Printable Format79-5204. Same; evidence of payment required; purchase of stamps; validity; tax payable, when. (a) No dealer may possess any marijuana, domestic marijuana plant or controlled substance upon which a tax is imposed pursuant to K.S.A. 79-5202, and amendments thereto, unless the tax has been paid as evidenced by an official stamp or other indicia.
(b) Official stamps, labels or other indicia to be affixed to all marijuana, domestic marijuana plants or controlled substances shall be purchased from the director of taxation. The purchaser shall pay 100% of face value for each stamp, label or other indicia at the time of purchase. Each such stamp, label or other indicia shall only be valid for three months after its date of issuance. The director shall issue the stamps, labels or other indicia in denominations in multiples of $10. Any person may purchase any such stamp, label or other indicia without disclosing such person's identity.
(c) When a dealer purchases, acquires, transports, or imports into this state marijuana, domestic marijuana plants or controlled substances on which a tax is imposed by K.S.A. 79-5202, and amendments thereto, and if the indicia evidencing the payment of the tax have not already been affixed, the dealer shall have them permanently affixed on the marijuana, domestic marijuana plant or controlled substance immediately after receiving the substance. Each stamp or other official indicia may be used only once.
(d) Taxes imposed upon marijuana, domestic marijuana plants or controlled substances by this act are due and payable immediately upon acquisition or possession in this state by a dealer. Interest on tax liabilities shall accrue at the rate prescribed by subsection (a) of K.S.A. 79-2968, and amendments thereto, from the date the tax was due until paid.
History: L. 1987, ch. 366, § 4; L. 1990, ch. 359, § 3; July 1.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Exclusion of evidence on grounds of remoteness that substantially impairs state's case examined. State v. Griffin, 246 Kan. 320, 787 P.2d 701 (1990).
2. Test to determine whether search warrant meets constitutional requirements discussed; specificity, technical irregularities, search by affiant examined. State v. LeFort, 248 Kan. 332, 334, 806 P.2d 986 (1991).
3. Cited in opinion holding that Kansas drug tax act does not violate due process provisions of U.S. Constitution. State v. Berberich, 248 Kan. 854, 862, 811 P.2d 1192 (1991).
4. Whether Kansas department of revenue is bound by state's plea bargain regarding drug stamp tax owed examined. Dickerson v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 253 Kan. 843, 852, 863 P.2d 364 (1993).
5. Assessments ordered pursuant to drug tax act (79-5201 et seq.) do not constitute criminal punishment for double jeopardy purposes. State v. Gulledge, 257 Kan. 915, 896 P.2d 378 (1995).
6. Taxpayer must have possession of controlled substance for sufficient time to affix stamp to incur tax liability under KDTA (79-5201 et seq.). In re Burrell, 22 Kan. App. 2d 109, 113, 117, 912 P.2d 187 (1996).
7. Amount of controlled substance in defendant's possession insufficient to sustain drug tax stamp violation. State v. Lockhart, 24 Kan. App. 2d 488, 494, 947 P.2d 461 (1997).
8. Prosecution failure to prove defendant qualified as drug dealer constituted reversible error in drug tax stamp charge. State v. Hutcherson, 25 Kan. App. 2d 501, 503, 968 P.2d 1109 (1998).
9. No grace period to purchase and affix drug tax stamp; tax is payable immediately upon possession. State v. Alvarez, 29 Kan. App. 2d 368, 28 P.3d 404 (2001).
10. Drug tax stamp; no grace period to obtain and affix. State v. Curry, 29 Kan. App. 2d 392, 28 P.3d 1019 (2001).
11. Conviction under statute valid whether or not controlled substance was in usable form. State v. Schoonover, 281 Kan. 453, 512, 133 P.3d 48 (2006).
12. Defendant had sufficient access and control over methamphetamine to immediately affix drug tax stamps. State v. Unruh, 281 Kan. 520, 536, 133 P.3d 35 (2006).
13. Drug tax stamp must be affixed immediately upon possession of the controlled substance. State v. Sykes, 35 Kan. App. 2d 517, 535, 132 P.3d 485 (2006).
14. Convictions hereunder vacated; trial court to conduct hearing to determine whether evidence is fruit of poisonous tree. State v. Poulton, 286 Kan. 1, 4, 179 P.3d 1145 (2008).
15. Cited; conviction hereunder reversed; impoundment of vehicle by law enforcement held unreasonable. State v. Branstetter, 40 Kan. App. 2d 1167, 1169, 199 P.3d 1272 (2009).
16. Defendant who fails to participate in ordered drug abuse treatment program is subject to serve underlying prison sentence. State v. Bee, 288 Kan. 733, 207 P.3d 244 (2009).