's a tax...an 11% excise tax. Owning a firearm is a right.

 

[gtodave]

So an EXTRA tax on buying a new gun isn't a tax on an implement used to exercise a right? What if it's your first gun?

It's a valid argument. You just don't like it.

Keep in mind I'm hard core Libertarian, and I'm with Boondock when he says no taxes are good taxes. I don't like paying an extra 11% on guns and ammo...but the market price is set. Take away P-A and we won't pay a penny less. But we will lose BIG TIME in the outdoors.

And you can get your first gun from other sources other than buying one new. Most people get their first gun as a gift or hand-me-down. I understand that that doesn't cover everyone though, and cost can be prohibitive. Hell, I'd own 100 more guns if I had the finances.

Here's the way I see it: The 2A recognized our right to own and carry a gun. It is not however a right TO a gun. We have to buy that gun at fair market price. It's not like the right to vote where the cost is covered by the gov't, and any poll tax would certainly be unconstitutional. So you're paying a price for it anyways...might as well have some of it go to stuff you approve of.

 

[gtodave]

Did Justice Roberts tell you it wasn't a tax? Like Obamacare?

It says it's a tax...an 11% excise tax. Owning a firearm is a right.

I agree that it is a tax. I'm saying it's not a tax on a right. See above.

 

[teratos]

Here's the way I see it: The 2A recognized our right to own and carry a gun. It is not however a right TO a gun. We have to buy that gun at fair market price. It's not like the right to vote where the cost is covered by the gov't, and any poll tax would certainly be unconstitutional. So you're paying a price for it anyways...might as well have some of it go to stuff you approve of.

What about the 1A case I posted above where the government tried to put an extra tax on paper and ink, and they said you couldn't tax the implements needed to exercise a right?

 

[243hunter]

I thought P-R was assessed on more than just firearms. It also applies to fishing equipment, camping gear, etc.

Sidebar - those are exempt from sales tax in WV.

I also thought that other products were subject to P-R taxes.

Also if P-R taxes are a violation of the Second Amendment then what about transfer taxes on Title II firearms?

Firearms and the like are Pittman-Robertson funds. Fishing is Dingel-Johnson fund.

 

[gtodave]

What about the 1A case I posted above where the government tried to put an extra tax on paper and ink, and they said you couldn't tax the implements needed to exercise a right?

I missed that. That would be a fair comparison. But if we can't have an "extra" tax on such items, why should they be taxed at all? Shouldn't sales tax go away too?

Listen, I'm all for ALL taxes going away. It's just that the P-A tax would be the last one I'd want to go. It serves a legit purpose.

 

[ericoak]

There is no reason why anyone should be paying this tax on the FMJ ammunition and self defense guns, but as can be seen on this website, people (including “conservatives”) have no problem making others pay an excise taxes that fund programs that have nothing to do with the product purchased as along as they approve of the use of the funding.

Pathetic.

 

[ericoak]

The Dems and Rinos are just trying to steal the PRA conservation money to funnel into their own pet projects and social agendas.

Pittman-Robinson is the one government program that works from the FDR New Deal nightmare.

Not seeing how PRA's excise tax is anti-2A if it helps promote hunting and wildlife conservation.

You don’t see how making self defense equipment more expensive to pay for things that have nothing to do with self defense is anti 2A?

Wtf does hunting have to do with 2A anyways. It’s entire purpose is to allow the people to fight an out of control government, not shoot birds and deer for fun.