30 



ad valorem inflationary factor that would accompany imposing the 

 tax at the manufacturer's first point of sale. The subsequent mark- 

 up of a product, as you noted earlier, as it moves through the com- 

 merce stream results in costs to the consumer in excess of the per- 

 centage of tax levied. 



In conclusion, I reiterate the fact that we remain supportive of 

 balanced and responsible funding mechanisms to sustain and 

 broaden the environmental and wildlife resource programs in this 

 country. However, SIA is adamantly opposed to the excise tax con- 

 cept of the "Teaming with Wildlife" proposal. On behalf of the SIA 

 and NSAA memberships, I thank you for this opportunity to ex- 

 press and appreciate your recognition of our problems. 



Mr. Saxton. Thank you very much, Mr. Ingemie. Mr. Mcllwaine. 



STATEMENT OF CHARLES B. MCILWAINE, VICE CHAIRMAN, 

 AMERICAN RECREATION COALITION 



Mr. McIlwaine. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for 

 this opportunity to appear on behalf of the American Recreation 

 Coalition. My name is Charles Mcllwaine, and I serve as the Vice 

 Chairman of ARC, a national federation of 125 corporations and as- 

 sociations actively involved in satisfying the nation's need for qual- 

 ity outdoor experiences. 



I am also the Vice President for Corporate Communications of 

 the Coleman Company based in Golden, Colorado, and one of the 

 oldest and largest manufacturers of outdoor recreation equipment 

 in the world. I would point out that recreation-related spending in 

 America today exceeds $300 billion annually. 



I fmd my appearance here somewhat ironic. Just over 11 years 

 ago, I testified in this very room before the Committee on Merchant 

 Marine and Fisheries on funding nongame wildlife programs. Mem- 

 bers who took part in that hearing continue to be involved in this 

 issue — the current Chairman of this committee. Representative 

 Don Young, and now Senator John Breaux, who at that time had 

 just experienced notable success in the creation of what we now 

 refer to as Wallop-Breaux. 



At that time, I underscored the recreation community's commit- 

 ment to good management of our natural resources, including 

 nongame species, but emphasized that an excise tax was the wrong 

 mechanism to fund a nongame wildlife grants program. My mes- 

 sage, I believe, was understood and shared by Messrs. Young and 

 Breaux. They made clear their hopes that voluntary means to gen- 

 erate these revenues could be found. 



I return to testify with three messages. First, the Congress and 

 the recreation community can take a great deal of satisfaction in 

 the new programs that have been implemented since 1985 to boost 

 recreation opportunities. The second message is that in spite of 

 these advances, the recreation needs of our nation are intense and 

 growing. The third message addresses the specifics of "Teaming 

 with Wildlife," including the grant's program to aid nongame wild- 

 life and the excise tax mechanism. 



ARC'S position is that the proposed excise tax does not qualify as 

 a recreational user fee. A user fee becomes simply a specialized tax 

 if a substantial portion of users do not pay or do not pay propor- 

 tional to the benefits they derive, while a very different substantial 



