Cook: Somebody must pay pop tax

Cook County Board officials estimate that some $17 million in revenue was lost during the month of July – which is when the courts considered legal actions that challenged the legitimacy of the penny-per-ounce tax on pop and other sweetened beverages.
 

Must be vintage if bottle only a dime

So now that the courts have ruled that the pop tax has legal legitimacy, county officials are talking about forcing someone to cough up the amount of cash they were denied during July.

SPECIFICALLY, THE COUNTY has filed a lawsuit against the Illinois Retail Merchants Association – one of the groups that was supportive of the effort by anti-tax activists to challenge the legitimacy of a pop tax.

The one that was supposed to raise some $67.5 million through the rest of 2017, and another $200 million for the 2018 fiscal year that begins Dec. 1.

Money they insist is needed by the county if its budget is to come out balanced in the end.

So losing a month’s worth of revenue is a significant loss to the county, so much so that it wants to file the legal action that many see as purely punitive towards any group that would dare speak out against the county.

PERSONALLY, I DON’T expect the county ever will get any money from this lawsuit of theirs. I think it is more of an intimidation tactic.

As in when one considers that when a Cook County judge last week handed down the ruling that upheld the pop tax’ legitimacy, the retail merchants association made a point of saying it was “weighing our legal options,” then earlier this week filed their own appeal of Judge Daniel Kubasiak’s ruling.

One that was meant to get an appeals court to strike down the pop tax once again.

 

PRECKWINKLE: Willing to fight for pop tax

I suspect that when their appeals disappear, the county’s lawsuit against the association will also wither away.

SUCH TACTICS MAY be strong-arm tactics that border on intimidation – although to tell you the truth, it’s not like business-oriented groups such as the association aren’t capable of deploying their own collection of goons to try to intimidate government entities into going along with their demands.

But then again, I’m also waiting to see what becomes of the 300 or so county employees who were laid off from their jobs last month due to the financial shortfall caused by temporarily losing the county pop tax.

County officials weren’t exactly quick to say when those people would be restored to the payroll – which as far as I’m concerned is a sleazier move than any tax hike being imposed on people who just feel compelled to have their dose of a carbonated beverage as part of their daily sugar intake.

Perhaps this particular tax just doesn’t offend me much because it is for a product that we choose to enjoy, or can decide to do without. And realize that sentence was just written by someone who enjoys an occasional Coca-Cola. Although I also have been making my own effort during the past year to reduce the amount of pop I consume.

WE COULD CONTINUE to engage in a back-and-forth battle over the pop tax. Or maybe we could move on to issues of true significance instead of fighting over the resulting price increase.

Pop tax couldn't wind up here, could it?

Because the reality is that nothing costs the same as it used to. Everything is more expensive these days. Remember it wasn't long ago that gasoline cost less than $1 per gallon?!?

Yes, the idea of having to pay an extra 20 cents for that single-serve bottle of pop ($1.89 at a Walgreens, the last time I bought one) kind of stinks. It makes me think of when I was a young child some 45 years ago having to accompany my mother to a neighborhood laundromat and being allowed to buy myself a pop from the vending machine for about 20 cents.

As in the total price – not just the tax added on! I find that price hike much more offensive.

  -30-

‘Pop’ goes the soda, tax to take effect

Interesting to see that Cook County government officials were quick to praise the judge who on Friday issued the order that allows the county to start taxing sweetened beverages as of Wednesday.

People will soon have to start taking tax into account

That tax was supposed to take effect July 1, and county board President Toni Preckwinkle said that Cook County lost some $17 million for not being able to charge the one cent per ounce tax on pop and othered sugared drinks.

COUNTY OFFICIALS HAD said that if the tax were not eventually implemented, county government’s finances would come up short this year and next – and some 1,100 people would have to lose their jobs. As things went, some 300 people were given layoff notices earlier this month.

So does this mean with Judge Daniel Kubasiak ruling that the tax can take effect and cannot be construed as being too confusing for people to comprehend that county government workers jobs’ are safe?

Not so fast!

As Preckwinkle put it, “until we are able to fully implement and collect revenue from this tax, we will continue to review our financial position and make adjustments accordingly.”

COUNTY OFFICIALS HAD said the tax would raise some $67.5 million through Dec. 1, and some $200 million during the county’s 2018 fiscal year. Will it be just a matter of subtracting the $17 million loss – or will other factors come into play?

Who’s to say just how long it will take before things stabilize. Or if it turns out that the tax shortfall will turn out to be merely an excuse, and if some people on the county government payroll will wind up losing their jobs regardless?

Personally, I found it interesting the way various groups were ready to rant with their pre-formed statements of praise or outrage. It makes me think what would have been most interesting is if someone had inadvertently hit the wrong button on the computer and sent out the statement that was intended to express themselves in the event the “pop tax” had withered away for good.

For what it’s worth, the Illinois Retail Merchants Association says it’s “disappointed,” and they’re “exploring all legal options.”

WHILE THE ILLINOIS Public Health Institute says it is “gratified” to see the tax take effect – but for quite the back-handed reason. They hope that adding about 20 cents to the cost of a single-serve plastic pop bottle, and about 65 cents to the cost of a 2-liter bottle, causes people to think in terms of consuming less in the way of carbonated beverages.

“The sooner people stop drinking sweetened beverages, the sooner we expect to see a decline in the chronic diseases caused by too much sugar,” institute officials said, in a prepared statement.

Which I suppose makes sense in theory – I know I have tried during the past year or so to reduce the amount of carbonated drink I consume (although I still enjoy the occasional can of Coca-Cola).

But I also note the number of times I have waited in line at a cashier to purchase that can of pop – only to have people ahead of me making their purchases of cigarette packages.

WHICH ALSO FACE many significant taxes that are supposed to discourage people from smoking, but instead just create intense levels of grumbling about how much a pack of “smokes” costs these days.

That might also make the ultimate beneficiary a business I remember from when I was a kid living near the Illinois/Indiana border – they sold cheap pop, cartons of cigarettes and fireworks. It was right on the state line – making it alluring to those who felt compelled to have such items.

Will 'cheap pop' attract more people to these border businesses?

There are many other such businesses in existence in the border areas surrounding Cook County, and there always will be certain people eager to save a few pennies on these particular purchases.

But if it turns out that the surrounding counties claim some sort of financial benefit from the Cook tax, I’d have to say they can have that form of “economic development” if it means we can reach some sort of higher purpose.

  -30-

EDITOR’S NOTE: Just a thought – the kind of people who enjoy a “soda” with their hot dog are the same kinds who are probably eager to rush out to the grocery store and start buying Heinz-brand “Chicago Dog Sauce.” And we all remember what “Dirty” Harry Callahan thinks about people who put ketchup on their hot dogs.