Starbucks, Taylor, Food Assistance discussed on The Opening Bell with Steve Grzanich

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

The sort of attacks on the poor because uh you know people like to drink their sugar drinks laced drink soda pop those people who are going to starbucks are not going to be taxed for this as people who would go and get a can of diet so door can of coke how what are you thinking about that what clearly that's one one way of looking at it but we hope you know customers come into our all all types who background every day and it doesn't apply to them fairly regardless of their socioeconomic background so we simply want to make sure that a to it can be done properly if it's going to be done at all i think it's important to know that the key carries come out with by changes in the last week thirty days in the last thirty days on how to implement this which makes it impossible to do the county built its case for this tax around the area help and i think as we talk before the break it was about hell it's doing a poor job a making that to effective because of the way it's a taxi are not taxing exactly identical products and the other thing you mentioned earlier that is probably gonna be a big impact for the judge looking at this is the impact on snapper the food assistance program he could you mentioned make the retailers some of those retailers in eligible for that programme correct so you cannot charge eight attacks on snap recipients purchases now obviously the federal government issues does and does not want to be taxed are headless benefits tax the way the county structured it ordinance you have to old tax into the christ up the product that is really legal under the snap snap program now the county then came out of a couple of weeks ago with something saying they well know you don't have to do that you can hear them or refund well you're not allowed to give them a refund you can't give it a snap recipient any sort of cash back within a valued back so it it sets up an impossible situation read taylor and pushed them in violation of snap in dozen did didn't they also suggest to that they wouldn't do the tax wooden impact l the low income must nap users uh i die not i think they suggested that or the gingerly if we could into it right oh okay so um.

Coming up next