New Connecticut Bill would Add a 50% Tax to Ammunition

New Connecticut Bill would Add a 50% Tax to Ammunition
New Connecticut Bill would Add a 50% Tax to Ammunition

Hartford, CT-( Connecticut state representative Jillian Gilchrest is proposing a 50% “sin tax” on ammunition.

House Bill (HB) 5700 has been introduced to the Connecticut State House of Representatives. State Senator Will Haskell has introduced a companion bill in the Connecticut State Senate.

In a Twitter post, Gilchrest said she is getting push back on the bill about the need to protect one's home. She asked, “how much ammunition does someone really need to do that?”

What responsible gun owners would tell the Freshmen Democrat is that it takes a lot. It isn't just about the rounds that someone defends their homes has in their gun. It takes a lot of practice with a firearm to use it correctly in a defensive situation. Gun owners would argue by restricting ammunition that you make a dangerous situation even more dangerous.

In the video, Gilchrest says she views guns as a health issue. She states that she thinks that this tax would cut down on gun owners just as taxes on cigarettes cut down on smokers.

This bill will run into some serious Constitutional issues. These taxes are more akin to Poll Taxes than taxes on cigarettes. Voting is a right. Smoking is not.

The Supreme Court of The United States has ruled multiple times that a tax cannot specifically target a right with a tax. A sales tax is okay since it is on all items, but courts could see a tax that only applies to ammunition as unconstitutional.

In Murdock v. Pennsylvania SCOTUS ruled that the state could not put a license tax on a solicitor. A Jehovah's Witness filed the case. He was asking contributions in exchange for books and pamphlets. The state argued that he was selling these items.

SCOTUS ruled that the Jehovah's Witness was exercising his freedom of religion. The court ruled that the state could not specifically target his right with a tax.

Cox v. New Hampshire is another case where SCOTUS ruled that the state cannot use a tax to target a specific right. Gun advocates will surely sue because a tax on ammunition specifically targets a right.

The Connecticut Democrats will most likely cite the tax paid to the government for items that fall under the National Firearms Act of 1934. SCOTUS is currently considering taking up Kettler vs. The United States of America. Jeremy Kettler is petitioning the court claiming that the NFA tax is a targeted tax against his right to bear arms.

Another Constitutional hurdle the proposed law could be the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

In Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections SCOTUS eliminated the poll tax because of how it adversely black and poor white voter compare to their wealthy counterparts. This new tax will hit the poor harder than the rich.

Willes K. Lee, President of the National Federation of Republican Assemblies and NRA Board Member, agrees with this assessment of the proposed law.

“Gilcrest & Haskill are so naive and new to political office that they don't know our public sees through their elitist hypocrisy,” said Lee. “They view firearms ownership and the right to defend oneself to be a privilege for only the rich who can afford yet another regressive tax.”

“Their bills target the most vulnerable, those law-abiding citizens who have the right to defend themselves and their families, who can least afford their privileged tax hike. They know that criminals steal their ammo, so their tax doesn't stop crime or terrorism. These bills are racist in nature and their motives for introducing these companion bills should be challenged.”

The House referred HB 5700 to Joint Committee on Finance, Revenue and Bonding.

About John CrumpJohn Crump

John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. He is the former CEO of Veritas Firearms, LLC and is the co-host of The Patriot News Podcast which can be found at John has written extensively on the patriot movement including 3%'ers, Oath Keepers, and Militias. In addition to the Patriot movement, John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and is currently working on a book on leftist deplatforming methods and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, on Facebook at realjohncrump, or at

  • 33 thoughts on “New Connecticut Bill would Add a 50% Tax to Ammunition

    1. Tell Gilchrest it’ll require a million rounds annually per household to protect one’s home.

      In a Twitter post, Gilchrest said she is getting push back on the bill about the need to protect one’s home. She asked, “how much ammunition does someone really need to do that?”

    2. If they cannot tax a right….well…..just eliminate that right! We’re talking Connecticut here. Glad I left As for traveling to neighboring states, they’re just as bad; and travel a little farther and Ct has revenuers who report your license plate for a bounty NH liquor anyone? Just let them go broke.

    3. No matter what the goobermint says, if it is illegal to tax the first amendment, ie. papers and such, it is unconstitutional to tax martial supplies. This includes any type of excise, sales, at permission tax, etc. To tax is to regulate and control, the 2af strictly forbids this. But please master, may I have more NRA supported punishment for exercising my God given rights. Same goes for registration.

      Tuck you fax!

    4. These PAID SERVANTS in “congress” need to rethink what bills they are putting into the pots of their states. They TOOK AN OATH of OFFICE which states that they will SUPPORT and DEFEND the Constitution against all enemies, both Foreign AND DOMESTIC. When these SERVANTS try to pass a law that is AGAINST the Constitution, they should be called onto the “red carpet” for SUBVERSION of the Constitution. SUBVERSION IS a PUNISHABLE OFFENCE when committed against America. These government PAID SERVANTS should be RECALLED, ARRESTED, CHARGED and PROSECUTED. Or they should be BANISHED for trying to commit OVER-REACH of their authority.
      Laws that are not agree with the Constitutional guidelines.

    5. So what is to stop Ct. citizens from going to another state and buy their ammo. I didn’t see any limits you were allowed to have. Ignorance abounds in all government positions.

