<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>NORML Blog, Marijuana Law Reform &#187; Board of Equalization</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.norml.org/tag/board-of-equalization/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.norml.org</link>
	<description>Working to reform marijuana laws</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 17:26:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Regulating Cannabis Sales Could Yield Over $17 Billion In Annual Savings And Revenue, New Study Says</title>
		<link>http://blog.norml.org/2010/09/29/regulating-cannabis-sales-could-yield-over-17-billion-in-annual-savings-and-revenue-new-study-says/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.norml.org/2010/09/29/regulating-cannabis-sales-could-yield-over-17-billion-in-annual-savings-and-revenue-new-study-says/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Sep 2010 20:30:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Paul Armentano, NORML Deputy Director</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[ACTIVISM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[$8.7 billion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Board of Equalization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[budgetary impact]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CATO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Harvard]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legalization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Miron]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.norml.org/?p=4102</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Treating marijuana as a legally regulated commodity would yield some $17.4 billion dollars annually in cost savings and new tax revenue, according to an economic report published yesterday by the CATO Institute think tank in Washington, DC. The report, entitled &#8220;The Budgetary Impact of Ending Drug Prohibition,&#8221; estimates that taxing the commercial sale of marijuana in a manner similar to alcohol would generate some $8.7 billion in annual revenue. The report further estimates that abolishing marijuana prohibition would additionally yield approximately $9 billion in annual law enforcement savings. Full text [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignright" src="http://norml.org/images/blog/NORML_Remember_Prohibition.jpg" alt="" width="225" height="306" />Treating marijuana as a legally regulated commodity would yield some $17.4 billion dollars annually in cost savings and new tax revenue, according to an economic report published yesterday by the <a href="http://www.cato.org/">CATO Institute</a> think tank in Washington, DC.</p>
<p>The report, entitled &#8220;<a href="http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=12169">The Budgetary Impact of Ending Drug Prohibition</a>,&#8221; estimates that taxing the commercial sale of marijuana in a manner similar to alcohol would generate some $8.7 billion in annual revenue. The report further estimates that abolishing marijuana prohibition would additionally yield approximately $9 billion in annual law enforcement savings. Full text of the entire report is available for download <a href="http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=12169">here</a>.</p>
<p>A previous 2005 <a href="http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=6476">study</a> commissioned by NORML estimated that marijuana law enforcement cost taxpayers some $7.6 billion per year.</p>
<p>A separate California statewide <a href="http://blog.norml.org/2009/07/16/california-tax-board-says-regulating-commercial-pot-sales-would-yield-14-billion-annually-also-predicts-decline-in-use-of-booze-and-tobacco/">analysis</a> published in 2009 by the state Board of Equalization and Taxation estimated that imposing retail taxes on the commercial sale of cannabis in California would yield approximately $1.4 billion in yearly revenue.</p>
<p>An op/ed in favor of legalization by the CATO study&#8217;s co-author, Jeffrey Miron of Harvard University, appears in today&#8217;s <em>Los Angeles Times</em> <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-miron-legalize-drugs-20100929,0,5651087.story">here</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.norml.org/2010/09/29/regulating-cannabis-sales-could-yield-over-17-billion-in-annual-savings-and-revenue-new-study-says/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>25</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>California Tax Board Says Regulating Commercial Pot Sales Would Yield  $1.4 Billion Annually &#8212; Also Predicts Decline in Use of Booze and Tobacco</title>
