IDS Budget and Tax Committee

[Yelnoc]

     The process we derived for calculating our spending & revenue suggests that there is no state-level taxation or spending beyond what the region deals with. Given that the region has specifically avowed the existence of state-level government, this is slightly problematic, though we can imagine the region as being a decidedly unitary system.

Why is that?  We used real-life state data to do so.  I don't see how that precludes the existence of state level taxation in the IDS, especially when, as you pointed out, we certainly have states.  In fact, bills such as the Education devolution act (whatever the one we were talking about earlier was called) at least attempted to assign duties and thus expenditures to the states, which seems to necessitate the states having some mechanism to gather revenue.

     We found our spending by adding together the real-life spending of each state in each category. Unless we assume that all of this money is being spent twice, there's not really much left over for state-level spending. Taxes are accounted for in the same manner, with the numbers being adjusted to reflect regional rates.

     My thought is that the region gathers the money & releases certain amounts of it to the states, with the current state government apparati being divided in some fashion between the region & the states.

Yes, our intent was to find our regions spending and revenue by adding up that of the states.  What I am saying is that we have no reason to assume that this money is going to the regional government but several to assume that the states are keeping it for their own programs.

Your thought is certainly the way things should be managed but, as far as I can see, that has not been happening.  My assumption was that areas not touched upon by the legislature or initiatives function the same as in real life; this seems to be an area that no one in the past has dealt with.

     As Badger prescribed a few pages back, we are ignoring local-level taxation. As such, my thoughts are that the figures given for regional taxation & spending refers to all that money that passes through the hands of the regional-level government. If we are going to include money on the state-level that the regional government never actually sees, then there is no reason to exclude similar funds on the local-level.

The point of including the state level figures as a separate level would be to temporarily separate them from regional spending and revenue.  We need to figure out our regions debt level and budget history.  Once that is done, legislature can be passed so that the region assumes the responsibilities of the state government.  At that point, those figures will be needed to create the new regional budget.

     But they are already completely linked, unless we want to abandon the base figures altogether and only consider legislation passed by the region as contributing to regional taxation or spending, which would probably generate exorbitant tax levels well beyond the demands of regional spending.

I am just talking about temporary separation, so that we can find the budget history of the region.  Unfortunately, past laws involving taxes and appropriations were passed on top of the base figures.  Meaning, for instance, that the corporate tax of the region is in addition to the corporate taxes of the states.  So what we will see is a large surplus in the regional budget but a large deficit in the aggregate of the state budgets.

It's not a pretty picture but, from what I gather of the region's legislative history, it makes the most sense.  I am not talking about keeping the two levels permanently separated.  After the regional budget is found (we already found the state ones) we will know our region's debt/surplus.  From there, we can begin the process of combining the regional and state budgets.  It shouldn't be that difficult of a task; it's really just a way of approaching the situation.

Unfortunatly, I am not to familier with the fiscal health of the region as I wish I could be. So I may not have alot of usefull imput on the budget.

That's ok, I didn't know anything about the budget when we started this either.  You learn by doing.  If you want to help, we desperately need budgetary figures for Puerto Rico.

[Yelnoc]

     It seems rather disastrous if true in regards to spending, as the region's base spending was taken to be the sum of all state spending, so that seperating it would essentially just mean that every item is being paid for twice. It however does seem very problematic as well in regards to taxation. As such, I think we may actually want to act ASAP in order to eliminate double taxation, because we cannot afford to be taxing our citizens so heavily.

That assumption for spending was (as far as I am aware) made just for this project.  Unless that exists in a law, we can discount it and assume that said items were only paid for once, by the state governments.

Taxation is certainly a major problem.  We will have to pass a massive tax overhaul once we finish with this.

[Yelnoc]

In the words of the President "Let me be clear."

Two Categories
-State Spending/Revenue: Taken from Badger's excellent website, all real data, the "base values"
-Regional Spending/Revenue: Everything passed as an initiative or a bill

We find the categories of each (State is already done) and present our findings.  That means that we will have the budget history of the region up to the present.  From there we will combine the two, do the overhauls, and mold the budget into shape.

