E-Cigarettes Could Be Taxed By States Missing Out on Tobacco Revenue

Status
Not open for further replies.

CharTech

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 19, 2009
489
936
Carolinas
"At Green Gourmet, a New York City deli, a pack of Altria Group Inc.’s Marlboro cigarettes costs $14.25." :ohmy: "That also covers a federal tobacco tax of $1.01 and state and local levies of about $4.35" That's why they'd like to ban vaping. Much easier to ban it then to try and tax it. Demonize and then ban!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lessifer

Steamix

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Sep 21, 2013
1,586
3,212
Vapistan
Combustible cigarettes. Burn-not-vape devices. Vaporless smokes. Proven to be taxable.

Yup. Them.

Been reading many posts here. The core of the vapers reverting to these products?
BP and BT better not hold their breath - could be a loooong wait :D

It's all about bidness, bidness, Profits.

What's the FDA gonna do against charity ? What's the FDA gonna do against no longer used - older - mods n atties getting collected, sanitized and given away for free ? You see, smoking or even using NRT for any length of time - there's a growing percentage of folks who are living on a tight budget. Made even tighter by having to spend a good portion of their available funds to feed that monkey on their backs.

There must be tons of older gear gathering dust in drawers all over the country. Turn it into a weapon to erode their customer base...
 

CharTech

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 19, 2009
489
936
Carolinas
It's kinda 1/2 n' 1/2.

One Half is the Money. And the Other Half are Elected/Appointed Officials wanting to score Points with an Un/Misinformed Public.

It's my feeling they feed the, if it's on TV or in the news it must be true people the bogus studies and the we must save the kids BS and then the officials step in as the hero to save the day when it was always about recouping the lost tax revenue from the beginning.
 

zoiDman

My -0^10 = Nothing at All*
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 16, 2010
41,314
1
83,834
So-Cal
It's my feeling they feed the, if it's on TV or in the news it must be true people the bogus studies and the we must save the kids BS and then the officials step in as the hero to save the day when it was always about recouping the lost tax revenue from the beginning.

Yeah... It's kinda a Self-Fulfilling Circle.

Event a Problem, Demonize it via Bogus Science, Negative PR it using Public Funds, Restrict it, Collect Campaign Contributions from those who Restrictions Benefit, Tax It, Use Tax Monies for whatever you want. Move on to next "Problem".
 

CharTech

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 19, 2009
489
936
Carolinas

zoiDman

My -0^10 = Nothing at All*
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 16, 2010
41,314
1
83,834
So-Cal

Vaslovik

Account closed on request
ECF Veteran
Jul 5, 2013
3,189
4,487
The same thing happened in France, Switzerland, Belgium, and the US in the early 1900's, and then as now it was about the money, and who got the money. The French vintners had been decimated by a blight that killed off their vineyards, and so another drink became popular, and the national drink. So they cranked up a vicious smear campaign against it and got it banned in those countries for nearly a century, to get back their market share. It was all about the money then, just as it is now, and the cycle remains the same, demonize it, ban it, and get back your market share. That's what BT and BP is doing now with the FDA in their pockets.

Back in the day they had the French Wine industry, the temperance movement, and the prohibitionists in their pockets. It's the very same game. If you look to history there are remarkable parallels. The only difference today is they want to own and monopolize what they are trying to ban to that end.

Back then it was alcohol they wanted to secure the profits from, now it's nicotine. It's whatever the people want that the reptiles want control of the profits from.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CharTech

CharTech

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Apr 19, 2009
489
936
Carolinas
The same thing happened in France, Switzerland, Belgium, and the US in the early 1900's, and then as now it was about the money, and who got the money. The French vintners had been decimated by a blight that killed off their vineyards, and so another drink became popular, and the national drink. So they cranked up a vicious smear campaign against it and got it banned in those countries for nearly a century, to get back their market share. It was all about the money then, just as it is now, and the cycle remains the same, demonize it, ban it, and get back your market share. That's what BT and BP is doing now with the FDA in their pockets.

Back in the day they had the French Wine industry, the temperance movement, and the prohibitionists in their pockets. It's the very same game. If you look to history there are remarkable parallels. The only difference today is they want to own and monopolize what they are trying to ban to that end.
Same old song and dance. I am hopeful the truth will win this time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread