51黑料

JEFFERSON CITY 鈥� 51黑料 and St. Charles counties cannot add their own tax on the sale of marijuana on top of local municipal sales taxes, a state appeals court ruled Tuesday.

In a that could cost the counties a growing source of revenue, a panel of judges in the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern Division overturned an April ruling by 51黑料 County Circuit Judge Brian May that said counties are 鈥渃onstitutionally authorized to enact a retail tax鈥� in incorporated areas.

The three-judge panel disagreed, saying the Missouri Constitution defines local governments as cities, towns and villages, not counties.

鈥淭he plain, unambiguous text of this constitutional provision means, that in an incorporated area like Florissant, the village, town, or city is the 鈥榣ocal government,鈥� not the county,鈥� the court ruled.

St. Charles County Executive Steve Ehlmann said attorneys will ask the Missouri Supreme Court to review the decision.

鈥淚鈥檝e talked with 51黑料 County Executive Sam Page, and we both agree it should be appealed,鈥� Ehlmann said Tuesday.

At issue is a concept called 鈥渢ax stacking.鈥�

In April 2023, 65% of 51黑料 County voters approved collecting a 3% sales tax on marijuana sales; in St. Charles County, 72% did.

The aim of the counties was to scrape some money from an industry projected to generate $1.4 billion in sales annually.

But, a marijuana dispensary in Florissant sued 51黑料 County, accusing it of unconstitutionally collecting the tax when Florissant already was. The shop, identified in the suit as Robust Dispensary on Howdershell Road, argued the county is only allowed to collect the levy in unincorporated territory. St. Charles County later joined the suit.

The dispensary鈥檚 attorneys argued the term differentiates between municipalities and unincorporated county territory. Either could impose a tax within its borders, but not both.

May sided with the counties in his ruling.

鈥淚f plaintiff鈥檚 interpretation were accepted, then a municipality or city would essentially be given carte blanche to ignore any county ordinance or regulation, including those related to public health and safety wholly unrelated to the taxing issue,鈥� May wrote.

The appeals court said May fumbled the decision.

鈥淭his argument suffers from several serious defects,鈥� wrote Judge John Torbitzky. Judges Robert Clayton III and Michael Wright concurred.

The decision will mean a loss of millions of dollars in revenue. 51黑料 County had collected more than $1.6 million through May, while St. Charles County estimates the tax would bring in $1 million annually.

鈥淚t is unclear at this point what the financial impact would be,鈥� Page spokesman Doug Moore said.

Ehlmann said the marijuana industry could have clarified the issue before it went before the judges.

鈥淲hen the County Council asked the voters to approve the tax, we heard nothing from anyone in the industry. This constitutional amendment was written by the marijuana industry, and they could have made it clear counties were excluded but that would have created opposition to their proposal,鈥� he said.

Andrew Mullins, executive director of MoCannTrade, the marijuana industry lobbying group, called it a win for weed companies and customers.

鈥淭oday鈥檚 ruling helps put $3 million back into the pockets of Missouri customers each month and will allow the industry to continue to contribute hundreds of millions each year in sales tax revenue to the state and our local communities,鈥� Mullins said.

A similar case is being litigated in the appeals court鈥檚 western division involving Buchanan County.

Updated with comments by St. Charles County Executive Steve Ehlmann.