[Yelnoc]

    It seems rather disastrous if true in regards to spending, as the region's base spending was taken to be the sum of all state spending, so that seperating it would essentially just mean that every item is being paid for twice. It however does seem very problematic as well in regards to taxation. As such, I think we may actually want to act ASAP in order to eliminate double taxation, because we cannot afford to be taxing our citizens so heavily.

That assumption for spending was (as far as I am aware) made just for this project.  Unless that exists in a law, we can discount it and assume that said items were only paid for once, by the state governments.

Taxation is certainly a major problem.  We will have to pass a massive tax overhaul once we finish with this.

     But as I said earlier, we're not looking at taxation & spending by local governments. This is a project for the regional budget; not local budgets or state budgets. If that's the case, we can discard the bases altogether & just look at the rates provided for by the regional statute.

     Going that way, we should use the Unified Law Code Initiative, take the rates for Georgia, & extrapolate them for the whole region. Given that those are provided for by the regional statute, that would probably be the most rigorous way to do it.

I guess I wasn't clear.  I'm not talking about the overall direction of the committee.  What I am talking about is temporarily separating the two for the purpose of calculating the budget.  The "local government" figures will be added back into region spending.  Think about it this way; we have the "base spending & revenue" of the states.  Now we need to find the base spending and revenue of the region.  Then we can combine the two.

[Yelnoc]

     It seems rather disastrous if true in regards to spending, as the region's base spending was taken to be the sum of all state spending, so that seperating it would essentially just mean that every item is being paid for twice. It however does seem very problematic as well in regards to taxation. As such, I think we may actually want to act ASAP in order to eliminate double taxation, because we cannot afford to be taxing our citizens so heavily.

That assumption for spending was (as far as I am aware) made just for this project.  Unless that exists in a law, we can discount it and assume that said items were only paid for once, by the state governments.

Taxation is certainly a major problem.  We will have to pass a massive tax overhaul once we finish with this.

     But as I said earlier, we're not looking at taxation & spending by local governments. This is a project for the regional budget; not local budgets or state budgets. If that's the case, we can discard the bases altogether & just look at the rates provided for by the regional statute.

     Going that way, we should use the Unified Law Code Initiative, take the rates for Georgia, & extrapolate them for the whole region. Given that those are provided for by the regional statute, that would probably be the most rigorous way to do it.

I guess I wasn't clear.  I'm not talking about the overall direction of the committee.  What I am talking about is temporarily separating the two for the purpose of calculating the budget.  The "local government" figures will be added back into region spending.  Think about it this way; we have the "base spending & revenue" of the states.  Now we need to find the base spending and revenue of the region.  Then we can combine the two.

     I am not sure that it is desirable to include local figures or even state figures under regional figures. It gives the region much more leeway for future actions to not treat it as a wholly unitary entity.

That may be so.  But if we aren't going to include the state government budgets in ours (co-opt them, you might say) then the region is reduced to leveling its own taxes to pay for its expenses.  Which leads us back to the current problem of having a massive corporate income tax (when put into perspective on top of state and federal taxes) and a series of excise taxes providing a large income for a very small budget (we built a pentagram- I can't think of any other expenses).

[Yelnoc]

-snip-

i luv u

*sloppy wet kiss*

     It seems rather disastrous if true in regards to spending, as the region's base spending was taken to be the sum of all state spending, so that seperating it would essentially just mean that every item is being paid for twice. It however does seem very problematic as well in regards to taxation. As such, I think we may actually want to act ASAP in order to eliminate double taxation, because we cannot afford to be taxing our citizens so heavily.

That assumption for spending was (as far as I am aware) made just for this project.  Unless that exists in a law, we can discount it and assume that said items were only paid for once, by the state governments.

Taxation is certainly a major problem.  We will have to pass a massive tax overhaul once we finish with this.

     But as I said earlier, we're not looking at taxation & spending by local governments. This is a project for the regional budget; not local budgets or state budgets. If that's the case, we can discard the bases altogether & just look at the rates provided for by the regional statute.

     Going that way, we should use the Unified Law Code Initiative, take the rates for Georgia, & extrapolate them for the whole region. Given that those are provided for by the regional statute, that would probably be the most rigorous way to do it.

I guess I wasn't clear.  I'm not talking about the overall direction of the committee.  What I am talking about is temporarily separating the two for the purpose of calculating the budget.  The "local government" figures will be added back into region spending.  Think about it this way; we have the "base spending & revenue" of the states.  Now we need to find the base spending and revenue of the region.  Then we can combine the two.

     I am not sure that it is desirable to include local figures or even state figures under regional figures. It gives the region much more leeway for future actions to not treat it as a wholly unitary entity.

That may be so.  But if we aren't going to include the state government budgets in ours (co-opt them, you might say) then the region is reduced to leveling its own taxes to pay for its expenses.  Which leads us back to the current problem of having a massive corporate income tax (when put into perspective on top of state and federal taxes) and a series of excise taxes providing a large income for a very small budget (we built a pentagram- I can't think of any other expenses).

     Aye, my thought is that either way we are going to have to do something pretty soon. I have a couple of ideas for new bills, but I'll wait to post them if we have something more pressing to deal with.

Sounds good.  I feel like I had something important to say but I just finished a section of The Ultimate Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy and my brain is feeling a bit scrambled.  Maybe tomorrow we'll do something constructive.

[Yelnoc]

2011 Budget

Regional Spending

Pensions
-Base: $0

Health care:
-Base: $0

Education:
-Base: $0
-Tertiary Education/Other Capital Outlay-Higher Education/Southeastern Educational Incentive Act: $3.5 billion
-Pre-Primary through Secondary Education/Other Capital Outlay - Elementary and Secondary Education/School Choice Initiative: $56.4 billion
-Total: $59.9 billion

Defense:
-Base: $0

Welfare:
-Base: $0

Protection:
-Base: $0

Transportation:
-Base: $0

General government:
-Base: $0

Other spending:
-Base: $0
-Cultural Services/Pentagram Creation Act: $200 million (1 time expense)
-Total: 200 million

Interest:
-Base: $?

Balance:
-Base: -$?

Σ
-Base: $0
-Total: 61.1 billion

Regional Revenue

Income Taxes:
-Base: $0
-Corporate Income Tax/Tax-Corporate Net Income/Put the "free" back in Free Enterprise Bill: 32.5 billion
-Corporate Income Tax/Tax-Corporate Net Income/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: -66.1 million (-0.0661 billion)
-Corporate Tax Rate: 8.6% (part of Free Enterprise Bill above - remember other provisions).
-Personal Income Tax Rate: 0% (none)
-Total: $32.4339 billion ($32,433,900,000)

Social Security Taxes:  
-Base: $0

Ad-valorem Taxes:
-Base: $0
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Alcoholic Beverage Sales/Southeast Alcohol Initiative, Section 8: $1.3127 billion ($1.00/proof liter or $0.385/gallon for beer, $0.909/gallon for wine, $3.31/gallon for spirits)
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Tobacco Products Sales/Southeast Tobacco Initiative, Section 6:  $0.04/cigarette ($6,034,000,000/year), $0.08/cigar (?), $2.00/kg tobacco(?)
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Marijuana Products Sales: $3.00/ounce
-Sales Taxes/Tax-Public Utilities Sale/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: 80% of standard electricity excise tax
-Sales Taxes/Tax-Public Utilities Sale/Southeast Biomass Initiative, Section 3: 80% of standard electricity excise tax
-Property Taxes/Tax-Property/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4
-Transportation/Tax-Motor Fuel Sales/Transportation Commission Initiative, Chapter 3, Section 22: $0.08/liter
-Transportation/Tax-Motor Vehicle License/Fair Consequences Initiative, Section 3
-License/Tax-Other License/Off-Shore Religious Organizations Initiative, Section 2
-Total: ?

