The Herald of Everett, Washington
HeraldNet on Facebook HeraldNet on Twitter HeraldNet RSS feeds HeraldNet Pinterest HeraldNet Google Plus HeraldNet Youtube
HeraldNet Newsletters  Newsletters: Sign up | Manage  Green editions icon Green editions

Calendar


HeraldNet Headlines
HeraldNet Newsletter Delivered to your inbox each week.
Published: Friday, June 29, 2012, 6:45 p.m.

Court clears way for tax on roll-your-own cigarettes

The state can begin collecting taxes on roll-your-own cigarettes starting Sunday.

OLYMPIA -- The cost of roll your own cigarettes is going up Sunday when the state begins imposing a new tax on the handcrafted product.
A state Supreme Court commissioner cleared the way late Friday when he concluded that opponents of the tax failed to comply with terms of an injunction blocking its collection by the state.
Franklin County Superior Court Judge Bruce Spanner granted the injunction contingent on those fighting the tax posting a $200,000 bond to ensure the state's interests are protected should it ultimately prevail.
Those plaintiffs, who include the owner of a store that provides machines for people to roll their own cigarettes and a customer, didn't put up the money.
On Friday, Deputy Commissioner Walter Burton issued a temporary stay on the injunction. It will be in effect until July 10 when a decision on extending it will be made.
That means starting Sunday retailers operating cigarette-making machines must place cigarette tax stamps on the products. This will add roughly 15 cents to the price of each cigarette.
The Supreme Court is expected to eventually settle the question of whether the validity of this tax, which was approved in April by a bipartisan majority of state lawmakers.
Supporters contended it is not a new tax but an extension of an existing one and ensures those rolling their own cigarettes pay the same amount of tax as those who buy packaged smokes.
Opponents argued it is a new tax. They contend that under the voter-approved Initiative 1053 it required approval by a two-thirds majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.
It did not meet that requirement in the Senate and should be disallowed, they argued in winning the initial injunction.
Jerry Cornfield: 360-352-8623; jcornfield@heraldnet.com
Story tags » State Supreme CourtTaxes

Share your comments: Log in using your HeraldNet account or your Facebook, Twitter or Disqus profile. Comments that violate the rules are subject to removal. Please see our terms of use. Please note that you must verify your email address for your comments to appear.

You are logged in using your HeraldNet ID. Click here to update your profile. | Log out.

Our new comment system is not supported in IE 7. Please upgrade your browser here.

comments powered by Disqus
digital subscription promo

Subscribe now

Unlimited digital access starting at 99 cents, or included with any print subscription.

loading...

HeraldNet highlights

Remembering Jerry
Remembering Jerry: EvCC groundskeeper Gerald Olmstead was always happy
An untapped market
An untapped market: Sound to Summit is first brewery taproom in Snohomish
Saving the trees
Saving the trees: Learn from arborist how to keep your trees healthy
So far, little snow
So far, little snow: But in 1871, it was a different story
SnoCoSocial