GA Code § 3-4-60 (2021)
2021 Georgia Code|Title 3 - Alcoholic Beverages|Chapter 4 - Distilled Spirits|Article 4 - Excise Taxation|Part 1 - State|§ 3-4-60. Levy and Amount of Tax

 The following state taxes are levied and imposed:    There shall be imposed upon the first sale, use, or final delivery within this state of all distilled spirits an excise tax in the amount of 50› per liter and, upon the first sale, use, or final delivery within this state of all alcohol, an excise tax in the amount of 70› per liter, and a proportionate tax at the same rate on all fractional parts of a liter;   There shall be imposed upon the importation for use, consumption, or final delivery into this state of all distilled spirits an import tax in the amount of 50› per liter and, upon the importation for use, consumption, or final delivery into this state of all alcohol, an import tax in the amount of 70› per liter, and a proportionate tax at the same rate on all fractional parts of a liter; and   All alcohol spirits manufactured within this state for sale within this state shall be made from Georgia grown products.    (Ga. L. 1937-38, Ex. Sess., p. 103, §§ 11, 12; Ga. L. 1964, p. 62, § 3; Ga. L. 1972, p. 207, § 6; Ga. L. 1974, p. 615, § 1; Ga. L. 1976, p. 692, § 1; Ga. L. 1977, p. 1154, § 2; Ga. L. 1978, p. 1645, § 1; Code 1933, § 5A-2701, enacted by Ga. L. 1980, p. 1573, § 1; Ga. L. 1981, p. 1269, § 35; Ga. L. 1985, p. 662, § 1; Ga. L. 1985, p. 665, § 2.)   Editor's notes.   - Ga. L. 1985, p. 662, § 1, also amended this Code section. However, that amendment has been treated as superseded by Ga. L. 1985, p. 665, § 2.   Ga. L. 1985, p. 665, § 1, not codified by the General Assembly, contained legislative findings that the cost of regulating and administering the manufacture, distribution, and sale of alcohol, distilled spirits, table wines, and dessert wines consumed in Georgia is greater for imported alcohol, spirits, and wines than it is for alcohol, spirits, and wines produced within Georgia and that it is in the best interests of the citizens of Georgia that the increased costs be provided for by taxation.   Ga. L. 1985, p. 665, § 4, not codified by the General Assembly, provided that the provisions of the Act shall not be severable and that in the event that any section or portion of any section of the Act is declared or adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such declaration or adjudication shall render the entire Act invalid, void, and of no effect and shall specifically revive the provisions affected by the Act as such provisions stood before the enactment of the Act, as amended by laws other than this Act.   Law reviews.   - For annual survey of state and local taxation, see 40 Mercer L. Rev. 357 (1988).   JUDICIAL DECISIONS   Constitutionality.    - Georgia statutes providing for an import tax on all distilled spirits and table wines imported for use, consumption, or final delivery into the state do not violate the equal protection and commerce clauses of the federal constitution. Heublein, Inc. v. State, 256 Ga. 578, 351 S.E.2d 190, appeal dismissed, 483 U.S. 1013, 107 S. Ct. 3253, 97 L. Ed. 2d 753 (1987).    For case discussing constitutionality of former law, see Scott v. State, 187 Ga. 702, 2 S.E.2d 65 (1939), overruled on other grounds, Blackston v. State Dep't of Natural Resources, 255 Ga. 15, 334 S.E.2d 679 (1985).    The pre-1985 version of this Code section violated the commerce clause of the federal constitution because it amounted to an act of "simple economic protectionism." The rule announced in Bacchus Imports, Ltd. v. Dias, 468 U.S. 263, 104 S. Ct. 3049, 82 L. Ed. 2d 200 (1984), which held a similar Hawaii statute unconstitutional, applies retroactively to claims arising on facts antedating that decision. James B. Beam Distilling Co. v. Georgia, 501 U.S. 529, 111 S. Ct. 2439, 115 L. Ed. 2d 481 (1991).   Standing to bring action for refund.    - Where, under the pre-1985 version of O.C.G.A. § 3-4-60, the manufacturer remitted the tax payment to the revenue commissioner and subsequently, in an itemized billing statement, required the wholesaler to remit payment for "state stamps" or "state tax," it was the wholesaler which was the taxpayer for purposes of O.C.G.A. § 48-2-35 and, due to its lack of standing, the manufacturer was procedurally barred from pursuing an action for refund. James B. Beam Distilling Co. v. State, 263 Ga. 609, 437 S.E.2d 782 (1993), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1056, 115 S. Ct. 662, 130 L. Ed. 2d 597 (1994).   Predeprivation remedies for disputed taxes.    - Where manufacturer remitted tax payments under the pre-1985 version of O.C.G.A. § 3-4-60, even if it was not procedurally barred from seeking a refund under O.C.G.A. § 48-2-35, its failure to avail itself of the predeprivation remedies available to it prior to payment of the disputed taxes results in denial of recovery of taxes so paid. James B. Beam Distilling Co. v. State, 263 Ga. 609, 437 S.E.2d 782 (1993), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1056, 115 S. Ct. 662, 130 L. Ed. 2d 597 (1994).   RESEARCH REFERENCES   C.J.S.   - 48 C.J.S., Intoxicating Liquors, § 409 et seq.   ALR.    - Specific tax imposed on goods in stock of dealer, as excise, or property tax, 173 A.L.R. 1316.   Interplay between Twenty-First Amendment and Commerce Clause concerning state regulation of intoxicating liquors, 116 A.L.R.5th 149.   What constitutes plain, speedy, and efficient state remedy under Tax Injunction Act (28 USCS § 1341), prohibiting federal district courts from interfering with assessment, levy, or collection of state business taxes, 31 A.L.R. Fed. 2d 237.