Fees and Charges:
-Base: $0
-Other/Charges-All Other/Pentagram Creation Act: $5,700,000/year
-Other/Charges-All Other/Safe Roads Initiative, Section 6: $44,400,000/year
-Total: $50,100,000 ($0.501 billion)

Business and Other Revenue:
-Base: $0
-Other/Miscellaneous-Net Lottery Revenue/Southeast Lottery Regulations, Section 6 (Amended by Expanding Choice Initiative)
-Total: ?

Total Direct Revenue:
-base: $0

Gross Public Debt:
-Base: $0

State Spending

Pensions
-Base: $3.81 billion

Health care:
-Base: $121.9 billion

Education:
-Base: $0 billion (pre-Educational Hotfix Act)
-Base: $48.9 billion (post-Educational Hotfix Act - original figure was $73.4 billion)
-Total: $48.9 billion

Defense:
-Base: $0.6 billion

Welfare:
-Base: $40.4 billion

Protection:
-Base: $21.5 billion

Transportation:
-Base: $28.2 billion

General government:
-Base: $7.4 billion

Other spending:
-Base: $18.7 billion

Interest:
-Base: $7.4 billion

Balance:
-Base: -$4.4 billion

Σ
-Base: $352.1 billion

State Revenue

Income Taxes:
-Base: $35.6 billion
-Corporate Tax Rate: ?
-Personal Income Tax Rate: ?
-Total: ?

Social Security Taxes:  
-Base: $15.1 billion

Ad-valorem Taxes:
-Base: $252.3 billion

Fees and Charges:
-Base: $107 billion

Business and Other Revenue:
-Base: $132.5 billion

Total Direct Revenue:
-base: $544.5 billion

Gross Public Debt:
-Base: $598.7 billion

[Yelnoc]

I am 99.9% sure that the above is correct but you might want to go over it anyway.  We need to figure out the cost of the Pentagram Creation Act and the revenues from the various excise taxes, fees, and the lottery initiative.  Once Badger gets back to us we will have the corporate tax rate for the states.  As far as the 6% personal income tax rate goes, is that based off of the states?  I don't think we passed a low concerning personal income taxes but I may be wrong.  In any event, there is the Regional government exposed.

[Yelnoc]

     I don't think it's possible to assign any sort of price tag to the Pentagram Creation Act. The act specifies that the pentagram will be several stories in height, which doesn't give us much to work with. Not to mention we'd also have to talk about revenue due to the PCA, since the pentagram is intended to serve as a tourist destination.

We could always do a PNOOCAM (Pull Numbers Our Collective Asses Maneuver).

[Yelnoc]

     I don't think it's possible to assign any sort of price tag to the Pentagram Creation Act. The act specifies that the pentagram will be several stories in height, which doesn't give us much to work with. Not to mention we'd also have to talk about revenue due to the PCA, since the pentagram is intended to serve as a tourist destination.

We could always do a PNOOCAM (Pull Numbers Our Collective Asses Maneuver).

     Pretty much. The Transamerica Pyramid was built from 1969-1972 & cost $32 million. Assuming we want a landmark of similar importance & adjusting for inflation, let's say the Imperial Pentagram costs $200 million.

I like it.  Now, how much money are we getting from it (ticket sales I, think 20%) and how much from the Safe Roads Initiative?

EDIT: I included the figure.  The region has spent 61.1 billion this year but presumably spent a lot more.  Hmm...

[Yelnoc]

You know, we are going to have to codify how we do this budget thing in the future.  I am thinking at the beginning of every year we present a new budget including all of last years appropriations.  Otherwise this will be a mess to keep a handle on.

[Yelnoc]

     I don't think it's possible to assign any sort of price tag to the Pentagram Creation Act. The act specifies that the pentagram will be several stories in height, which doesn't give us much to work with. Not to mention we'd also have to talk about revenue due to the PCA, since the pentagram is intended to serve as a tourist destination.

We could always do a PNOOCAM (Pull Numbers Our Collective Asses Maneuver).

     Pretty much. The Transamerica Pyramid was built from 1969-1972 & cost $32 million. Assuming we want a landmark of similar importance & adjusting for inflation, let's say the Imperial Pentagram costs $200 million.

