11% tax where are we at in the lawsuit?

[treelogger]

The 9th is the most overturned circuit, ...

That statement is either false or meaningless.

The meaningless version: A larger number of 9th circuit decisions has been overturned than of any other circuit. That may be true, but it is simply because the 9th is also by far the largest circuit. Matter-of-fact, a larger number of 9th circuit decisions has also been affirmed than any other circuit (or of all State courts together)!

The false version: The fraction of 9th circuit decisions that are overturned by the Supreme Court is not significantly larger than of other circuits. They all hover between 60% and 80% overturned, and in the long-term average, a larger fraction of 6th circuit decisions is overturned than 9th circuit decisions.

In general, the Supreme Court overturns pretty much uniformly 2/3 to 3/4 of all the cases it accepts. The variance between circuits is not very large in the long term, but fluctuates significantly year to year.

Your derogatory comments about the 9th circuit, and laudatory comments about Judge Benitez, are wholly without basis in reality. His Duncan opinion was not written for the appeals process; it was written for the peanut gallery, for conservative gun rights activists. And to demonstrate how gloriously smart and a great writer Judge Benitez is. Sadly, that is neither true, nor good for the appeals courts. Unfortunately, it was also full of logical holes and innuendo, which pretty much turned it into a lead balloon. But I'm sure the various gun rights groups that used it for advertising made really good money off of it.

 

[Plenty_Pack_556]

For time-being, avoid taxes in all by supporting the troops and their support and purchase at the nearest military base as a Veteran. You don't pay city or state taxes, and they can special order guns not in-stock/ in-inventory.

Or buy from BassPro with BP card on some Mondays and depending on your city tax %, you may avoid paying extra tax by pricing in the savings; and if you are a Veteran, you might save money on guns and pay no tax ymmv on city after discounts get calculated in after final price.

The only 2 viable options to avoid "taxes" on new guns thus far.

 

[Jimi Jah]

PPT is the third way. Buy from another used.

 

[USMC06RET]

After reading many of your posts recently, I am looking forward to you being "surprised".

Yup, me too.

 

[USMC06RET]

SCOTUS has been known to wait for the "right" case.

We'll see.

Considering that SCOTUS declined to hear the challenge to Ocean State Tactical, LLC v. Rhode Island which, for all intents and purposes, was the same as Duncan v. Bonta, I give it 5-1 odds (20% chance) that SCOTUS will hear Duncan v. Bonta.

Additionally, when one considers that the CRPA has so far requested two extensions to file their petition for writ of certiorari, it seems to me that they are having a very difficult time making their case in a way that differs substantially from the petition filed in Ocean State Tactical, LLC v. Rhode Island. If the CRPA case were strong, they would have slammed that petition into SCOTUS prior to the 18 June 2025 deadline.

Lastly, regardless of there being a conservative majority in SCOTUS, I still don't believe they have stooped so low as to "slap" any state or federal circuit, there would be no point. A SCOTUS ruling against the banning of LCMs for any state would apply to all states, regardless of population.

 

[USMC06RET]

Your derogatory comments about the 9th circuit, and laudatory comments about Judge Benitez, are wholly without basis in reality. His Duncan opinion was not written for the appeals process; it was written for the peanut gallery, for conservative gun rights activists. And to demonstrate how gloriously smart and a great writer Judge Benitez is. Sadly, that is neither true, nor good for the appeals courts. Unfortunately, it was also full of logical holes and innuendo, which pretty much turned it into a lead balloon. But I'm sure the various gun rights groups that used it for advertising made really good money off of it.

Brutal, but accurate!

 

[TFA777]

Nonsense. If this were true, the federal 11% excise tax on guns and ammo would long have been overturned. Hint: It has not; it is nearly 100 years old now.

And the cases for taxes on paper and ink for newspapers are much more complex.

I think the problem there is its the manufacturer who's being taxed, the california tax is on the citizen.

Minneapolis Star Tribune themselves were being taxed, not the ink manufacturer.

 

[treelogger]

I think the problem there is its the manufacturer who's being taxed, the california tax is on the citizen.

In California, it's the dealer who is being taxed.

 

[skb720]

I am surprised the private marketplace PPT hasn't been as active I was expecting post sin tax. People just don't care and willing to pay the 11% tax?

 

[M_N04H]

I am surprised the private marketplace PPT hasn't been as active I was expecting post sin tax. People just don't care and willing to pay the 11% tax?

Of course we care. But we also want our guns. It helps to wait for deals too.

 

[jarhead714]

I am surprised the private marketplace PPT hasn't been as active I was expecting post sin tax. People just don't care and willing to pay the 11% tax?

I don’t know where you live, but it’s pretty damn active around these parts.

