MARIJUANA TAX CASE IS THE RESULT OF AN UNJUST LAW

Un-American Way

Kentucky legislators have enacted, and Kentucky courts have upheld,
some fairly rotten laws over the years. The case of Charles Thomas Jr.
provides a perfect example of why a 1994 statute levying a tax on
illegal drugs ranks with the worst of them.

Last fall, state police found about 500 marijuana plants growing in
five patches near the Breathitt County trailer where Thomas lives.
Thomas doesn't own the land where the pot was growing, and he was
never convicted of any crime.

Convicted? He wasn't even indicted.

But the state Revenue Cabinet is demanding that Thomas pay
$1,161,859.94 in taxes, penalties and interest on the marijuana.

Why? Because in a report to the Revenue Cabinet, a state trooper
identified Thomas as the ``dealer'' of the marijuana growing near his
trailer.

Under the 1994 law taxing illegal drugs, that's all it takes to slap a
monstrous tax bill on anyone in Kentucky. One police officer writing
your name on a ``Notice of Seizure and Tax Lien.''

No other evidence is required; and if you're Thomas, you may never get
to argue your case in court.

You see, the same law that lets one police officer essentially convict
you also requires that you post bond in the amount of your alleged tax
bill before you can appeal that very same bill. If you can't raise a
$1,161,859.94 bond (or a bit more than that now, with interest
accruing constantly), that's your tough luck.

``It's not a very taxpayer-friendly-type law,'' says Charles Werder, a
supervisor with the Revenue Cabinet's Division of Collections. ``It
pretty much tells you that it's up to the person to prove that they're
innocent, which kind of contradicts everything we've been brought up
to believe.''

Amen.

Two years ago, the Kentucky Supreme Court upheld this law, saying this
tax does not constitute double jeopardy. The court's rationale was
that the tax liability imposed under the law ``is not contingent on
the commission of a crime.''

We think the court erred in that case. A tax applied only to
``illegal'' drugs of necessity must be contingent on the commission of
a crime. If there is no crime, the drugs must not be considered
illegal and should not be subject to this tax.

At least in the case the court heard, the two dealers hit with a tax
bill had confessed. In Thomas' case, there was no confession, no
conviction, not even an indictment. His case went from accusation
straight to punishment, with little or no available appeal.

That's not justice. That's ``star chamber'' injustice, promoted by an
atrocious law that ought to be repealed.