E-cigarettes threaten tax revenue (finally someone said it)

[ScottP]

tobacco taxes ... have scientific basis (social costs of medical problems). ecig taxes do not.

While that is probably how they started out, the "tax and spend" crews in the government are now dependent on that money to fund various programs. If people quit smoking and that tax pool dries up, they WILL raise taxes somewhere else. They will not say "oh well it was fun while it lasted but I am glad people quit smoking" and do without the money.

 

[vjc0628]

Because the freedom to choose to do unhealthy things is better than the lack of that freedom. However the social costs need to be accounted for.

what social needs and how does all this excessive tax pay for it exactly ?
please provide links

 

[dr g]

While that is probably how they started out, the "tax and spend" crews in the government are now dependent on that money to fund various programs. If people quit smoking and that tax pool dries up, they WILL raise taxes somewhere else. They will not say "oh well it was fun while it lasted but I am glad people quit smoking" and do without the money.

That would depend on how the politics play out. Ecigs are a game-changer. The science is undeniable.

 

[ScottP]

?? that's the excuse for excessive taxing not being about money???

when did taxing eradicate smoking I must have missed that one

You asked why they didn't make "ciggs" illegal, I am saying why they didn't make it illegal. Banning stuff DOES NOT WORK!! The taxes were originally to try and push people away from it rather than try to make it illegal. For many people this HAS worked. I know more people that quit smoking for financial reasons than for health reasons. Unfortunately, now the government is addicted to the cash flow like a bunch of crackheads.

 

[JulesXsmokr]

That would depend on how the politics play out. Ecigs are a game-changer. The science is undeniable.

They are conveniently changing the science..or trying to.

 

[Spazmelda]

Because the freedom to choose to do unhealthy things is better than the lack of that freedom. However the social costs need to be accounted for.

This would be much more applicable if they were actually using those taxes to remedy the problem. Not much of the tobacco tax (or tobacco settlement) goes toward tobacco programs or research. I don't know the numbers right off hand, but it's a tiny percentage,

 

[Vaslovik]

You asked why they didn't make "ciggs" illegal, I am saying why they didn't make it illegal. Banning stuff DOES NOT WORK!! The taxes were originally to try and push people away from it rather than try to make it illegal. For many people this HAS worked. I know more people that quit smoking for financial reasons than for health reasons. Now they are addicted to the cash flow like a bunch of crackheads.

You give THEM more credit than I do. I don't believe for a minute that it was ever about anyone's health, but was in fact ALWAYS about the money.

 

[WattWick]

"Taxation, gentlemen, is very much like dairy farming. The task is to extract the maximum amount of milk with the minimum of moo. And I am afraid to say that these days all I get is moo."
-- (Terry Pratchett, Jingo)

Seems tobacco is just as addictive for governments as they are for the populace.

 

[dr g]

This would be much more applicable if they were actually using those taxes to remedy the problem. Not much of the tobacco tax (or tobacco settlement) goes toward tobacco programs or research. I don't know the numbers right off hand, but it's a tiny percentage,

It's applicable, I mean it's better to have the ability to do what you like and be taxed than for it to be made illegal. The direction of tax income is always in flux, but general funds go toward social medical spending, so it's fine with me.

I don't think taxes and the tobacco settlement should be conflated.

To a certain degree the point of tobacco taxes is all moot because ecigs solve the issue.

 

[ScottP]

You give THEM more credit than I do. I don't believe for a minute that it was ever about anyone's health, but was in fact ALWAYS about the money.

Maybe. I just think they learned from Prohibition and decided if they can't make it illegal, then slowly tax it into oblivion was the next best thing.

If you want my best guess, if they lose enough revenue from tobacco taxes and cannot get eCigs taxed the way they want, I would expect alcohol taxes to be what goes up. I mean let's face facts. Alcohol kills more innocents every year than tobacco ever could....usually due to alcohol related car accidents. It already has a separate "sin tax" associated with it making it very easy to raise.

 

[ScottP]

To a certain degree the point of tobacco taxes is all moot because ecigs solve the issue.

While this is true, I HIGHLY doubt that governments will see it that way.

 

[dr g]

While this is true, I HIGHLY doubt that governments will see it that way.

It may not really be their choice. When science is clear and overwhelming it becomes politically untenable to pretend it's not.

It will be interesting to see how this all plays out. Ecigs really are a game-changer.

 

[Vaslovik]

Maybe. I just think they learned from Prohibition and decided if they can't make it illegal, then slowly tax it into oblivion was the next best thing.

