Sorry Prof Jack, this one isnt the fault of Costco, the free market, or the Tea Party. Lay it at the feet opportunistic Washington State Legislature.

The unit cost has indeed gone down, but the brutal taxes are: State of WA 6.5%, Vancouver City 1.2%, state spirit sales tax 20.5%, spirit volume tax $3.77/Liter. ($2.83 per 750 ml bottle.)

Again, Govt stiffs the consumer and some how the blame falls on "corporate greed".

Costco basically wrote the ballot measure. They could have prevented this from happening. As I say, they're now going to be majorly in the hole here in Oregon.

sorry - forgot reference:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politicsnorthwest/2018372644_liquor.html#Two

Costco basically wrote the ballot measure. They could have prevented this from happening. As I say, they're now going to be majorly in the hole here in Oregon.

Cost-Co should have figured out a way to ensure that the programs currently funded by the state income from liquor would be maintained. But I see nothing wrong with the state tacking on a fee/tax to ensure that those programs are continued.

A decade ago, I was working in a Dallas liquor store, and saw how this worked for Oklahoma firsthand. Alcohol prices were as much as a third higher in Oklahoma than in Texas, and the Legislature kept increasing the "sin tax" even more on the idea that if people disliked paying the taxes, they'd quit drinking. Of course, severe alcoholism is just a symptom of having to live in Oklahoma, so enterprising people realized that they could drive to Dallas, buy what they needed, and still save money after the transportation costs were figured in. Of course, the only way that worked was if they bought in bulk.

Now, I wasn't bothered by the realization that these people were loading up station wagons and SUVs with all the liquor they could carry. I wasn't bothered that they weren't bothered by the very good likelihood of being busted by the Oklahoma State Troopers for transporting liquor across state lines. I wasn't even bothered by the fact that many would be camped out in the parking lot on Monday morning waiting for us to open at 9, and would try to sneak in early if we had the front doors open for any reason. Heck, even the threats to shoot up the place and kill us all because we only had six bottles of Bloody Mary mix and they needed three cases became less urgent the fifth or sixth time you heard it. No, what bothered me was that most of these regular customers were loading up every other week. If you're THAT miserable in Oklahoma, why don't you move and save an obscene amount of money?

As I understand it at least some of the taxes go down after a year, not that that helps now.

I wouldn't be surprised if Costco already had another ballot measure written and ready to go to eliminate, or significantly reduce, some of the taxes. Baby steps...

I hope they do it in Oregon, and I hope they don't add a bunch of taxes at the same time. (At the same time I am hoping that Oregon voters have paid attention to what happened in Washington so that they will approve one that cuts the state funding from liquor sales rather than trying to keep them whole for some stupid reason.

I think the profit margin is more than the tax in Oregon. The state already marks up liquor over 100% in some cases. I bought a particular bottle of 18 year old scotch in California last summer for $50, including tax. The same bottle here is $94.

I thought Oregon had some of the highest, if not the highest, spirits taxes in the country. I guess Washington is worse.

Sounds like costco should have looked into how California does it.

I wonder if Washington gives Indian casinos a break like Oregon does?

http://pactoregon.org/research-pact-olcc.html

Baby steps. Baby steps. Getting rid of the "physical plant" is a step in the right (smaller government) direction. The state warehouses and employees have taken the first hit. Now the rest is just paperwork. Next year legislation will try to adjust cross line revenues.

The idea that Costco and Grocery Outlet share any interest in the welfare of the 99% is absurd.

Oklahoma, Somalia, Haiti...if you want to experience limited government drowned or ready to be drowned in a bathtub, we have destinations aplenty for you. Want a health economy and better general standard of living? Try Taxachusett, Germany, Italy, etc.

The general welfare of the populace is not coherent with the interests of big or even medium sized businesses. Absent regulation and social support, you get a predatory market that inevitably pushes the 99% further and further into the muck in order to squeeze out the last penny. Theory that isn't politically calculated says it. Observational research says it. Your experience says it. Rush and Liars won't say it, but that doesn't make it false. It is manifestly true. Even economists who study mathematical simulations which include no human factors say it. Just accept that and move on.

"The general welfare of the populace is not coherent with the interests of big or even medium sized Goverment. Absent regulation and social support, you get a predatory Goverment that inevitably pushes the 99% further and further into the muck in order to squeeze out the last penny. Theory that isn't politically calculated says it. Observational research says it. Your experience says it. Rush and Liars say it, but that doesn't make it false. It is manifestly true. Even economists who study mathematical simulations which include no human factors say it. Just accept that and move on."

Fixed that for you. :)