		<link>http://blog.norml.org/2009/07/16/california-tax-board-says-regulating-commercial-pot-sales-would-yield-14-billion-annually-also-predicts-decline-in-use-of-booze-and-tobacco/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.norml.org/2009/07/16/california-tax-board-says-regulating-commercial-pot-sales-would-yield-14-billion-annually-also-predicts-decline-in-use-of-booze-and-tobacco/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 17:44:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Paul Armentano, NORML Deputy Director</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[ACTIVISM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[14 billion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AB 390]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Board of Equalization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California Field poll]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marijuana Control Regulation and Education Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.norml.org/?p=1137</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[Editor's note: This post is excerpted from today's NORML weekly media advisory.] A revised budgetary analysis by the California State Board of Equalization (BOE) estimates that taxing and regulating the retail sale of cannabis by adults would raise approximately $1.4 billion in annual new state revenue. The BOE’s estimate, released late yesterday, assesses a $50 per ounce tax on the retail sale of cannabis (among other state-imposed costs), as recommended under Assembly Bill 390: The Marijuana Control, Regulation and Education Act.  This act seeks to license and tax the commercial [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignright" src="http://norml.org/images/blog/cannabis_flower.jpg" alt="" width="198" height="260" />[<strong>Editor's note:</strong> This post is excerpted from today's NORML <a href="http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=3442">weekly media advisory</a>.]</p>
<p>A revised budgetary <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j9P7paNzS32m_gMI8AAEkpvjXNWwD99F7TVO0">analysis</a> by the California State <a href="http://www.boe.ca.gov/">Board of Equalization</a> (BOE) estimates that taxing and regulating the retail sale of cannabis by adults would raise approximately <strong>$1.4 billion in annual new state revenue</strong>.</p>
<p>The BOE’s estimate, released late yesterday, assesses a $50 per ounce tax on the retail sale of cannabis (among other state-imposed costs), as recommended under <a href="http://capwiz.com/norml2/issues/alert/?alertid=12758896">Assembly Bill 390: The Marijuana Control, Regulation and Education Act</a>.  This <a href="http://legalizationwiki.org/Ammiano_Bill_AB_390">act</a> seeks to license and tax the commercial production, packaging, and retail sale of marijuana to those 21 years of age or older.</p>
<p>As introduced, AB 390 would <em>not</em> impose taxation or licensing requirements on the non-commercial production of cannabis (up to ten mature plants), or on the not-for-profit distribution of pot.  Further, the bill would <em>not</em> alter existing legislation on the use of medicinal cannabis, nor would it impose new taxes or sanctions on the medical cultivation of cannabis.</p>
<p>According to the BOE’s revised calculations, the enactment of AB 390 would raise an estimate <strong>$990 million annually</strong> from the proposed $50 per ounce levy on retail sales of marijuana in addition to another <strong>$392 million</strong> in yearly sales tax revenues.</p>
<p>The BOE assessment did not assess whether the enactment of AB 390 would reduce existing law enforcement and prosecutorial costs, which have been estimated by <a href="http://www.canorml.org">California NORML</a> to average some $200 million per year.  In 2007, a record <a href="http://www.canorml.org/news/2007arrests.html">74,000 Californians</a> were charged with marijuana offenses – the largest total since the state ‘decriminalized’ the personal possession of small amounts of marijuana in 1976.</p>
<p>The BOE report acknowledged that legalizing pot for adults <strong>would likely result in a “substitution effect” where consumers gravitate toward the use of marijuana “and away from cigarettes and alcohol.”</strong></p>
<p>According to a May 2009 <a href="http://field.com/fieldpollonline/subscribers/Rls2306.pdf">California Field poll</a> of 901 registered voters, <strong>56 percent</strong> of Californians say that lawmakers should “legalize marijuana for recreational use and tax its proceeds.”  Presently, the state is facing a $26 billion budget deficit.</p>
<p>Assembly Bill 390 is presently before the Assembly Committees on <a href="http://www.assembly.ca.gov/acs/newcomframeset.asp?committee=57">Public Safety</a> and <a href="http://www.assembly.ca.gov/acs/newcomframeset.asp?committee=10">Health</a>, which are expected to take up the issue early next year.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.norml.org/2009/07/16/california-tax-board-says-regulating-commercial-pot-sales-would-yield-14-billion-annually-also-predicts-decline-in-use-of-booze-and-tobacco/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>100</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