I like it.  Now, how much money are we getting from it (ticket sales I, think 20%) and how much from the Safe Roads Initiative?

     According to Wikipedia, Graceland, Memphis's biggest attraction, sees 600,000 tourists a year. The Pentagram is too new to really be a magnet by itself, but assuming they pay an average of $10/person to go inside (ticket prices would probably be a bit higher & the real number of tourists is probably somewhat higher, but also some tourists would probably not go to the Pentagram), that figures to $6,000,000/year. Since we are obviously not close to recouping the total costs, we'll be getting $5,700,000/year from it.

     As for the Safe Roads Initiative, the Department of Transportation says that 44.4 million new & used cars were sold in the U.S. in 2009. Though it was part of a significant downward trend, we'll simplify things by assuming things have remained static since then. Conveniently, dividing by five to find the number of those cars in the region cancels out multiplying by five to account for the amount of the fee, so the Safe Roads Initiative just brings in $44,400,000/year.

Great, I added that to the budget.  Once we complete the following we will be finished with our regional budget (after which we will simply combine it with the aggregate state budgets).

1) Income Taxes: Derive Revenue figures from the following bills:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

2) Ad-Valorum Taxes: Derive Revenue figures from the following acts:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Yelnoc]

I will start with this bill.

Section 1 seems to indicate that, when we combine the state and regional budgets, all state revenue derived from Corporate income taxes should be dropped, presumably replaced by the revenue from this bill.

The first provision of section 2 can be ignored since we are simply looking for 2011's budget.  That means we have a corporate tax rate of 8.6%.  Now, how do we determine how much money a corporate tax rate of 8.6% raises?  This is complicated by Section three, which exempts businesses in their first year from taxation and lowers the business tax to five percent for their second year.  Any thoughts?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Yelnoc]

     I had difficulty finding much on corporate incomes, though this article by the Huffington Post suggests a national corporate profit rate of $1.66 trillion/year. Dividing by five, that gives us $332 billion/year in the IDS. Since new businesses obviously don't pull in all that much, I'll simplify things by ignoring their reduced corporate taxes & multiply that figure by 0.098, which gives us a total revenue rate of $32,500,000,000/year. I'm going to assume that our lowish rate combined with a lack of loopholes provided for by the Put the "free" back in Free Enterprise Bill means that we see minimal tax avoidance, unlike our federal counterparts.

Added to the balance sheet.

Now we have this section of the Nuclear Initiative.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The first order of the day is figuring out how many nuclear plants there are in the southeast.  This site is helpful.
Alabama: 7 units
Arkansas: 2 units
Georgia: 4 units
Louisiana: 2 units
Mississippi: 1 unit
South Carolina: 7 units
North Carolina: 5 units
Puerto Rico: 0 units
Tennessee: 3 units (that are built or at least that information is provided about)
Texas: 4 units
Total: 35 units

[Yelnoc]

    According to the Department of Energy, nuclear plants were responsible for the production of 800 billion kWh of energy in 2009. There are currently 104 active reactors in the United States, so multiplying by (35/104) gives us 270 billion kWh produced in the region.

     The Nuclear Energy Institute site provides average costs. Adding up the average costs of fuel, operations, & maintenance gives us a cost of $0.0203/kWh. Rounding up to $0.025/kWh, since they obviously will have to sell for a gain, we get a total revenue of $6.75 billion for sales of electricity produced by the regional nuclear plants.

     The results of this provision is essentially a cut into the corporate income tax rate, so we find the amount of this cut by multiplying by the corporate tax rate & the percentage cut provided for by the bill, giving us $66,100,000/year. Please note that this is a decrease to the revenue of the region, as we are providing for a tax break for these plants.

Duly noted.  And final the Ad-Valorum taxes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Let's start with the sin taxes.  The main obstacle here is determining consumption rates.  I'll go trawl around the internet for alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana data now.

EDIT:
According to this map, the USA in 1998 (or more recent, it doesn't say) consumed between 1,500-2,499 cigarettes per person for a total of 451 billion cigarettes in 1998.

DOUBLE EDIT:
Found this excellent site for revenue from alcohol excise taxes and this one for state tax rates. 

