The Backpack Tax

[Belsnickel]

I've talked about this issue on here, before, but Outside has an article about it that is bringing the issue into the spotlight.

Is it finally time for the backpack tax?

Now, me personally, I feel like we could up the excise taxes on hunting gear, firearms, fishing gear, etc. to 15% and then put the 5% excise on other outdoor gear. Since hunting and fishing are consumptive activities, it makes sense for us to pay more, but it's time for other recreationists to pay, as well. The argument over the revenues flowing in, already, falls flat to me. That revenue from outdoor recreation is already being used to pay to repair and improve many other things that people engaging in OR also utilize. Now, I'd love to see state legislators send more general funds to these conservation agencies, but in the meantime we need to be working to offset the damage being done to our wild places.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

I tend to agree with your position, especially as the number of hunters diminishes. I'm not sure on the trend for anglers, but I doubt it's seeing a surge in numbers. Hunters and anglers have certainly borne the brunt of the costs of conservation and are definitely in the minority as to who is using these lands. I don't know that taxing hiking/camping gear would address this discrepancy, but it would definitely be a start. I'm on your side in regard to increasing funding for conservation at the government level. I know this is CA, and I get this is an old argument, but maybe not give illegal immigrants free health care (not legal citizens though) and spend that money on conservation and education?

[Sled21]

(08-16-2021, 01:51 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I've talked about this issue on here, before, but Outside has an article about it that is bringing the issue into the spotlight.

Is it finally time for the backpack tax?

Now, me personally, I feel like we could up the excise taxes on hunting gear, firearms, fishing gear, etc. to 15% and then put the 5% excise on other outdoor gear. Since hunting and fishing are consumptive activities, it makes sense for us to pay more, but it's time for other recreationists to pay, as well. The argument over the revenues flowing in, already, falls flat to me. That revenue from outdoor recreation is already being used to pay to repair and improve many other things that people engaging in OR also utilize. Now, I'd love to see state legislators send more general funds to these conservation agencies, but in the meantime we need to be working to offset the damage being done to our wild places.

Hunters and Fisherman already pay more by having to pay for licenses, tags, permits, etc. And as for it being consumptive, one could argue that without it, it would cost more to prevent overpopulation of certain game. Personally, I think it's time to hit the other ourdoor enthusiasts a little more and leave the hunters and fisherman alone.

[Belsnickel]

(08-17-2021, 02:40 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Hunters and Fisherman already pay more by having to pay for licenses, tags, permits, etc. And as for it being consumptive, one could argue that without it, it would cost more to prevent overpopulation of certain game. Personally, I think it's time to hit the other ourdoor enthusiasts a little more and leave the hunters and fisherman alone.

As a hunter and an angler, I understand this position, and as someone with a deep knowledge of conservation policy I understand the point more than you may realize. However, I am still in favor of raising the taxes for fishing and hunting gear. Honestly, I'm calling for taxes to be raised on me in all three categories as I purchase a fair amount of camping/backpacking gear, as well. We just need more funding, and that's why I am for it.

[masonbengals fan]

(08-16-2021, 05:50 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I tend to agree with your position, especially as the number of hunters diminishes.  I'm not sure on the trend for anglers, but I doubt it's seeing a surge in numbers.  Hunters and anglers have certainly borne the brunt of the costs of conservation and are definitely in the minority as to who is using these lands.  I don't know that taxing hiking/camping gear would address this discrepancy, but it would definitely be a start.  I'm on your side in regard to increasing funding for conservation at the government level.  I know this is CA, and I get this is an old argument, but maybe not give illegal immigrants free health care (not legal citizens though) and spend that money on conservation and education?

  Not sure about California but here in the Ohio valley there are way more fisherman out on the water. Never saw anything quite like it. 
 Covid, I guess is the reason. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-17-2021, 06:33 PM)masonbengals fan Wrote:   Not sure about California but here in the Ohio valley there are way more fisherman out on the water. Never saw anything quite like it. 
 Covid, I guess is the reason. 

There are definitely more anglers and hunters due to the pandemic, but their numbers in CA are dwarfed by campers/backpackers/hikers.

[masonbengals fan]

Never considered that. Doing my part here. Kentucky fishing & trout license, out of state Ohio fishing & proud member of Kentucky Wild.

Few things better in life than wetting a line. 

[Sled21]

(08-17-2021, 04:53 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: As a hunter and an angler, I understand this position, and as someone with a deep knowledge of conservation policy I understand the point more than you may realize. However, I am still in favor of raising the taxes for fishing and hunting gear. Honestly, I'm calling for taxes to be raised on me in all three categories as I purchase a fair amount of camping/backpacking gear, as well. We just need more funding, and that's why I am for it.

Well I assume you can afford it. So could I. However, there are a great many people in places like Eastern Kentucky where people hunt and fish because it's how they feed their families. I'm not sure I go along with raising their taxes to do so, especially in these times. Hiking, biking, rock climbing etc are all leisure sports. For some, hunting and fishing are as well. For many, hunting and fishing are a life line.

