Alaska cruise ship tax (long)

On 14 Jan 2005 02:11:14 GMT, PARNAMI wrote:

In the 70's, I vowed never to patronize any town that
implemented a chargeto use the beach. To this day, I've remained true to my
word...and I'm just an hour's drive away.

Why? You get to kick more kids that way.

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 05:20:59 GMT in rec.travel.cruises, "Thomas
Smith" -NO-SPAM wrote:

I'm Tom Smith, and I approved this message.

and i was proud to be one of the first to sign the petition as
one of the original sponsors, and to gather signatures (as a
volunteer, i might add). it's about time the cruise industry
paid its fair share just like every other industry that exploits
our state and its natural resources for profit.

================================================== ===========
If you want to see the real Alaska, don't come on a
cruise ship! See the cruise industry rogue's gallery
at http://www.cruisejunkie.com/#Environmental_Issues

Dennis P. Harris

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 05:20:59 GMT in rec.travel.cruises, "Thomas
Smith" -NO-SPAM wrote:

I'm Tom Smith, and I approved this message.

and i was proud to be one of the first to sign the petition as
one of the original sponsors, and to gather signatures (as a
volunteer, i might add). it's about time the cruise industry
paid its fair share just like every other industry that exploits
our state and its natural resources for profit.

================================================== ===========
If you want to see the real Alaska, don't come on a
cruise ship! See the cruise industry rogue's gallery
at http://www.cruisejunkie.com/#Environmental_Issues

Dennis P. Harris

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 20:50:33 GMT in rec.travel.cruises, Dillon
Pyron wrote:

Thus spake "Thomas Smith" -NO-SPAM :

For those of you who have seen the rumors about the Alaska legislature
considering taxing cruise ships, rest assured they are not. However, Alaska
voters will consider such a tax at the next statewide election, currently
scheduled for August, 2006. Here is the information I could find on this
issue from the Alaska Division of Elections

IIRC, Federal law extends state's rights to either the 3 or 12 mile
limit. I don't think the tax on gambling will hold up. As far as the
port tax goes, I don't see any flaws in it. I don't see where it
really isn't anything more than money in the treasury. Of course it
will pass. "Gouge the tourist" taxes always pass. Look at hotel
taxes. Houston's is around 25% now, with the latest additions.

actually the legislature is considering a bill, because if they
pass a law that is identical, it won't end up on the ballot.
they haven't, however, passed similar bills when they had the
opportunity.

most of the gambling is taking place in state waters, so the
profits are most certainly taxable. as a matter of fact, it
wouldn't be legal under state law but the cruise lines were
exempted from the state prohibition by congress, who left the
door open for state taxation by not prohibiting it.

it's about time that this industry started paying for using
alaska's natural resources just like all the other industries
here, although the money certainly doesn't compensate for the
noise, crowds, and air and water pollution the ships bring.

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 20:50:33 GMT in rec.travel.cruises, Dillon
Pyron wrote:

Thus spake "Thomas Smith" -NO-SPAM :

For those of you who have seen the rumors about the Alaska legislature
considering taxing cruise ships, rest assured they are not. However, Alaska
voters will consider such a tax at the next statewide election, currently
scheduled for August, 2006. Here is the information I could find on this
issue from the Alaska Division of Elections

IIRC, Federal law extends state's rights to either the 3 or 12 mile
limit. I don't think the tax on gambling will hold up. As far as the
port tax goes, I don't see any flaws in it. I don't see where it
really isn't anything more than money in the treasury. Of course it
will pass. "Gouge the tourist" taxes always pass. Look at hotel
taxes. Houston's is around 25% now, with the latest additions.

actually the legislature is considering a bill, because if they
pass a law that is identical, it won't end up on the ballot.
they haven't, however, passed similar bills when they had the
opportunity.

most of the gambling is taking place in state waters, so the
profits are most certainly taxable. as a matter of fact, it
wouldn't be legal under state law but the cruise lines were
exempted from the state prohibition by congress, who left the
door open for state taxation by not prohibiting it.

it's about time that this industry started paying for using
alaska's natural resources just like all the other industries
here, although the money certainly doesn't compensate for the
noise, crowds, and air and water pollution the ships bring.

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 13:01:20 -0800 in rec.travel.cruises, Ray
Goldenberg wrote:

It could be challenged on the grounds that it discriminates against
tourists who arrive by cruise ship as compared to not being a charge
for tourists that arrive by plane. I think this is how the opposition
will battle it in court if it ever passes.

ray, you are talking through your other end again.

we charge everyone at our airports, as much as the feral gummint
will allow. we'd charge more but the airline lobbyists bought
congress to keep them from raising the limit.

the industry can do whatever they want, the proposition is legal.
if they don't like it, i'm one of many alaskans that won't cry if
we have a lot fewer ships polluting our air and water and a lot
fewer choppers disturbing our peaceful use of our own homes.

but then shills like you never want to be confused by facts.

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 13:01:20 -0800 in rec.travel.cruises, Ray
Goldenberg wrote:

It could be challenged on the grounds that it discriminates against
tourists who arrive by cruise ship as compared to not being a charge
for tourists that arrive by plane. I think this is how the opposition
will battle it in court if it ever passes.

ray, you are talking through your other end again.

we charge everyone at our airports, as much as the feral gummint
will allow. we'd charge more but the airline lobbyists bought
congress to keep them from raising the limit.

the industry can do whatever they want, the proposition is legal.
if they don't like it, i'm one of many alaskans that won't cry if
we have a lot fewer ships polluting our air and water and a lot
fewer choppers disturbing our peaceful use of our own homes.

but then shills like you never want to be confused by facts.

On 14 Jan 2005 02:11:14 GMT in rec.travel.cruises,
(PARNAMI) wrote:

I probably won't! In the 70's, I vowed never to patronize any town that
implemented a chargeto use the beach. To this day, I've remained true to my
word...and I'm just an hour's drive away.

i just hope that there are a lot of folks like you that will do
exactly that. it would be great to have cruise ship traffic back
at even 1979 levels.

days without crowds. downtown stores that stay open all year and
sell something besides tshirts and tourist trap crap. trails
without guided groups of sheeple. roads without bus after bus
after bus of even more sheeple, being fleeced by the cruise
industry. ah, i can dream...

On 14 Jan 2005 02:11:14 GMT in rec.travel.cruises,
(PARNAMI) wrote:

I probably won't! In the 70's, I vowed never to patronize any town that
implemented a chargeto use the beach. To this day, I've remained true to my
word...and I'm just an hour's drive away.

i just hope that there are a lot of folks like you that will do
exactly that. it would be great to have cruise ship traffic back
at even 1979 levels.

days without crowds. downtown stores that stay open all year and
sell something besides tshirts and tourist trap crap. trails
without guided groups of sheeple. roads without bus after bus
after bus of even more sheeple, being fleeced by the cruise
industry. ah, i can dream...

Sounds like a bunch of disgruntled Alaskans to me. I suspect that, if
the law passes, it will be tied up in the courts until most of the
current posters to this group are long gone. Nothing like keeping
lawyers well fed.