When Josh Zetzsche testified before the Port Orchard City Council recently, urging the council to repeal its emergency moratorium on medical marijuana dispensaries, one of his arguments was the idea that the city may be missing out on a potential revenue source.
“To just stick our heads in the ground is just going to perpetuate a black market. It’s already going on, is what I’m saying. Let’s regulate it. Let’s collect taxes for it.”
According to the state’s Office of Financial Management, the fiscal effect of the most recent version of the bill on counties and cities is “indeterminate.” Washington Office of Financial Managment Analysis
SB 5073 seeks to clarify rules about the use of medical marijuana, which has been legal in Washington State for a couple decades. The bill would establish a system whereby the state’s Department of Health and Department of Agriculture would jointly oversee regulation of licensed dispensaries and their products, as well a voluntary registry for authorized patients.
The bill calls for establishing fees and fines, and certain state and local taxes would apply. But according to Port Orchard Treasurer Allan Martin, “The emphasis in the bill is in recapturing cost, not a revenue source.”
Martin cited an analysis of the fiscal impact of the bill by the state’s Office of Financial Management, which shows that revenue from fees will go to fund a total of 16 full-time-equivalent employees in the 2011-2013 biennium. The number of state employees would increase to 68.5 in 2015-17.
The state would undertake a rule-making process during 2012 to establish the details of how medical marijuana regulation would be accomplished. This process would involve public hearings on the East and West side of the state on what OFM officials expect will be a highly “controversial” topic. The bill calls for a cost-benefit analysis by the Washington Institute for Public Policy in 2014.
For now, some general assumptions have been made.
The state’s business and occupation (B&O) tax would apply to the manufacture and sale of cannabis products, and cities like Bremerton that have a B&O tax would charge it. But the growing, harvesting, and selling of cannabis at wholesale by the grower is exempt from B&O tax.
Retail sales of cannabis and cannabis products would be subject to retail sales tax. However, Martin notes, prescription drugs are exempt from retail sales tax. What’s not clear is how the state will/would classify medical marijuana products for tax purposes. Right now the manufacture and sale of medical marijuana products is subject to sales tax.
Cities would charge business licenses, but that wouldn’t be any windfall. The average license fee statewide is $43.40 per year.
Based on data on medical marijuana from California and Colorado, Washington State officials expect the number of dispensaries statewide to be about 250 during 2013, the first year the new laws would be implemented. That number would increase each year, topping out at 1,000 in 2017, when most license applications would be renewals.
Likewise, the forecast for numbers of registered patients ranges from 18,000 in 2013 to 68,429 in 2017.
Despite these projections, the actual revenue from sales and B&O taxes is not specified in the OFM document, which states, “Because the total revenue is not known, and it is not known what percentage of producers, processors, and dispensers would be within the B&O taxing districts, it is not possible to accurately predict the revenue impact to local government as a result of the bill.”
Here’s what the document has to say about how the bill could
affect cities and counties.
“Cities: Indeterminate cost savings as well as additional
expenditures related to costs for law enforcement staff to follow
the provisions of the bill.
Counties: Ditto”
Here’s more from from the OFM’s analysis (remember this document gets revised as the bill is amended).
“ASSUMPTIONS:
The state business and occupation (B&O) tax applies to the
manufacture and sale of cannabis products. The growing, harvesting,
and selling of cannabis at wholesale by the grower is exempt from
B&O tax. Retail sales of cannabis and cannabis products are
subject to retail sales tax. *
II. B – Cash receipts Impact
Briefly describe and quantify the cash receipts impact of the
legislation on the responding agency, identifying the cash receipts
provisions by section number and when appropriate the detail of the
revenue sources. Briefly describe the factual basis of the
assumptions and the method by which the cash receipts impact is
derived. Explain how workload assumptions translate into estimates.
Distinguish between one time and ongoing functions.
Sections 702 & 901: Allow the Secretary of Health to establish and charge fees to adequately recapture the cost to the state of implementing, maintaining, and enforcing the provisions of each section. Fees will be established starting in fiscal year (FY) 2013 to cover the costs of implementing and administering this new program. While individual fee levels will be determined during the rules process, total collections over time will balance with expenditures. For fiscal note purposes, DOH estimates that five percent of the operational costs for the registration system will be attributable to law enforcement agencies’ queries. In addition, the method for developing the range of classes for dispensaries, registration applications, and access to the registry information for law enforcement will be established during the rulemaking process. The number of payers for dispensary licensing is estimated, using the states of California and Colorado and the current number of dispensaries advertising in Washington, as follows:
…
C. SUMMARY OF REVENUE IMPACTS
Briefly describe and quantify the revenue impacts of the
legislation on local governments, identifying the revenue
provisions by section number, and when appropriate, the detail of
revenue sources. Delineate between city, county and special
district impacts.
The legislation would have an indeterminate impact on city revenue.
WSDA assumes that 1,000 producers and 200 processor establishments
will apply for licenses in FY 2013. According to the Association of
Washington Cities (AWC), the 39 cities in Washington that assess
Business and Occupation (B&O) taxes would be able to collect
these taxes from producers, processors, and dispensers. The
Department of Health (DOH) estimates that 250 dispensers will apply
for licenses. DOH assumes this number will increase over the
following three years, to
approximately 476 new applications in FY 2016, with a total of
1,000 or more dispensers operating. The average tax rate is .0019
for both manufacturing and wholesale products, and .002 for retail.
Because the total revenue is not known, and it is not known
what percentage of producers, processors, and dispensers would be
within the B&O taxing districts, it is not possible to
accurately predict the revenue impact to local government as a
result of the bill.
Sections 704 and 705 direct that dispensers must be licensed by the
cities and counties in which they are located. Approximately 200
cities (80 percent) require businesses to obtain a standard license
for a fee, according to the AWC. Of these, 65 percent charge a flat
fee, and the average flat fee or initial business license fee is
$43.40. The Washington State Association of Counties estimates that
counties would assess standard licensing fees, adequate to cover
the associated costs.
SOURCES
Department of Agriculture
Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs
Pierce County
Washington State Association of Counties
Association of Washington Cities
Department of Revenue