      1. BIG stores that stock more cigarettes and tobacco products in Missouri just inside our borders ALL AROUND the state are a testament to that fact, due to our tobacco tax being so much lower. Hmmm, . . . . . Maybe I’ll open a few ammo stores just outside of Connecticut . . . .

    6. This is one of the next idiotic dreams to fight the wrong problem, again !! They will never stop shooters or criminals with any of these bills ! The Government is becoming more stupid each day it opens it’s piehol ?!!

      1. She is just another brainwashed product of our Marxist infiltrated colleges. It’s not the fault of the “government” per se. The gov is like a car that has different drivers from time to time. Sometimes you get a driver that refuses to obey the rules of the road (The US Constitution) and it can end up very badly for the passengers, pedestrians, and even the driver it self. There should be a rule that at the first sign of deviance from the rules, the driver would be extracted from that vehicle, and replaced. And that bad driver should be subjected to inquiry to discern its motives, and given remedial education, or punishment if it is found that it (the driver) was acting treasonously.

    7. First, they can order their ammo online and circumvent sales tax entirely (unless CT already made that illegal).
      Second, if that comes to pass, maybe the NRA can set up a “charity” site to provide free ammo to people in totalitarian states?
      Third, CT is really small. The entire population is an hour or less from another state. Simply buy elsewhere then drive home and pay CT NO sales tax.
      Lastly, maybe they can just buy cheaper from “reloaders,” in, and out of state. Sure, that may be illegal, but the creation of black market sales is built upon gov’t pressure making them illegal.

      CT is also going to start charging tax on All food and medication. So when the Socialist state is down to taxing the sick and poor, it’s only so long before it’s bankrupt.

    8. What does Democrat and Sin Tax have in common. These idiots have a one track mind. I wonder what she intends to do with this revenue? Provide health insurance for all the illegal immigrants in the country. Just like the idiots wanting to tell you you can only buy 20 rounds of ammo a month, or quarter . When will they tell you you can only buy a gallon of milk a month. We can ban the sale of cigarettes but we can legalize marijuana and opoids. Well consider this, 20 a month is 240 a year times 10 years is 2400. Patience! So much for practice.

    9. IMOA history is repeating itself in that these ill informed anti-gunners are attempting to ban weapons and limit ammunition that will be bought by law abiding citizens. They’re also attempting to tax ammunition to the point that law abiding citizens can’t afford ammo due to high taxes. That same knee-jerk thought process brought about the American Revolution thinking Americans would stand being heavily taxed and being disarmed.

      1. 30,000 people leaving CT per year, like I did. The people leaving are either from businesses closed, like GE, Travelers, Aetna, etc., or people sick of the state taking more. So those 30,000 aren’t voting any more, just the takers, or stupid liberals who complain about everything, but then still vote stupid.

        CT is adding tolls ($1,200 per year per person estimate), taxation on previously exempt food, medication, and threatening to tax your 401K if you leave the state. The liberals cry, “you made your money here, it’s not fair you’re not going to spend it here.” Seriously, look it up.

        CT has a sales tax, a “temporary” income tax that only goes up, high real estate taxes, sewer tax, cars , boats, social security, a state corporate tax, high gas, and cigarette taxes etc.,

        Cars are taxed like homes, every year, no matter how old the car may be and may be as high as 70 mils. So a new car assessed at $50,000 would cost you $3,500 for the year.

        It never ends there.

    10. CT, being surrounded by socialist MA, NY and RI, has ensured that it’s citizens will be well and truly screwed by this onerous taxation. People need to stop being Sheep. There’s not enough Sheepdogs out there to protect them all from the wolves in government. Lost causes?

      1. @Gunner, Well, until the S. Ct decides that this tax is on interstate commerce and that is usurping Congress’s authority, people can spent their tourism dollars where they can buy ammunition and bring a trunk full of souvenirs back home with them. Then have a barbecue for one’s friends, who talk him out of a few bricks of souvenirs. Ergo the vacation is paid for.
        You have heard of “Eco-tourism”? This would be “Ammo-tourism”.

    11. To you shooters, if you are traveling near Lexington, KY stop and visit Buds Gun Shop. Good deals and cash speaks. Eastern TN? Stop at Wideners in Knoxville. Both states still respect the SA. Despite Nashville and Louisville.

    12. This is as stupid as the Oregon bill which would limit ammo purchases to 20 rounds a month. I’m glad I live elsewhere, and reload. I’m thinking it won’t be long before they start limiting powder, primers, lead, and brass purchases.

    13. I wonder if this effects “components” or if it’ll just make reloading even more cost effective. Thank God I live in a free state far away from the swap dipshits and demon-rats.

    14. Anti Gunners want to disarm the honest and law abiding, they don’t care about criminals or anything else. I do not see this dumb bill to have any effect on crime. Think it’s time for everyone to stand up and be counted, if nessesary Fight.

    15. in the real worlds of engineering, manufacturing, even medicine – controlled trials demonstrate whether something works or not. try your useless commie bull-s**t on CT dhimmi-rats first for 5 years, then let us all know what happened – under oath of course.

    16. Perhaps Representative Jillian Gilchrest would consider a 50% tax on automobile purchases. Seeing how many people are killed or injured in auto accidents, by applying her logic, wouldn’t she also view automobiles as a health issue?

    Leave a Comment 33 Comments