Help fund Substance Abuse Programs
City Council President and South Boston resident Bill Linehan proposed a 6.25% tax on alcohol sales in the city of Boston on Wednesday before the Government Operations Committee.
According to the proposal, the revenue generated from the tax will go to fund local substance abuse treatment programs. This would apply to only liquor store purchases not alcohol sold in bars and restaurants.
According to masslive.com, Massachusetts Package Stores Association Executive Director Frank Anzalotti said that back in 2009 the heart of the statewide tax on liquor sales was the same but the promise to help substance abuse programs wasn’t kept. “We knew back then what happens to bills like this. They siphon the money in that direction for maybe a year, and then they find out it ends up somewhere else in the general fund,” said Anzalotti.
Linehan said due to the way the law is written, the tax will stay dedicated and not end up going to other city functions.
Back in 2010, 6.25 % tax on liquor store sales by the state (Question 1) was repealed by voters with more than 50 percent of the vote.
What do you think, Southie?
4 Comments
Comments are closed.
No! No more taxes, ok? Bostonians are taxed more than enough and I’m tired of contstantly having to take more of the money I earn and work sometimes 6 days a week for that should be going to my family, and shell it out in new taxes because some people have made bad decisions in their lives. If I have to, as a matter of principle, rather than pay another tax, over and above the taxes already levied on alcohol, I will go outside the city to by it. Others feel the same way. And this will be yet anoter way that unthinking Boston pols are hurting local business. A message to those people we elect to office: How about coming up with ways to lower the tax burdens of working families instead of always thinking up ways to add new ones?
I fear the impact this tax will have on off-premise businesses (liquor stores, packies, breweries, distilleries) and their employees. Consumers will have a direct disincentive to buy their beer/wine/spirits at local shops and instead head to Cambridge, Somerville, Everett, Quincy, etc. to buy it without the added tax. The less revenue businesses take in, the less they can provide in the form of wages and benefits. It’s disconcerting to see the City make a push like this in the face of stated initiatives to promote innovation, small business, and job growth. Substance abuse treatment has to be a top priority, but there have to be other ways to increase its effectiveness than throwing more money at it.
I fear the impact this tax will have on off-premise businesses (liquor stores, packies, breweries, distilleries) and their employees. Consumers will have a direct disincentive to buy their beer/wine/spirits at local shops and instead head to Cambridge, Somerville, Everett, Quincy, etc. to buy it without the added tax. The less revenue businesses take in, the less they can provide in the form of wages and benefits. It’s disconcerting to see the City make a push like this in the face of stated initiatives to promote innovation, small business, and job growth. Substance abuse treatment has to be a top priority, but there have to be other ways to increase its effectiveness than throwing more money at it.
I contacted Bill Linehan on this. I oppose any more taxes. Enough already. Enough. I know this is supposed to be used for something that affects all of society. But at some point throwing more and more money at problems doesn’t work.
Give us a break. Enough.