What States Have Changed or Are Looking at Changes in Fireworks Laws

Over the last few months many states have either proposed, or passed, changes to their fireworks laws, perhaps more towards the goal of generating new sources of tax income for starved budgets rather than due recognition of the full value of consumer fireworks. This article provides only an overview of various state efforts, to date, while also highlighting the changes that have been proposed or passed. This article, however, does not give a comprehensive evaluation into any particular legislation nor does it purport to predict the outcome of any pending legislation.

In a surprising move, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts appears to be moving forward on consideration of its own bill legitimizing sales of certain consumer fireworks by vendors located within the state. In January, State Representative Rich Bastien, a freshman representative from the Second Worcester District, proposed a bill to make certain consumer fireworks legal in the Massachusetts. The representative ran on a platform of restoring Massachusetts by creating new jobs; so, it comes as no surprise that he likely views his proposed legislation as a jobs bill rather than a fireworks bill. This is consistent with the additional fact that Representative Bastien’s district borders on New Hampshire and, reportedly, he wants to deter residents from crossing the state border and purchasing fireworks in New Hampshire, to the extent that it deprives Massachusetts businessmen from realizing these sales revenues themselves while also depriving the Commonwealth from obtaining tax revenues being lost to New Hampshire. Although subject to change, the current version of the bill provides each locality with option to legalize certain consumer fireworks within their jurisdiction. In addition, under the initial proposal, Massachusetts would require the purchaser of the fireworks, for a small fee payable to the appropriate local entity, to obtain a permit. It is understood that the bill is currently in the drafting phase before the House Counsel and should be released in the near future.

In Michigan, where only sparklers, fountains snakes and cone devices are presently legal, efforts are underway to expand the regulations to cover all consumer fireworks. Like Massachusetts, Michigan residents are currently constrained to get their fireworks by going to another, preferably a neighboring, state. The proponents of this piece of legislation like to point out that the sale of consumer fireworks in neighboring deprives Michigan of precious tax revenues while the State faces a $1.8 billion dollars deficit; these tax revenues can be put to good use in Michigan. State Representative Harold Haugh, who is now leading the push to make more consumer fireworks legal, estimates that this measure would result in approximately 200 new stores open year-round, thereby creating new jobs in addition to the tax revenues from the sales.

In Maine, a bill was introduced to permit sales of most 1.4G fireworks. Initial reports from Maine may have incorrectly stated that the governor barred the Fire Marshal from testifying at the public hearing. While it is understood that the Fire Marshall did, in fact, provide testimony at the work session, and has been active in furthering the legislation, his position reflects the governor’s – neither for nor against the legislation. Like other states, the proponents in Maine emphasize the creation of jobs and the consequent sales and tax revenues associated with the legalization of fireworks. While the sponsors and proponents in all these states recognize that one piece of legislation for consumer fireworks is not going to solve all their fiscal woes, they appreciate that every sales and tax dollar helps. In late February, Maine’s Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee scheduled a work session to examine the present proposal. As a result of this meeting, the committee took a “straw-poll” to determine the extent of public support, which reportedly was overwhelming. As a result the bill has been referred to a subcommittee consisting of members of the legislature, the State Fire Marshal’s Office, the Attorney General’s Office, a representative of industry, and an industry lobbyist. It appears that substantial strides are being made in Maine and that the residents of Maine may have a bill in the near future.

In addition to the major proposals listed above, there have been some more minor changes in other state regulations. In Utah, a recent bill was passed (70 for – 0 against) allowing the sale of cake fireworks that shoot sparks more than 15-feet; the bill also changes the time periods during which residents may purchase and use fireworks. Under the new law, fireworks may legally be sold and used from June 26 through July 26. Finally, in South Dakota, residents are now allowed to use all fireworks conforming to CPSC regulations between June 27 to July 5, and December 28 to January 1. On March 9, 2011, South Dakota’s Governor, Dennis Daugaard, signed into law a bill allowing the sale and use of fireworks during these time periods, opening up sales during the Christmas and New Year’s holidays, something former Governor Mike Rounds ruled against as an inappropriate intrusion of the solemnity of Christmas Eve and Christmas Day.

In conclusion, it is encouraging to know that our elected officials, throughout the United States, are willing to support the fireworks industry and we should, in turn, throw our support behind them.