 

[eaglemike]

In California, it's the dealer who is being taxed.

Not at all true. Go buy a firearm, and see if the tax shows up. You can even see it if you buy a firearm though Davidson's.'The tax isn't on the dealer, it's on the buyer.
Your take on the 9th is not especially accurate either. You might not be aware of how often they have gone against the 2A. I know you won't believe me, so look it up yourself. Every en banc, that might be a good place to start. One justice wrote a scathing dissent a few years ago, stating that every en banc at the time was decided in favor of the state. I don't recall which decision it was, or I would link it.
I was there in Judge Benitez's courtroom for at least 1 hearing. Your derision for him isn't deserved.

 

[treelogger]

The dealer sends the tax to the state. Not the buyer. Your honor, I rest my case.

And if you want to learn about the 9th, look up Nordyke.

 

[eaglemike]

The dealer sends the tax to the state. Not the buyer. Your honor, I rest my case.

And if you want to learn about the 9th, look up Nordyke.

Ridiculous take. We pay the tax. You literally said "it's the dealer who is being taxed." You didn't say it's the dealer that collects the tax. Try telling that to a judge, and see if you are believed. Troll.
Look up the decisions from the 9th regarding 2A, and tell me what percentage were decided in the state's favor.

 

[jarhead714]

I took it as the dealer is being taxed in a sense that so many customers are being lost to PPT. I am of course, probably incorrect.

 

[eaglemike]

I took it as the dealer is being taxed in a sense that so many customers are being lost to PPT. I am of course, probably incorrect.

It's not built into the retail price. It's on top of the retail price.
The dealer's business is harmed, due to the loss of sales, that is the situation. There is no doubt of that. The anti's goal of limiting the number of firearms available is succeeding to some degree. It's also driving up the price of arms transferred through PPT.
Go to the Gun Genie on Davidson's, get a quote, you don't have to actually purchase, and you'll see an excise tax itemized. Who is going to pay it? The dealer will collect it, but you will pay it.

 

[Dvrjon]

Not at all true. Go buy a firearm, and see if the tax shows up. You can even see it if you buy a firearm though Davidson's.'The tax isn't on the dealer, it's on the buyer.

While the buyer is ultimately impacted by the tax, the Statute imposes the tax on the retailer based on the retailer’s gross receipts, much akin to gas taxes and tariffs. While the tax may be (and is) passed through to the buyer, nothing precludes the retailer from eating the cost…except profit margins.

36011. Imposition and rate of tax.
Commencing July 1, 2024, an excise tax is hereby imposed upon licensed firearms dealers, firearms manufacturers, and ammunition vendors, at the rate of 11 percent of the gross receipts from the retail sale in this state of any firearm, firearm precursor part, or ammunition.

History—Added by Stats. 2023, Ch. 231 (AB 28), in effect January 1, 2024.

/////////

You literally said "it's the dealer who is being taxed." You didn't say it's the dealer that collects the tax. Try telling that to a judge, and see if you are believed.

If you follow the litigation in this, Chuck Michel stated that the lawsuit couldn’t be filed until the vendors had actually paid the tax. That’s well after the injury to the paying consumer, but the judge will easily rule that the statute doesn’t compel the retailer to pass the tax through to the consumer (it also doesn’t prohibit it). But under the statute, the retailer is the aggrieved party as the tax is imposed on them.

 

[USMC06RET]

While the buyer is ultimately impacted by the tax, the Statute imposes the tax on the retailer based on the retailer’s gross receipts, much akin to gas taxes and tariffs. While the tax may be (and is) passed through to the buyer, nothing precludes the retailer from eating the cost…except profit margins.

The above is the correct interpretation. The excise tax is a lot like a tariff, it's a "wink-wink" tax on the consumer because the vendor / dealer is unlikely to just absorb the tax without adjusting their retail pricing. Sure, some vendors might offer promotions but as with tariffs, it's ultimately the consumer that bears the brunt of the tax.

 

[NorCalBusa]

It's not built into the retail price. It's on top of the retail price.
The dealer's business is harmed, due to the loss of sales, that is the situation. There is no doubt of that. The anti's goal of limiting the number of firearms available is succeeding to some degree. It's also driving up the price of arms transferred through PPT.
Go to the Gun Genie on Davidson's, get a quote, you don't have to actually purchase, and you'll see an excise tax itemized. Who is going to pay it? The dealer will collect it, but you will pay it.

Wonder how long before dealers feel like they should also "mark up" various fees and taxes they pass along or pay? They have to collect it, account for it, prepare and submit it, verify it arrived, CPA reviews along with everything else, and deal with any BS afterwards. Prolly worth another 10% on top of the tax/fee value.

 

[General]

They got 5 bucks from me when I bought a Red Ryder'