Wisconsin hard liquor tax proposed
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — The tax on hard liquor would go up 50 cents a pint to pay for increasing penalties on drunken driving in Wisconsin under a proposal headed for debate in the state Senate.
The Senate Judiciary Committee approved the 58 percent tax increase on Tuesday. The higher tax would help pay for a proposal the Assembly unanimously passed last month that would, among other things, make a first drunken-driving offense a crime in Wisconsin if a child is in the car. However, the tax was not included in the Assembly’s version of the bill.
The tax has the backing of Democratic Senate leaders. Gov. Jim Doyle, also a Democrat, was open to the idea.
“He wants to see strong legislation to prevent drunken driving and he recognizes the costs of not addressing this problem are substantial,” said Lee Sensenbrenner, a spokesman for Doyle.
The Tavern League of Wisconsin, which represents 13,000 bars, taverns and restaurants, has not taken an official position on the proposed higher tax, said its lobbyist, Scott Stenger. But it wasn’t exactly endorsing it either.
“We’re not real excited about raising taxes on our businesses,” Stenger said.
The sponsor of the drunken-driving bill in the Assembly, Rep. Tony Staskunas, D-West Allis, said he had “serious doubts” that a liquor tax increase could pass that chamber. An identical version of the bill must clear both the Senate and Assembly, and be signed by the governor, before it becomes law.

Oct 27, 2009 at 7:45 a.m.
Suggest removal
You know I read these comments and so many people are labeling everyone who drinks beer as GUILTY of being a drunk! And think that by driving up the tax, they won't drink anymore. But guess what folks, there are many people out there who drink responsibly. It always comes down to the bad apple! The jerks that drink and drive will still do it no matter what the gov comes up with. The gov stubornly thinks they can curb drunk driving by making all alochol consumers pay for it. Bottom line, people will still drink and drive. It's a fact of life! A drunk may care before they drink, but once they start drinking "I care" quickly turns to "I don't care" no matter what laws or taxes are incepted.
Oct 12, 2009 at 6:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
People really didnt see this coming? The cigarette tax was the beginning....its not going to end there. Soda will be next, then potato chips and dips, candy bars, fast foods...it will go on and on. And they will pass the higher taxes, because enough people have already been crapped on and will support the next idea.
Now i can sit back and support every stupid thing that want to tax. And listen to people whine about how unfair it is because its hit home to them finally. I believe this is what they call karma.
Oct 8, 2009 at 1:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
Ol Doyle has to get his last little kick in the jewels to the WI taxpayers before he leaves office.
Oct 7, 2009 at 11:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
raise it as high as cigarette tax its only fair.the higher they raise cigarettes the more people buy,so lets start raising,lol
Oct 7, 2009 at 9:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
I can't believe what I'm reading in here. We wouldn't want to increase the tax on hard liquor, then some people might have to cut down on their drinking. How awful....
In case you just read the headline and not the article, the tax would pay for increased penalties on drunken driving. It costs money to keep people in jail and such.
Oct 7, 2009 at 8:31 p.m.
Suggest removal
This tax is just another way for the state to raise more money and to make it harder for every bar owner to make a living.
Oct 7, 2009 at 6:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
So tax hard liquor, whoop-dee-doo. Tax everything, but make it clear EXACTLY where that revenue is going.
Everytime a new tax is imposed on an already struggling citizen, it is given a cursory outline in the media as to how that new money will be spent.
Wisconsin has for all too long adopted that "Rob Peter to pay Paul" mentallity.
Enough with the political power-players.
When they introduce a new tax, we expect to see more for our efforts than shiney new pamphlets at a highway rest stop or a "State of the Art" automated telephone fiasco.
Oct 7, 2009 at 5:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
deliver it 15 ounces at a time. problem solved.
Oct 7, 2009 at 3:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
Tax Texting
Oct 7, 2009 at 1:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
Well, first of all anything Gov. Doyle thinks is a good idea should be questioned. Taxing anything more at this time whether Beer, Hard liquor or cigs would be wrong. People can't deal with many more increases. Maybe a special tax for those who make $200,000 a year.
Oct 7, 2009 at 1:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
Tax the people who give illigal immigrants the jobs. They need to be taxed big time. Tax the exempt status of these so called employment agencies. They need to be looked at thoroughly. We could generate alot of money that way. Tax the churches. We are being taxed out of existence. It is time to wake up. A revolution is coming soon.
Oct 7, 2009 at 1:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
Let's tax anybody who is over 6 feet tall and over 200 pounds. They take up more room. How ridiculous for taxing hard liquor. Our representatives have been crazed for a long time now. It's time for a revolution.
Oct 7, 2009 at 1:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
excellent question officerfriendly:) i get a kick out of people complaining cuz tax is going up on liquor. boo hoo. i WANT TO PAY TAX on my pot and ucle sam wont let me. there are actually about 20 million smokers annually who would pay taxes on it. now probably 15 million of those would vote to keep it illegal so they dont have to pay taxes on it...but if legalized they certainly would be paying taxes on it. let me give you a hypothetical...
coffee shops in amsterdam are allowed up to 16 ounces in their store at one time. they have bike runners who restock them throughout the day. lets assume i could open up 'kids cannabis cafe' on milton ave. maybe the old video place looks good to me:) i promise you i can sell a pound of cannabis out of there a day. CA has talked about legalizing with taxing $50/ounce. at 16 ounces thats $800 a day i would be paying in taxes. maybe half to the state an half to the city?? now assuming im open maybe 300 days a year thats $240,000 annually I WANT TO PAY IN TAXES. add to that the income tax from the 3 full time workers ill employ at about 40G/year and i think that looks sorta like a cash cow bein flushed down with the bong water.
Oct 7, 2009 at 12:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
I don't understand why they need to come up with a new tax to increase the penalties on those convicted of DUI. The people convicted pay fines and court costs, sometimes amounting to well over $1000 for the offence. It has to be a HUGE moneymaker for the state. How would increasing the fines of those convicted cost the state money? It sounds like they're just using this to justify a new tax and trying to blame those convicted of DUI for it.....
Oct 7, 2009 at 11:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
we need to tax the idiots who serve more than one term. call it the seat tax!!!!
Oct 7, 2009 at 11:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
thekid:
i don't think anyone has problems with paying taxes.
but i think you'd agree, how that money is spent, and the amount spent is the problem.
it's one worthless, over-budget program after another. THAT is the problem my friend.
How do you know the money raised by this tax will go to where it is intended? because some politician said so?
it's another bridge for sale.
Oct 7, 2009 at 9:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
As long as most of our free choices are being taxed, when are going to re-evaluate the tax exempt status of churches?
Flame away....
Oct 7, 2009 at 8:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
"It is the right of the people to alter or abolish government" Declaration of Independence, 1776
Oct 7, 2009 at 8:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
kid, Are you buying drug tax stamps to pay your fair share?
Oct 7, 2009 at 8:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
hard liquor tax going up is more than fair. the beer tax is currently 6 pennies/gallon. we are one of the lowest in the country. it has not gone up in 40 years. i understand the gripe that we dont want to pay more taxes anywhere, but come on. do you think it costs the same today to run the govt as it did 40 years ago?? is the average income the same as it was 40 years ago?? EVERYTHING ELSE has gone up in the last 40 years. pay your share.
Oct 7, 2009 at 8:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
Why don’t they reposes the drunk driver’s car and sell it at auction? If that doesn’t raise enough money then increase the fines and make the law so that the fines are automatically deducted from the persons pay check. We need to start holding people accountable for their actions. I know plenty of people who would never drink and drive if they knew their car would get reposed automatically if they were caught. It is not societies fault that they are drunks, and I for one am sick of paying for other peoples mistakes.
Oct 7, 2009 at 8:31 a.m.
Suggest removal
Just more money in the general fund for our spendthrift legislaters to urinat away. This is just my humble opinion, of course
Oct 7, 2009 at 8:23 a.m.
