Print
Email
Share

Candy tax takes effect June 1 in Washington

Candy tax takes effect June 1 in Washington

Candy tax takes effect June 1 in Washington

by Associated Press and KING5.com

KING5.com

Posted on May 11, 2010 at 6:02 AM

EVERETT, Wash. -  Starting next month, Washington will begin adding sales tax onto the price of gum and most but not all candy products.

For example, Three Musketeers will be taxed but Milky Way will not.

Starburst, Gummi Bears and M&Ms? Yes. Nestle's Crunch and Twizzlers? No.

How will you and retailers know which is which?

The state Department of Revenue has posted a list online of nearly 3,000 items that will be subject to tax. Another 263 items that are not.

What's the difference? Basically, flour. If the candy you like is prepared with flour it will not be subject to sales tax.

The Dept. of Revenue explains it this way:

Candy is a preparation of sugar, honey, or other natural or artificial sweeteners combined with chocolate, fruits, nuts, or other ingredients or flavorings and formed into bars, drops, or pieces. Candy does not require refrigeration. Candy does not include any preparation containing flour.
Flour is made from grain such as wheat, rice, corn, rye, oats, and barley.  Flour does not include flour substitutes, such as starch. Any product that lists flour as an ingredient on the nutritional facts label is not taxable as candy.

Click here for the list of candy products that will be taxed and those products that are similar to candy that will tax exempt (Excel spread sheet).

Also starting June 1, sales tax will be applied to bottled water, and the tax goes up for mass-marketed beer. The soda pop tax kicks in July 1.

 

Print
Email
Share

To add a comment, please register or login.

1000 characters remaining

Submit

We welcome your comments on this story's topic. Off-topic comments, personal attacks, and inappropriate language may be flagged and removed, and comment privileges blocked, per our Terms of Service. Thanks for keeping the comments space respectful.

Privacy Policy

You have indicated this comment should be removed.

Close

The comment has been submitted for review. Thank you .

Comments: Displaying 1 - 15 of 31

chipp84 said on October 27, 2010 at 6:17 AM

Has anyone noticed the problem with the health care industry? Health insurance is UNAFFORDABLE because of increased chronic diseases like obesity, and hypertension, CVD, etc. Perhaps taxing junk foods is an excellent idea to help redirect people's vision onto HEALTHFUL foods and beverages. If we can put a FAT TAX on junk foods to slowly decrease the risks of chronic diseases associated with these foods, then we can lower the rate of health care delivery by these patients... in turn, lowering the cost of health care services, and increasing the rate of access of health care for everyone else that really needs it for unpreventable chronic/acute diseases. Please think about the risks of such junk foods. This tax money is being put to USE, as well as taxing foods that shouldn't be consumed in the first place. This "fat tax" will do everyone a favor.

54626564
Flag this comment

dennilane said on June 10, 2010 at 9:13 AM

I wonder how much tax dollars were spent figuring out what items are taxable or not.

45110749
Flag this comment

jodfoster said on June 1, 2010 at 4:16 AM

For pete's sake, people. CANDY IS NOT FOOD. POP IS NOT FOOD. These are items that should have been taxed already. How do you think things get paid for in your community? Happy thoughts and rainbows? Taxes pay for everything we use for FREE on a daily basis. One thing I can see from all of these comments is that we need more money in education.

44457944
Flag this comment

anonymoususer said on May 12, 2010 at 5:47 PM

I spoke with a cashier about the candy tax and she said that people with food stamps do not pay sales tax at all. So find someone to buy the candy with food stamps and give them cash for it...... How do these fools get off saying flour is a food so candy made with flour (licorice / kitkats / etc.) is non taxable but chocolate covered nuts are taxable? Are nuts not food??? (a nutritious food too - especially compared to exempt candies that made the non taxable list) Doughnuts are a food item but Aplets & Cotlets are not ??? If ANY of these loonies get re-elected, then this state will be in the toilet as it will deserve to be.

43107877
Flag this comment

rocketscience said on May 12, 2010 at 11:28 AM

Lets stop paying taxes completely and see what happens ok ?

43084757
Flag this comment

bazwest said on May 12, 2010 at 7:31 AM

Taxes to the state are like heroine to the addict. It takes an ever increasing amount of the drug just to maintain the same old high. As with any household budget, until the state learns how to limit it's spending it will NEVER control it's budget; its on the spending side that budgets are balanced. These new taxes when considered alone may not seem too extreme to some, but the truth is this new revenue will not balance the budget and it will not help those that truly need government's help either. These new taxes are destined to become just the latest temporary "fix" in the insatiable tax habit developed by our state democratic party politicians. We need to enroll the whole bunch of them in "Taxaholic's Anonymous" at the next election this November.