Unfortunately our tax is per liter while those are per gallon and ours is on all alcohol while theirs is broken up into spirits, table wine, and beer categories.

[Yelnoc]

Added those figures.  Now for actual revenue.  Nebraska seems to be the closest to us as far as those tax rates go.  In 2008, made $26,254,000 off all three alcohol taxes.  Nebraska's population is 1,796,619 to our 80,882,282.  That rounds to about 0.02%, suggesting that the IDS's revenue from alcohol sales is in the area of $1,312,700,000 per year, assuming my calculations are correct.

[Yelnoc]

I guess I did the alcohol revenue was ok.  I will do the same for tobacco.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is just for the cigarette tax; I'm not sure how we will find Cigar and Tobacco revenues.  Now, no state in the union has a tax as low as the IDS's piddly 4 cents.  What I had to do was take North Dakota's $0.44 rate, divide by 11 (and thus divide its revenue of 24,127,000 by 11=2,193,363).  Then I divided their population like ours (646,844/80,882,282=.008%).  So, if my calculations are correct, the IDS's revenue from cigarettes alone is $274,261,189 or about .000274 billion.

[Yelnoc]

     That looks right, though it should be 0.274 billion. This isn't the UK.

Whoops.  Lol

[Yelnoc]

Pentagram Creation Act? Was that really the best way to spend $200 M?

It's quite evil, actually. 

In the meantime, AG, do you want to help us?  We need revenue from cigar and tobacco tax, two things that I wasn'ta ble to find when calculating the cigarette revenue.

[Yelnoc]

    I just realized that our rate is per-cigarette while the rates you were looking at were per-pack. A pack contains 20 cigarettes (I think), so our tax rate is actually $0.88/pack. Running the computation again with that, I get $6,034,000,000/year for revenue from cigarette taxes.

Great, thanks.  I updated the sheet and re-posted it below for convenience.

[Yelnoc]

2011 Budget

Regional Spending

Pensions
-Base: $0

Health care:
-Base: $0

Education:
-Base: $0
-Tertiary Education/Other Capital Outlay-Higher Education/Southeastern Educational Incentive Act: $3.5 billion
-Pre-Primary through Secondary Education/Other Capital Outlay - Elementary and Secondary Education/School Choice Initiative: $56.4 billion
-Total: $59.9 billion

Defense:
-Base: $0

Welfare:
-Base: $0

Protection:
-Base: $0

Transportation:
-Base: $0

General government:
-Base: $0

Other spending:
-Base: $0
-Cultural Services/Pentagram Creation Act: $200 million (1 time expense)
-Total: 200 million

Interest:
-Base: $?

Balance:
-Base: -$?

Σ
-Base: $0
-Total: 61.1 billion

Regional Revenue

Income Taxes:
-Base: $0
-Corporate Income Tax/Tax-Corporate Net Income/Put the "free" back in Free Enterprise Bill: 32.5 billion
-Corporate Income Tax/Tax-Corporate Net Income/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: -66.1 million (-0.0661 billion)
-Corporate Tax Rate: 8.6% (part of Free Enterprise Bill above - remember other provisions).
-Personal Income Tax Rate: 0% (none)
-Total: $32.4339 billion ($32,433,900,000)

Social Security Taxes:  
-Base: $0

Ad-valorem Taxes:
-Base: $0
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Alcoholic Beverage Sales/Southeast Alcohol Initiative, Section 8: $1.3127 billion ($1.00/proof liter or $0.385/gallon for beer, $0.909/gallon for wine, $3.31/gallon for spirits)
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Tobacco Products Sales/Southeast Tobacco Initiative, Section 6:  $0.04/cigarette ($6,034,000,000/year), $0.08/cigar ($80,000,000/year), $2.00/kg tobacco ($24,000,000/year)
-Excise Taxes/Tax-Marijuana Products Sales: $3.00/ounce ($48,000,000/year)
-Sales Taxes/Tax-Public Utilities Sale/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: 80% of standard electricity excise tax: $0
-Sales Taxes/Tax-Public Utilities Sale/Southeast Biomass Initiative, Section 3: 80% of standard electricity excise tax: $0
-Property Taxes/Tax-Property/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4
-Transportation/Tax-Motor Fuel Sales/Transportation Commission Initiative, Chapter 3, Section 22: $0.08/liter
-Transportation/Tax-Motor Vehicle License/Fair Consequences Initiative, Section 3
-License/Tax-Other License/Off-Shore Religious Organizations Initiative, Section 2
-Total: ?

Fees and Charges:
-Base: $0
-Other/Charges-All Other/Pentagram Creation Act: $5,700,000/year
-Other/Charges-All Other/Safe Roads Initiative, Section 6: $44,400,000/year
-Total: $50,100,000 ($0.0501 billion)

Business and Other Revenue:
-Base: $0
-Other/Miscellaneous-Net Lottery Revenue/Southeast Lottery Regulations, Section 6 (Amended by Expanding Choice Initiative)
-Total: ?

Total Direct Revenue:
-base: $0

Gross Public Debt:
-Base: $0

State Spending

Pensions
-Base: $3.81 billion

Health care:
-Base: $121.9 billion

Education:
-Base: $0 billion (pre-Educational Hotfix Act)
-Base: $48.9 billion (post-Educational Hotfix Act - original figure was $73.4 billion)
-Total: $48.9 billion

Defense:
-Base: $0.6 billion

Welfare:
-Base: $40.4 billion

Protection:
-Base: $21.5 billion

Transportation:
-Base: $28.2 billion

General government:
-Base: $7.4 billion

Other spending:
-Base: $18.7 billion

Interest:
-Base: $7.4 billion

Balance:
-Base: -$4.4 billion

Σ
-Base: $352.1 billion

State Revenue

Income Taxes:
-Base: $35.6 billion
-Corporate Tax Rate: ?
-Personal Income Tax Rate: ?
-Total: ?

Social Security Taxes:  
-Base: $15.1 billion

Ad-valorem Taxes:
-Base: $252.3 billion

Fees and Charges:
-Base: $107 billion

Business and Other Revenue:
-Base: $132.5 billion

Total Direct Revenue:
-base: $544.5 billion

Gross Public Debt:
-Base: $598.7 billion

[Yelnoc]

     The fees & charges total is actually $0.0501 billion.

That's what I meant.  I'm glad you're here to spot these mistakes.

[Yelnoc]

     According to this report, more than 5 billion cigars were consumed nationwide in 2006. If we assume ~1 billion for the IDS, at $0.08/cigar, that gives us cigar tax revenue of roughly $80,000,000/year.

      No precise numbers are given for later years, though according to the article a bill passed by Congress IRL in 2009 vastly increased the national cigar tax, which has dealt a severe blow to the cigar industry. No such bill was passed in Atlasia, so the most recent figures would actually not be that accurate for our purposes.

Good, good.  Assuming that "tobacco" refers to smokeless tobacco, this report should be of use.  The data is old (1997) but should be ok for our purposes.  It states more than 121 million pounds of smokeless tobacco was consumed in 1997.  Let's round up and assume the IDS consumes 25 million pounds or  11,363,636.4 kg.  For simplicitie's sake (and to compensate for the old data), let's make that 12 million kg.  So 12,000,000 at $2 is $24,000,000/year.

Now, onto Marijuana revenues.

[Yelnoc]

I don't know how we are going to find revenue figures for Mary Jane.  There are no real-life US examples we can base it off of.  Did the initiative in question simply decriminalize it or did it make all aspects of Cannabis (possession, sale, transportation, and cultivation) legal?

EDIT:
That's reasonable, added.

[Yelnoc]

Now on to the Nuclear Initiative Part II.  I think you might have posted the standard electricity excise tax in the beginning of the thread; I will have to go look.

-Sales Taxes/Tax-Public Utilities Sale/Southeast Nuclear Energy Initiative, Chapter 4: 80% of standard electricity excise tax

EDIT:
Looks like we don't save a standard electricity excise tax
 
Should we pass something in the legislature to retcon this?