Home > 2014 SD Legislative Session, Gun rights, South Dakota > SD HB 1065: Removing fee from concealed carry killed in Committee

SD HB 1065: Removing fee from concealed carry killed in Committee

January 28, 2014

Anonymous_9mm_pistol (1)Today the House Local Government Committee took up South Dakota House Bill 1065. HB 1056 would have removed the fee required when getting a permit to carry concealed. The bill was killed 8-5 by sending it to the non-existent 41st legislative day. Yesterday I said this was a bill I support, even though it doesn’t go as far as I would like.

Rep Olson (R-28B) sponsored and gave proponent testimony for the bill. Her testimony was pretty brief, which is OK because there was much more to say from others later on.

Opponent testimony revolved largely around the lost revenue removing this $10 fee would cost the state. Three dollars of the fee goes to the County issuing the permit; which goes to cover the cost of issuing the permit. The other seven dollars goes to the Secretary of State. Losing this seven dollars that goes to the states general fund seemed to be the biggest issue. Listening to the opponents of this bill actually backs up the claim by many of us that this ‘fee’ is actually a tax.

Rep Nelson (R-19) had quite a bit to say on the issue. He asked if other rights, specifically First Amendment rights required citizens to pay a fee to use those rights. I agree with Rep Nelson! There would be an outcry if anyone tried to tax free-speech.

There was an attempt to hijack the bill by Rep Hajek (R-14). Rep Hajek wanted to double current conceal carry tax to $20. That would give an additional $7 to the counties and additional $3 to the state. Part of her reasoning was because other states have high permit costs, then so should South Dakota? Usually Republicans trying to raise taxes are a little more sly about it. In this case Rep Hajek was actually coming out and pushing for a 100% increase on a tax so the state could get more revenue. I wonder if that move will have any impact on her re-election?

I doubt this is a bill that will have any smoke-out attempts. So it will likely remain dead for the year. I would however expect to see it again next year. Maybe then we will have a few more Republicans in Pierre that are not afraid to cut taxes; especially a tax on a constitutionally protected right.

PS. Another gun bill, HB 1066, did pass the Committee. But I was unable to listen to all of that testimony. Perhaps when I have more time…

  1. Merlyn Schutterle
    January 28, 2014 at 7:36 pm

    I used to have a permit even though I didn’t have any guns. The first time I applied, the sheriff at that time denied me, but wouldn’t give me a reason. I think it was the Jankow thing. We got a new sheriff and everything went well. It’s expired now. I can dig up ten bucks to get another just to piss people off.

    • January 28, 2014 at 7:48 pm

      I have spoken with a few Sherrif’s that are actually kind of annoyed with issuing permits. They would rather just do away with permits.

  2. Matt DeBow
    January 29, 2014 at 5:43 pm

    I do not consider it a tax, because I have a choice to purchase or not to purchase. Taxes I have no choice.

    • January 29, 2014 at 6:37 pm

      That is one thing that makes it interesting when talking about taxes and fees. Different people have varying ideas of what each term means.

  1. No trackbacks yet.
Comments are closed.
%d bloggers like this: