Gimme a break: There's nothing sweet about candy tax

This editorial appears in the July 9, 2010, Yakima Herald-Republic

No wonder backers of Initiative 1107 were able to turn in more than 395,000 signatures last week and ensure voters a chance in November to decide whether to repeal tax increases on soda, candy, gum and certain processed foods. The taxes are regressive to low-income people and confusing to retailers and consumers alike.

In the weeks leading up to the candy tax going into effect last month, the state Department of Revenue spent countless hours combing through the vast inventory of candy sold in the state. If candy contains flour, like the ever-popular Kit Kat bar, no tax is levied. But if it's flour-free like Good & Plenty, the Department of Revenue puts it on the list of candy to be taxed. By the middle of May, The Seattle Times reported this list had grown to 87 pages of single-spaced entries.

But it doesn't end there. Then comes the task of making sure a store -- whether it's a large chain like Fred Meyer or a small mom-and-pop operation -- has the taxable candy in its computer system. According to a recent story in The Columbian of Vancouver, that resulted in employees at the Plaid Pantry chain spending several days entering more than 2,000 candy bar codes into their cash-register system. Who's paying for this extra work? Private businesses, of course.

Then there's the tax on soda pop, which went into effect July 1. The American Beverage Association has pumped more than $1 million into the I-1107 campaign in hopes of repealing the state's 2-cents-per-12-ounce tax on carbonated beverages. The association has successfully sidetracked proposals in at least 10 other cities or states.

Its most recent victory came in New York state, when the governor last week decided to drop a proposal to tax sugary sodas.

Though health advocates in New York backed the tax, opponents argued it unfairly burdened poor people and would do little to reduce obesity and improve the health of state residents.

Expect to see these arguments raised again as the I-1107 campaign heats up during the late summer and fall.

State lawmakers who supported the tax on soda pop and candy are quick to point out it lasts only three years.

But we have seen these "sunset" clauses suddenly get a new lease on life when conditions don't improve. With recent revenue projections still angling down, we are far from confident that lawmakers will actually take the taxes off the books. They might even be tempted to expand them to other edible items.

We didn't like the tax increases earlier this year when lawmakers shoved them through and we like them even less now that they are in effect. Instead of poking around taxpayers' shopping carts, lawmakers need to spend more time and energy finding ways to set long-term goals for reducing expenses.

* Members of the Yakima Herald-Republic editorial board are James E. Stickel, Bob Crider, Spencer Hatton and Karen Troianello.