43064669
Flag this comment

wittyname said on May 12, 2010 at 6:38 AM

What about the ice cream that has candy bars in it? Wait, the big variety packs of Candy for Halloween. Are they going to tax each piece of candy or the bag as a whole?

43059827
Flag this comment

hourforum said on May 12, 2010 at 6:37 AM

you guys stop complaining. Remember the most recent new TAX on smokes? Oh' that took effect sooner than this " sweet tax". Oh- yea, the tax on smokes went way up!!!!!!!! Is that the case for candy? Nope. The issue with the state budget is not Mrs. CG's matter that SHE did herself. You must look at this- Washington state HAD good revenue, however BAD choices for TAX BREAKS for many major companies REDUCED the state revenue. The law makers all need to take a one month ferlo- sorry for the spelling-, each year NOT PAID. State workers, exept for State police need also to take a month off NO PAY either. save some money. NOW, you can ballance the budget Olympia.

43059739
Flag this comment

vanceox said on May 12, 2010 at 6:29 AM

STOP THIS TAX-HIKE INSANITY! We need to vote these nincompoops out this November!!! And IMPEACH GREGOIRE!!!!!!!!!

43059113
Flag this comment

ny_nicmc said on May 12, 2010 at 6:03 AM

tacwilster- I am sure those items will still be foodstample... soda already has a tax on it and it can be purchased with foodstamps. The government does not have the balls to police what people can buy on foodstamps.... although when I am on a budget I have to make better choices!!!

43056702
Flag this comment

anonymoususer said on May 12, 2010 at 12:56 AM

idiot copy- so you tink the government sould dictate to people what to eat and what to feed their children??? I suppose you want the government to tell you wen you can use the rest room too. ................. Chocolate requires refrigeration when it's 100 F outside - so is this a loophole??? At what temperature are they defining the necessity of refrigeration at??? This is one of the most idiotic pieces of legislation they have come up with. If they didn't pay the idiots millions of dollars to come up with a list defining what is candy and what is not, it would have reduce the budget deficit by that much. For those of you whining about the choice people make while eating -do you really think a doughnut is healthier than a candy bar??? .................. also, ice cream toppings are the same ingredients as a candy bar but it isn't taxed and a candy bar is??? ....... Is their purpose to raise income for the budget or is it to reduce the consumption of these products?

43041999
Flag this comment

anonymoususer said on May 12, 2010 at 12:45 AM

well, gee - donuts are not a "basic need" either - yet they will not be taxed because washington state constitution says NO TAX on grocery store food. A candy bar has less sugar (by percent) than pure sugar - and chocolate has health benefits. This is the idiots end run around the state constitution. I would rather pay shipping to an out of state company to ship the items to me than to pay the idiots in olympia a single penny on this unconstitutional tax. The fairest way would have been to raise the state sales tax across the board instead of placing a tax on a few items then whining when they are not bringing in the $$$ they budgeted to bring in. The old bat and her sock puppets need to go - starting this november

43041817
Flag this comment

wittyname said on May 11, 2010 at 8:16 PM

Yes, I get to say it!!!! This is one SWEEEEEET tax!!!! No really though, this is dumb. Government is so lost they are grasping for anything to tax. Next on the agenda is a taxing the miles people drive in their car.

43036672
Flag this comment

pauladara said on May 11, 2010 at 6:12 PM

We need to face facts, washington has become the next highest taxed state beside California. If we want to smoke we pay more, now candy, and pop, and water which is an item we all need, so whats next. Are they going to put the tax back on food because they can't manage. Next time we vote we all need to to listen more carefully and research who is running.

43030533
Flag this comment

sues_cheerio said on May 11, 2010 at 4:47 PM

I vote for getting rid of all sin taxes. It's not fair to tax specific groups. You can't get around buying toilet paper. Everyone would share fair on a toilet paper tax.

43026379
Flag this comment

emptynestr said on May 11, 2010 at 2:46 PM

We obviously have an idiot in the village... the Gov. that is. Vote this one out of office. What about Emilys Chocolate covered strawberries. Strawberries are a food item. So are blueberries and raspberries. And out of all the thousands of candy items how are any of us going to know when we go to buy something if it is taxable or not? Do we just let the cash register tell us? How dumb is that?

43020477
Flag this comment

clear2copy said on May 11, 2010 at 12:35 PM

candy isn't a basic human need

43012177
Flag this comment

tacwilster said on May 11, 2010 at 12:32 PM

Well hopefully this means that people using food stamps can no longer purchase pop, gum or candy with their vouchers/credit card!! That is a good thing then maybe they will buy more nutritious food for their kids!!

43011864
Flag this comment

justme1970 said on May 11, 2010 at 11:41 AM

She's crazy! OUT OUT OUT!! VOTE HER OUT PLEASE!

