February 22, 2017 - Proposition 56 was approved by voters in November 2016 to increase taxes on cigarettes and other tobacco products. Questions have been raised as to whether the Governor’s proposals for allocating Proposition 56 revenues meet the initiative’s requirement to supplement—and not supplant—existing spending in several areas. To examine these questions, we begin by reviewing the provisions of Proposition 56 and the Governor’s budget proposals. We then discuss whether the Governor’s proposals for Medi‑Cal could be viewed as supplanting General Fund resources and identify the relevant case law. We conclude by describing some trade‑offs for the Legislature to consider in allocating the Proposition 56 revenues.
April 22, 2015 - California imposes excise taxes on cigarettes and on other tobacco products such as cigars and chewing tobacco. The state also licenses tobacco sellers and distributors. Recently, there has been considerable legislative interest in the cost of these programs, which are administered by the State Board of Equalization (BOE). The Legislature faces two key decisions: (1) how to pay for BOE’s cigarette and tobacco programs, and (2) how much to spend on them. This report recommends that the state use excise tax revenue to pay for excise tax administration but not for the tobacco licensing program. To address the imbalance between the licensing program’s costs and revenue, we further recommend the Legislature (1) temporarily increase fees on tobacco retailers, wholesalers, and distributors, and (2) direct BOE and the California Department of Justice to explore options to reduce the program’s costs by promoting electronic filing of schedules and tax returns.
February 14, 2017 - Voters legalized the use of medical cannabis in California in 1996, and the Legislature approved the Medical Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MCRSA) in 2015. In November of 2016, voters approved Proposition 64, which legalized and created a regulatory framework for the nonmedical use of cannabis. In the coming year, the Legislature will face key choices about whether it wants to make statutory changes to bring the regulatory frameworks of MCRSA and Proposition 64 into greater alignment. Additionally, the Legislature will need to determine the staff and other resources to provide to the various agencies charged with regulating and taxing the cannabis industry. We recommend the Legislature (1) work with the administration to enact legislation to align the regulation of medical and nonmedical cannabis to the maximum extent possible, (2) make its decisions on the extent to which it wants to align the regulatory structures for medical and nonmedical cannabis before making its decisions on the Governor’s requested funding and related positions, and (3) take a more incremental approach to budgeting for departments that are requesting resources in 2017-18.
June 14, 2016 - Presented to: Assembly Health Committee Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee Senate Health Committee
May 1, 2012 - Presented to: Assembly Health Committee, Hon. William W. Monning, Chair and Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee, Hon. Henry T. Perea, Chair
January 31, 2017 - In this web post, we provide an overview of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the level of funding proposed for the department in the Governor’s 2017-18 budget. We also assess and make recommendations on two specific DOJ budget proposals: (1) a one-time $5 million unallocated General Fund reduction and (2) a $45 million funding increase related to Proposition 56 revenues.