Passing Prop KK would put a new tax on gun and ammo sales, to fund victim and behavioral health services.
At its simplest, passing Colorado Proposition KK would create a new 6.5% excise tax on sales of firearms and ammunition through firearms dealers, manufacturers, and vendors, beginning April 1, 2025. The tax would fund services for victims of crimes, mental health, and Colorado’s School Disbursement Program Cash Fund. Prop KK is statutory, not a Constitutional amendment, and would pass with a simple majority.
What Will Prop KK Do?
The Colorado General Assembly placed KK on the ballot by passing House Bill 24-1349. It’s a 28-page bill and I’ll always recommend reading the whole thing in full, but here’s a basic outline of what the proposition would do:
- The 6.5% tax would be levied on the purchase of “any firearm, firearm precursor part, or ammunition” sold by a vendor, dealer, or manufacturer doing business in Colorado.
- Retail sales to law enforcement personnel or active duty members of the military would be exempt from the tax.
- The Colorado Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) requires all tax increase ballot measure to state in the ballot title how much revenue the measure would generate, and for Prop KK the ballot title will say $39 million annually.
- If KK passes, the state would be able to keep and use all revenue collected from the new tax, even if it exceeds $39 million, since the legislature included a TABOR-override clause saying so in HB 24-1349.
- KK would create a new Firearms and Ammunition Excise Tax Cash Fund, and the first $30 million going to this fund would need to be transferred to the Colorado Crime Victim Services Fund to be used in awarding grants.
- The next $8 million would need to be transferred to the Behavioral and Mental Health Services Cash Fund. The first $5 million of this total must be used on veterans’ mental health services, and the next $3 million would go toward behavioral health crisis response system services for children.
- The next $1 million would need to be transferred to the School Security Disbursement Program Cash Fund. This is an existing fund that awards grants to schools that submit qualifying proposals to enhance school security.
The Crime Victim Services Fund would get the bulk of Prop KK money. According to the proponent’s website, the general types of victim services could include: “emergency shelter or safehousing, immediate crisis response or long-term case management, therapy and support groups, legal assistance, safety planning, resource navigation and referrals, and housing or financial assistance.”
The Prop KK tax would be in addition to a federal excise tax of 10% for handguns, or 11% for all other firearms and all ammunition. The federal tax has been used for wildlife conservation programs since the passage of the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act in 1937. Prop KK would not impact the federal tax.
HB 24-1349 passed the General Assembly largely along partisan lines, with Democrats generally in support and Republicans in opposition. It passed the Senate 18-15, and the House 44-18. Committee hearings on the bill generated reasonably large amounts of testimony, and grossly simplified, firearms advocates and hunting advocates testified in opposition, while victim services advocates testified in support.
The fiscal note for HB 24-1349 anticipated revenue of about $9 million in FY 2024-25, which would be a partial year, and nearly $36 million in its first full year of FY 2025-26, but actual numbers will depend on the quantity of taxable sales.
Why Proposition KK?
The “legislative declaration” portion of HB 24-1349 is actually a pretty good source for basic concepts that describe the perceived need for Prop KK, though it’s not the only source. For a few excerpts from the bill:
- Colorado has generally low rankings among states when it comes to funding behavioral health services, but demand has generally been high since the pandemic. According to the bill, the Colorado Crisis Services Hotline has received 30% more calls and texts than in recent years, while Children’s Hospital has treated 10% more youth experiencing thoughts of suicide.
- The rate of suicide among Colorado veterans is higher than the national average, and the state is expected to experience a “39% increase in service needs in the near future.”
- More than 13% of all women in America have been “threatened by an intimate partner using a firearm.”
- Individuals who experience emotional/mental trauma due to gun violence might need these services.
In very short, passing Prop KK would provide dedicated funding to these categories of services through this specific excise tax, while today the state must weigh discretionary funding for behavioral health or victim services against other competing needs.
Opposition Points
It sort of goes without saying that the new tax under Prop KK would drive up the cost of purchasing guns and ammunition in Colorado. Just for one example, the fiscal note for HB 24-1349 says the state is basing its revenue assumptions on average prices for guns and ammo, such as $548 for a handgun. At 6.5%, the Prop KK tax would add $35.62 to the price of that handgun.