[Belsnickel]

(08-18-2021, 09:13 AM)Sled21 Wrote: Well I assume you can afford it. So could I. However, there are a great many people in places like Eastern Kentucky where people hunt and fish because it's how they feed their families. I'm not sure I go along with raising their taxes to do so, especially in these times. Hiking, biking, rock climbing etc are all leisure sports. For some, hunting and fishing are as well. For many, hunting and fishing are a life line.

Subsistence hunters and anglers aren't going to be the ones hit with the tax, because they aren't the ones out there buying new gear. The only concern I have regarding the financial barrier to getting outside is that this could present one more for those already underrepresented in the outdoors.

[Benton]

I don't tend to favor any more discouraging people to get involved in outdoor recreation. We already don't do enough of it.

So where should the money come from?

Hell, I dunno.

[BigPapaKain]

(08-18-2021, 10:20 AM)Benton Wrote: I don't tend to favor any more discouraging people to get involved in outdoor recreation. We already don't do enough of it.

So where should the money come from?

Hell, I dunno.

Littering fines that are BRUTAL.

[Belsnickel]

(08-18-2021, 01:45 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: Littering fines that are BRUTAL.

If we could cut off fingers for littering and surface shitting, I would not object.

[BigPapaKain]

(08-18-2021, 01:56 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: If we could cut off fingers for littering and surface shitting, I would not object.

I'd rather just hit them in the wallet and get rid of taxes on hunters and fishers, but dismemberment is a pretty good deterent.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

Sounds like an even bigger deterrent for people to enjoy the outdoors.

Also are we no longer worried about unfairly targeting the poor and minorities? I can't keep track anymore how needing money for an ID for voting is discriminatory but needing a license for fishing (which I believe needs an ID to prove residence) or a tax to go walking or biking outside is great.

US seems to spend trillions whenever it wants right now. No reason they can't throw some of that unlimited spending at maintaining nature.

[Belsnickel]

(08-19-2021, 09:09 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Sounds like an even bigger deterrent for people to enjoy the outdoors.

Also are we no longer worried about unfairly targeting the poor and minorities? I can't keep track anymore how needing money for an ID for voting is discriminatory but needing a license for fishing (which I believe needs an ID to prove residence) or a tax to go walking or biking outside is great.

US seems to spend trillions whenever it wants right now. No reason they can't throw some of that unlimited spending at maintaining nature.

Well, the tax isn't to go biking or walking, the tax is on the gear. You can enjoy the outdoors with minimal gear that isn't very expensive and this tax wouldn't have much of an effect. Hell, you can enjoy the outdoors without buying any of the gear that would be taxed. You don't need a license or anything to enjoy many of our public lands in a non-consumptive way and even with a backpack tax, that would remain the case. But hey, let's compare this to voting, a civil liberty protected by the Constitution with a specific mention of not being allowed to charge someone to do it. That's called intellectual dishonesty.

As for the spending itself, we need to increase revenues. Period. I'm not a budget hawk by any means, but we have experienced years of politicians refusing to increase government revenues and it's because of that we are continually having to raise the debt limit.

[GMDino]

(08-20-2021, 06:52 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Well, the tax isn't to go biking or walking, the tax is on the gear. You can enjoy the outdoors with minimal gear that isn't very expensive and this tax wouldn't have much of an effect. Hell, you can enjoy the outdoors without buying any of the gear that would be taxed. You don't need a license or anything to enjoy many of our public lands in a non-consumptive way and even with a backpack tax, that would remain the case. But hey, let's compare this to voting, a civil liberty protected by the Constitution with a specific mention of not being allowed to charge someone to do it. That's called intellectual dishonesty.

As for the spending itself, we need to increase revenues. Period. I'm not a budget hawk by any means, but we have experienced years of politicians refusing to increase government revenues and it's because of that we are continually having to raise the debt limit.

I was doing some genealogy stuff last night and as I was flipping through newspapers from the 40's and 50's I saw an article about people fighting against PA wanting to increase the fishing license fee.  

There is nothing new under the sun.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(08-20-2021, 06:52 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: As for the spending itself, we need to increase revenues. Period. I'm not a budget hawk by any means, but we have experienced years of politicians refusing to increase government revenues and it's because of that we are continually having to raise the debt limit.

Why do we need to increase revenues? Why is that the default answer? The US already collected $3.5t during the 2020 fiscal year from taxes alone... during a pandemic. They have money.
https://www.irs.gov/statistics/soi-tax-stats-irs-data-book

Maybe it's time to instead of trying to find ways to increase revenues, to instead find ways to use the already collected revenues more efficiently, more intelligently, and on the things we actually need (which I do agree that taking care of nature is something we need).

While that doesn't have to take the form of removing things the government does, there has to be plenty of ways to cut waste. Even if it's just a percent, when you're talking trillions of dollars, that's huge money. The government needs to start asking "do we need this?" and "are we spending money efficiently and responsibly?" and once that happens you'll find you don't need to increase revenues.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2020/09/30/wheres-the-pork-us-taxpayers-funded-a-lot-of-wasteful-spending-2017-2019/?sh=173d9e753dc0
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2019/03/12/use-it-or-lose-it-dod-dropped-46-million-on-crab-and-lobster-and-9000-on-a-chair-in-last-minute-spending-spree/

That's not even touching the topic of all the countries we're fighting in and how much we're spending as a country to do that.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/map-shows-places-world-where-us-military-operates-180970997/