Thursday, November 26, 2015     Volume: 30, Issue: 18

Weekly Poll
What would you like to see the United States do about ISIS?

Air strikes are a start, but let’s put boots on the ground.
Look for less confrontational ways to address the situation, like economic sanctions and a multilateral peacekeeping effort.
They’re a pissed off byproduct of the 2003 Iraq invasion. Maybe it’s time to stop creating more terrorists.
Let’s begin by helping the refugees that fled from their violence.

Vote! | Poll Results

RSS Feeds

Latest News RSS
Current Issue RSS

Special Features
Search or post SLO County food and wine establishments

New Times / Letter To The Editor

The following article was posted on January 3rd, 2013, in the New Times - Volume 27, Issue 23 [ Submit a Story ]
The following articles were printed from New Times [] - Volume 27, Issue 23

Wood you believe this?

San Luis Obispo

By Ken Hermann

In mid-December I received a copy of a “Special Notice” from the California State Board of Equalization, about a new use tax assessment, the “Lumber and Engineered Wood Products 1 Percent Assessment. (Yes, that is a $1 tax on every $100 spent.)

Starting January 2013, we will be taxed an additional 1 percent on many lumber products that are sold or transported into the state.

With further investigation, I found that Assembly Bill 1492 sets regulations for the recovery of fire suppression costs, extends the lifespan of timber harvest plans, and establishes a Public Resources Code, section, the “Timer Regulation and Forest Restoration Fund.”

This new fund is set up to provide for actions, regulations, and practices of the departments of Forestry and Fish and Game that currently exist, and are themselves funded through existing taxes and forest management fees. These fees, paid by forest landowners and management companies, are then passed to lumber consumers in the form of retail pricing.

Additionally, “The initial emergency regulation and the one readoption of an emergency regulation authorized by this section shall be exempt from review by the Office of Administrative Law.”

This double taxation bill has been quickly jabbed into us with virtually no comment or evaluation period, without considering alternatives, and to charge for things previously paid. It’s a side-deal slush fund to the general fund.

This splinter needs to be plucked out and thrown back at the boards from which it came.