During the House Finance Committee hearing on HB 24-1349 in April 2024, a number of witnesses testified that the new tax would disproportionately impact lower-income Coloradans. However, it’s relevant to note that the introduced version of the bill before that hearing called for an 11% tax, and there was an amendment on the table at House Finance to take it down to 9%, and it was eventually amended again to reach its current 6.5%.
Organizations including Congressional Sportsmen Foundation (CSF), Colorado Wildlife Conservation Project, Coloradans for Responsible Wildlife Management, National Shooting Sports Foundation, and National Rifle Association are among groups opposing Prop KK.
In an April 2024 post, CSF opined that passing what would become KK could decrease sales of guns and ammo in Colorado, in turn reducing revenues generated for conservation programs under Pittman-Robertson, though this post did not include projected statistics. CSF also made a general claim that new costs under KK would reduce participation in sport shooting and hunting, though again there were no statistics in this post.
Follow The Money
The pro-KK committee Colorado Supports Crime Victim Services had reported about $167,165,000 in total campaign contributions as of Oct. 15. The top donors include $35,000 from Violence-Free Colorado, and $15,000 from New York-based Everytown For Gun Safety.
There is an opponent committee called Stop Tax Increases established, but it reported no contributions as of Oct. 15.
KK Pro:
- The need for victim services and behavioral health services are significant, and funding for them can be seen as insufficient or uncertain. Prop KK would provide a modest but dependable funding source specifically dedicated to these services.
- Proponents will argue that there is a connection between gun violence and the need for behavioral health services, so it’s appropriate to tax guns and ammo to help fund the services.
KK Con:
- A new tax is more likely to affect poorer residents than richer people who can easily afford the extra expense. There are already federal taxes and normal sales taxes on purchases, and the new tax from KK would only add to this tax burden.
- Firearms aren’t only used in crime or violence. They can be used for hunting or self-defense, and some people who might become victims want firearms to protect themselves. Adding expense through KK might discourage non-criminals from purchasing guns or ammunition.
Prop KK Proponent Campaign Website: https://yesonpropkk.com/
Richard’s Take
After frankly agonizing a bit, I’ll be neutral on Prop KK. I have no problem whatsoever saying that the various victim support and behavioral health services called out in KK need more funding, but I also have a tough time accepting that there’s an exclusive linkage between the types of guns and ammunition used almost exclusively for hunting and the need for these services. I can easily conceive of linkages between assault weapons or handguns and the need for services – handguns are often used in violent crimes or domestic violence (including threats or intimidation), while assault weapons can be used in mass shootings that traumatize families and communities.
There are many other sources for information about homicide and gun violence, but the chart linked here showed 1.4% of U.S. homicides in 2019 where the type of weapon was identified were committed with shotguns, and about 2.4% with unspecified types of rifles, but about 46% were committed with handguns. This shows very clearly that it is possible to commit gun violence against humans with shotguns, but it also shows they’re not even close to the most common weapon used.
I grew up in a relatively low-income hunting family where we did to a certain extent depend on hunting and fishing for meals, which gave me some understanding about the differences between guns. I have also worked in government, which gave me some perception about the appropriateness of taxation. Usually, I’d prefer to see some sort of tangible connection between products being hit with “sin” taxes and the problem you’re trying to address, but I know full well this isn’t always the case.
For example, we’re using taxes on sports gambling to pay for water projects, or marijuana taxes to help fund school construction. But there are also components of those taxes that directly relate to relevant problems, like funding programs for people who develop gambling problems or substance abuse issues. And I know with alcohol taxes, the responsible social drinker still contributes some amount of tax revenue even though they’re not typically the ones causing most of the alcohol-related societal problems. So, I know we don’t always get iron-clad connections between the taxed item and the programs being funded.
Still, I’m staying neutral on KK because I would have preferred some type of discernment between hunting equipment and the type of firearms out there that are more likely to be used in crimes of violence or even mass killings. My actual vote is likely to be what they call a “game day decision.”