43007927
Flag this comment

janejuliet said on May 11, 2010 at 11:32 AM

Here is the major issue: defining what is candy and what makes it taxable. They are saying flour exempts the tax, however, flour (and the grains from which it is derived) is not the only thing that defines something as a food item. They are taxing things with nuts, which are healthier for the body than flour, and chocolate-covered potato chips, which are not healthier, but certainly if they are going to consider that a taxable item, then why are they not taxing plain potato chips? Possibly because it is illegal? Same goes for the nuts, and many other of the ingredients in these things. I am not a big sweets eater, but I am highly bothered by the fact that yet ANOTHER tax is being added to one thing that is by law un-taxable because it is a necessity; no - not the candy itself - but food in general. And the bottled water tax?! Talk about charging for basic human needs. Those of us that choose to give our kids healthy options when camping, like WATER, now will be punished.

43007264
Flag this comment

clear2copy said on May 11, 2010 at 11:12 AM

you know, bob.. perhaps some candy NEEDS to be taken out of the mouths of children.. bad parents certainly aren't regulating their chubby little animals and their sugar consumption.. this is a step in the right direction.

43005902
Flag this comment

emansnas said on May 11, 2010 at 11:05 AM

Yeah, that's it, let's tax the hell out of the addicted.. and if they complain we'll righteously tell them it's for their own good.. that'll make 'em feel guilty while salving our own conscience.. perfect.. very progressive. Candy.. sure have at those decadent over indulgent chocoholics... make 'em pay. Let's see now.. who else can we exploit...............

43005422
Flag this comment

phordphreek said on May 11, 2010 at 10:59 AM

Can you just image the guy at the little mom and pop that doesn't use scanners reading the ingredients on all of the candy to determine if he/she should charge tax? BTW- it's not just 3000 items; all of those items are only listed once, no matter how many different sizes they come in. This will be a huge pain for ALL retailers and confusing for consumers.

43005087
Flag this comment

a6chris said on May 11, 2010 at 10:36 AM

if it moves tax it i, if it does not move tax it. I wonder if she stays up nights thinking of things to tax....

43003382
Flag this comment

dede1978 said on May 11, 2010 at 10:25 AM

bobknows, we didn't vote on this one, and senormoofer you're wrong on the issue of cigarettes. Alot of people plan on quitting if they haven't already, and a lot of us will go where we can get them cheaper. Mine up north cost me almost $30. a carton, less than $3 a pack. And a tax that focuses on a specific group of people is wrong, period!!!!! We should all be contributing equally.

43002499
Flag this comment

senormoofer said on May 11, 2010 at 9:07 AM

The reason for taxing some, and not all, is plainly stated, and very easy to comprehend. Flour is added to some, making it a non-taxable item, done, simple. I say just continue to tax the hell out of alcohol and cigarettes, people are still going to pay regardless. Candy and soda people can live without, it's not an addictive substance like alcohol and cigarettes.

42996714
Flag this comment

bobknows said on May 11, 2010 at 8:15 AM

Only a loony leftist would take candy out of the mouths of children. ... Thank you Governess Haywire. Thank you all you loony leftist voters. I hope you are pleased with yourselves.

42992527
Flag this comment

theroguechef said on May 11, 2010 at 8:13 AM

So do we really wonder why we have such a huge deficit in WA state??? How long is it taking them to decide which candy to tax? Is this going to be another state funded thing we can spend millions on, get nothing, and finally figure out we need to over haul it or drop it. We bleed money in this state because of poorly thought out, desperate plans that get bogged down by 'planning/investigating commitees'. Frankly, I don't care what we tax.....as long as we can just decide what it is quickly and get on with it, enough of this ridiculous exploring. If it's candy we're taxing now, then so be it...just make the freaking decision that its everything in the candy isle or none of it and move on. I would happily up my sons allowance if I knew that, at least, one decision has been made and finalized and then moved on from.

42992304
Flag this comment

anonymoususer said on May 11, 2010 at 7:40 AM

polluted air - you are an example of what is wrong with this country. The washington state constitution already has made taxing grocery store food items illegal. If you want a tx on all you consider "candy" then what is the defining point of what they will tax? donuts?, sugar?, rice? (because it has a high glycemic index), chocolate dipped ice cream? ....... I would rather pay shipping and purchase out of state than to pay this idiotic unconstitutional tax. Lemmings like you will just bend over and ask for more.

42989922
Flag this comment

wawolf said on May 11, 2010 at 7:38 AM

WTH? Why tax some but not all. Personally I think there are better ways to shore up the state deficit (like auditing state agencies for fleecing), but if you are going to tax candy tax all of it.

42989807
Flag this comment

freshair said on May 11, 2010 at 6:11 AM

You have got to be kidding. Candy is candy, tax it all!

42983157
Flag this comment