Just say 'no'! Container tax would 'cripple' shipping transportation in state.

• Author: Bohi, Heidi
• Position: ALASKA WASHINGTON CONNECTION

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Shipping is Alaska's lifeline. Ninety-seven percent of all goods arrive via water and almost all of these commercial ships come from ports of Seattle and Tacoma in Washington state. While freight also arrives by air, barge and truck, most of the state's economy gets loaded into cargo hulls or packed into containers before finally docking on store shelves, and the further a community is from the Seattle the more expensive the final waybill will be. Rising fuel costs mean that already astronomical shipping charges will continue to increase for all items coming into the state: in one year, the cost of shipping a 40,000 pound trailer full of goods increased by almost 15 percent.

But having shipping costs tacked onto inbound freight is about more than inconvenience and added expense. Costs of materials, consumer goods, and business-related expenses often stand in the way of opportunity and quality of life.

While in most states, development of manufacturing drives expansion and competition in shipping, in Alaska, inflexible transportation structures restrict the growth of manufacturing and other economic development plans. This is why, when Washington state Sen. Mary Margaret Haugen, D-Camano Island, introduced legislation that would slap a hefty shipping tax on all containers entering or exiting Washington ports costing Alaska consumers an additional $45 million to $60 million annually, Rep. Bill Thomas, R-Haines, and other legislators sent an Alaska-style message to the Washington Legislature.

NO WAY JOSE

"At the first meeting, I told the (stakeholder) committee that a tax of this magnitude was unacceptable and believed that Alaska would reciprocate," Thomas says from his office.

His response refers to a warning sent indirectly to the Washington Legislature, threatening to impose a similar tax on Alaska oil sent to Washington. It was not just a political ploy, Thomas' staff says, but a practical way to pass the earnings from the potential container tax back to the people of Alaska so they could pay for the increased shipping fees that would result from Washington's legislation if it passed.

"This proposed tax deeply offended Alaska because we were not even consulted and the tax would have hit us the hardest," Kaci Schroeder Hotch, legislative aide to Thomas says, adding that because Washington's economy also significantly depends on Alaska the plan only incensed statewide legislators more. Alaska is Puget Sound's fifth...