204 



Department of Fish and game is considering adoption of a user fee on canoes, 

 kayaks, and paddlecraft to enhance their state programs, while at the same 

 time, the state has the power to mandate registration of those craft in the 

 state, and if a resident travels to a wide variety of state, local and federal 

 wilderness areas, she may well be required to pay yet another set of user fees. 

 Potentially, our participants could have to pay fees to four or more agencies, 

 creating a significant barrier to not only participation but future sales of 

 paddlesports equipment as well. 



lAFWA claims to the contrary, it would be exceedingly difficult, if not 

 impossible for manufacturers to simply pass the 5% tax along to consumers as 

 a straight 5%. Instead, it would become yet another factor of the total over cost 

 of that item and be incorporated into the final retail price of the item and 

 adjusted upwards accordingly. 



For example, a typical purchase of a touring kayak, our fastest growing market 

 segment would be affected in the following manner - 



Total $2540 $3357 



On this purchase, the proposed tax would add a minimum of $127 to 

 the purchase price, creating a significant barrier to purchasing and 

 participation now and in the future. 



• Benefits to participants 



Despite the tax proponents claims, this proposal is not like the Pittman- 

 Robertson and the Dingell Johnson/Wallop-Breaux funding initiatives for 

 the hunting and fishing communities. The Sport Fish Restoration Act 

 (Dingell-Johnson) and the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act (Pittman- 

 Robertson) are both funds that are targeted specifically towards projects 

 directly impacting the constituency who pays the tax. These excise taxes raise 

 $5 Billion in federal excise taxes for state programs. The lAFWA fails to detail 

 that both acts were started by hunting and fishing interests, and that the 

 money is spent completely on dedicated hunting and fishing programs. 



