Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 36-770 (2026)

Tobacco products tax fund

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

36-770. Tobacco products tax fund

(Caution: 1998 Prop. 105 applies)

A. The tobacco products tax fund is established consisting of revenues deposited in the fund pursuant to section 42-3251.01 and interest earned on those monies. The Arizona health care cost containment system administration shall administer the fund.

B. Forty-two cents of each dollar in the fund shall be deposited in the proposition 204 protection account established by section 36-778.

C. Five cents of each dollar in the fund shall be deposited in the health research fund established by section 36-275.

D. Twenty-seven cents of each dollar in the fund shall be deposited in the medically needy account established by section 36-774.

E. Twenty cents of each dollar in the fund shall be deposited in the emergency health services account established by section 36-776.

F. Four cents of each dollar in the fund shall be deposited in the health care adjustment account established by section 36-777.

G. Two cents of each dollar in the fund shall be deposited in the health education account established by section 36-772.

H. Except as provided in section 36-776, monies in the fund:

1. Are continuously appropriated.

2. Do not revert to the state general fund.

3. Are exempt from the provisions of section 35-190 relating to lapsing of appropriations.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1971–1983 · leading case: Bischofshausen v. Pinal-Gila Counties Air Quality Control Dist., 673 P.2d 307 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1983).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Bischofshausen v. Pinal-Gila Counties Air Quality Control Dist., 673 P.2d 307 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 2× “Their claim is that Control District had a statutory duty under A.R.S. § 36-770 et seq., to control and regulate the activities of other defendants, the asbestos mine and mill operators, and the failure of Control District to properly perform its duties led to the creation of…”

State v. Arizona Mines Supply Co., 484 P.2d 619 (Ariz. 1971). “See footnote to § 36-770, A.R. S. (II) “The Information does not Charge the Defendant With the Commission of an Offense.”

Am. Smelting & Refining Co. v. Arizona Air Pollution Control Hearing Bd., 535 P.2d 1070 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1975). · cites it 2× “For this proposition the Director cites little relevant authority, but contends that the power to so act is inherent in the Board by virtue of statutes relating to air pollution control found at A.R.S. §§ 36-770 et seq. and 36-1700 et seq.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.