How 1000 percent excise tax would hurt Americans

How 1000 percent excise tax would hurt Americans
Glock Model 21

The Second Amendment means that no matter how much politicians want to make it so you can’t own a gun, they can’t actually ban guns.

However, Congress has the authority to tax, and the proposal to pass a 1000 percent excise tax is likely an attempt to get around the Second Amendment using an authority actually in the Constitution.


It’s a novel change of pace, to be sure.

However, I don’t think it’s any more constitutional than an outright ban would be.

Further, it’s not going to actually help anyone, as an op-ed at the Washington Examiner notes.

Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA) proposed a 1,000% excise tax on firearms earlier this month. If passed, the tax would affect the whole nation, but especially his district, which covers the cities of Arlington, Alexandria, and Falls Church, as well as parts of Fairfax County.

As one of Beyer’s constituents, I’m personally concerned by how this tax would leave me and my neighbors defenseless in the face of rising crime rates across the Washington metro region and northern Virginia in particular.

Northern Virginia news site ALXNOW reported earlier this year that “Alexandria’s gun-related crimes increased 100% from 2022 over 2021, according to a police report.” ARLNOW, the site’s sister publication, reported an increase in crime from the Arlington Police’s annual report as well. Overall crime increased 17.8%, and while the number of nonviolent offenses, including traffic offenses and drug offenses, decreased, “the rise in the more serious, often violent ‘crimes against persons’ was driven in large part by increases in simple assault and aggravated assault.”

Another report by Patch on Alexandria’s most recent publicly available crime numbers noted that even “non-violent” gun crimes are up, “including possession by a felon or carrying without a license.”

This congressional legislation would have a national impact, but by promoting this bill, Beyer ignores the needs of his own constituents.


That’s not a design flaw, in my opinion, but a feature.

Beyer knows that such a high excise tax would put many firearms ideal for self-defense out of reach for millions of Americans. The same is true for standard capacity magazines–standard because they’re what actually comes with the gun except where prohibited by law. The idea that anything but a 10-round magazine or smaller should be normalized flies in the face of reality–which are better for people who don’t know what they might be facing in a self-defense situation.

The purpose of this tax isn’t to ban but to restrict it so the wrong sort doesn’t have the means to defend themselves effectively, but people like Beyer’s wealthy patrons will.

And that’s where much of the issue is.

While Democrats like to pretend they’re for “the little guy” and Republicans are all about the wealthy, Beyer’s excise tax would make it so the little guy is powerless to protect himself from criminals, most of whom obtain their firearms illegally in the first place.

That’s what’s really going on here and Beyer and his allies should be called on this regularly.


Unfortunately, those who normally say they speak for the middle and lower-economic classes are strangely silent on this one. Curious, isn’t it?

Join the conversation as a VIP Member