Suggest removal
I think this is a good idea. I only drink hard liquor, never got into beer. Then again I dont drink much since I dont find it to be worth the expense. If it helps someone in the end then I am all for it.
Oct 7, 2009 at 8:07 a.m.
Suggest removal
"The tax has the backing of Democratic Senate leaders. Gov. Jim Doyle, also a Democrat, was open to the idea." I'm shocked!!
Oct 7, 2009 at 7:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
Sounds like a great idea in my humble opinion. Pete...not sure what this has to do with Account Obama, but hey, if you're going to blame him (which is rediculous by the way), then I'm going to thank him. Thank you Obama, you're the man.
Oct 7, 2009 at 7:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
i thought tickets paid for drunk driving. the tax is a tax that will go for other things, like overspending in other areas. it is way easier to raise taxes than cut expenses. again, we are being lied to.
Oct 7, 2009 at 7:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
Gotta love the way our puritanism works with big governments desire to get bigger and to control more of our lives. People don't wake up because they're all too glad to control other people's lives.
Oct 7, 2009 at 1:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
15yearsthere--
"Maybe it's time for a trial run of those ignition interlock devices (breathalyzers) for first time DUI offenders in WI?"
So I am a drunk. I have an 'ignition interlock device' on my vehicle. I get loaded in a bar (or at home) and have my wife/son/daughter/friend (all who are too intimidated to refuse) blow the device.... or, I just borrow someone elses car.
Oct 7, 2009 at 12:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
Taxes,fines, jail...ad infinitum.Are these the only solutions people can come up with?
.
Maybe it's time for a trial run of those ignition interlock devices (breathalyzers) for first time DUI offenders in WI?
Oct 6, 2009 at 11:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
Pete what exacly does a proposed STATE tax in the STATE of WI have to do with Obama? I'd think it has a bit more to do with the STATE lawmakers and the STATE Governer.
...
For all you people that were in support of the tabacco tax I hope you are happy becuase as it's been said before they will not stop at tobacco. They will levy a tax on every product sold and point the finger at some social program or detriment it is paying for. Whether it be health related, disposal costs.....you name it. Sales taxes should be enough and those are already increasing as it is. The taxation in this state is getting beyond rediculous.
Oct 6, 2009 at 10:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
We need to clean our air. We should all be taxed for breathing. Then we can have money to keep the air pure. I say a penny per breath?
Oct 6, 2009 at 9:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
The cigarette tax was probably partially raised to discourage people from smoking. Apparently, the lawmakers do not believe raising taxes will reduce drunk driving because they need the money to enforce penalties OR they think it will reduce drunk driving (and the costs for penalties) and they will use the money for something else.
Oct 6, 2009 at 9:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
Yet another tax for Wisconsin. So raise taxes on ALL hard liquor consumers to pay to make it a crime to drive drunk with a child in the car? I don't even understand, what exactly the tax is spent on? Jail costs? Second, why not fine/tax the irresponsible drunk vs. everyone else?
Oct 6, 2009 at 9:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
Perhaps we should just think of this as another "user fee".....
Oct 6, 2009 at 9:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
Okay, they can nearly double the cost of cigarettes in the last two years without too much of an issue. Yet, we have hard liquor taxes that are PROPOSED to increase FIFTY CENTS and there's an uproar in WI.
Seems a little ironic to me. Of course, WI is the leading state in the nation for alcohol-related driving AND probably deaths. Hmmm.
Oct 6, 2009 at 9:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
Then tax the drunk drivers. It is annoying that everyone else always pays for the ills of others. Car insurance goes along with that.
Oct 6, 2009 at 8:32 p.m.
Suggest removal
Come to wisconsin everyone,they tax you for everything! If they would stop spending so much money,we would not see these tax's. Just take it all,give me what you don't need!!
Oct 6, 2009 at 8:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
Its about time, but should include beer products too!!
Oct 6, 2009 at 7:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
Sounds good to me.
Oct 6, 2009 at 7:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
seems fair
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.