If you want my best guess, if they lose enough revenue from tobacco taxes and cannot get eCigs taxed the way they want, I would expect alcohol taxes to be what goes up. I mean let's face facts. Alcohol kills more innocents every year than tobacco ever could....usually due to alcohol related car accidents. It already has a separate "sin tax" associated with it making it very easy to raise.

Well your point is well taken, but then alcohol seems to have neatly avoided oblivion since Prohibition ended (takes a sip of Jim Beam) and lately we see a certain herb being decriminalized, sold publicly, and taxed. I wonder if the same might happen with other drugs now illegal. I hope not, but there would seem to be certain social problems we just cannot arrest our way out of.

Vaping would seem to be the answer to the evil of cigarettes, it was for me personally, but then someone in government admits what we all knew from the git, that they are losing tax money as people quit smoking, so they have to do something about it. There can be no clearer statement that it's really all about the money in the first place in my book.

 

[Vaslovik]

It will be interesting to see how this all plays out. Ecigs really are a game-changer.

Unless those with enough money and power don't want the game changed.

Yeah, I'm cynical, but I came by it honestly....

 

[ScottP]

(takes a sip of Jim Beam)

Ahhhh my drink of choice as well.

Well your point is well taken, but then alcohol seems to have neatly avoided oblivion since Prohibition ended and lately we see a certain herb being decriminalized, sold publicly, and taxed. I wonder if the same might happen with other drugs now illegal. I hope not, but there would seem to be certain social problems we just cannot arrest our way out of.

You know, I never thought about it before but that could actually be a big part of WHY they are looking to legalize that other herb. They could be doing that specifically to help compensate for the taxes. Trade one smoking tax for the other in a sense.

 

[soba1]

I will now say it openly, if they are so worried about tax revenue.
There are other items and actions they could tax, but don't have the nads to do so in this
country.

 

[Vaslovik]

Ahhhh my drink of choice as well.



You know, I never thought about it before but that could actually be a big part of WHY they are looking to legalize that other herb. They could be doing that specifically to help compensate for the taxes. Trade one smoking tax for the other in a sense.

Well I hadn't thought about it that way either, but gosh, you may well be right about that! It sure might be why the Federal government has recently announced it will back off about it. Wow, who knew? Vaping was the way to get that stuff legalized nationally! The mind boggles....

Maybe I should become a farmer...

 

[Spazmelda]

It's applicable, I mean it's better to have the ability to do what you like and be taxed than for it to be made illegal. The direction of tax income is always in flux, but general funds go toward social medical spending, so it's fine with me.

I don't think taxes and the tobacco settlement should be conflated.

To a certain degree the point of tobacco taxes is all moot because ecigs solve the issue.

I'm not conflating taxes with the settlements, which is why I put it in parentheses.

I'm actually not okay with the government's dependence on tobacco taxes, for a few reasons. First of all, it's a regressive tax. I'm not thrilled with making up budget shortages largely on the backs of poorer Americans. They've got enough to deal with. More importantly, in my mind, it is a huge gigantic conflict of interest. On the one hand, they want all smokers to quit for their health and for the health of our society, on the other hand they are becoming more and more dependant on those taxes. It's an untenable position, IMO.

 

[dr g]

You know, I never thought about it before but that could actually be a big part of WHY they are looking to legalize that other herb. They could be doing that specifically to help compensate for the taxes. Trade one smoking tax for the other in a sense.

Taxation is a big part of it, but not really directly because of the decline of tobacco tax revenue. The decline of tax revenue in general during the recession had a lot of states scrambling for other sources.

I'm actually not okay with the government's dependence on tobacco taxes, for a few reasons. First of all, it's a regressive tax. I'm not thrilled with making up budget shortages largely on the backs of poorer Americans. They've got enough to deal with. More importantly, in my mind, it is a huge gigantic conflict of interest. On the one hand, they want all smokers to quit for their health and for the health of our society, on the other hand they are becoming more and more dependant on those taxes. It's an untenable position, IMO.

Note I said nothing about dependence on tobacco taxes, only direction. I'm not sure I agree with "dependence," that appears to be a generalized anti-tax viewpoint. You could say a government is "dependent" on any tax equally. Especially when it's a tax that is not special-use, that goes directly to the general fund, it is a very vague argument to make.

 

[Vaslovik]

Note I said nothing about dependence on tobacco taxes, only direction. I'm not sure I agree with "dependence," that appears to be a generalized anti-tax viewpoint. You could say a government is "dependent" on any tax equally. Especially when it's a tax that is not special-use, that goes directly to the general fund, it is a very vague argument to make.

The power to tax is the power to destroy. Power corrupts. Do we see any corruption in our government?