Federal Bills Would Subtantially Increase Tobacco Taxes and Allow New Taxes on Electronic Cigarettes

[armchairnomad]

Federal Bills Would Subtantially Increase Tobacco Taxes and Allow New Taxes on Electronic Cigarettes — Troutman Sanders Tobacco Team

So the fact that they are going to levy these taxes on this product makes ABSOLUTELY no sense. There are ingredients in e-cigs that have nothing to do with tobacco, and then there is nicotine. So what they are REALLY taxing is nicotine. If this is the case, are they going to levy these taxes on tomatoes, eggplant, califlower, and potatoes? because ALL of these vegetables contain nicotine. Are they also going to label pesticides that contain nicotine as a tobacco "product"?

This whole thing is f-cking ridiculous, and is definitely pissing me off. E-cigs are helping people, and they are trying to make them harder for the average person to use them.

 

[sbdivemaster]

"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a [goverment] boot stomping on a human face -- forever."
-- George Orwell

It's pissing me off too - then again, I was ...... off at the government before all of this.

 

[NatashaR]

"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a [goverment] boot stomping on a human face -- forever."
-- George Orwell

It's pissing me off too - then again, I was ...... off at the government before all of this.

Yep.. me too. Taxes are going up on EVERYTHING they can think of to tax or increase tax. As their spending increases and the money printing continues.

 

[Constance Shutts]

We need to replace them all.

 

[jkmtwo]

The FDA can not levy a tax without Congress allowing it to do so.

Call your congressman, educate them NOW!

 

[adeline]

Wow, if the goal of this is to reduce the number of smokers (see penalty on manufacturers if smoking rate doesn't decline 5% annually), why the heck are they going to tax ecigs? So counter-intuitive.

 

[Envithyx]

Increase the tax rate for snuff from $1.51 to $26.79 per pound.

Hey boss, I need more money. I'm gonna impose a new requirement that makes you pay me twelve times as much.

 

[jerseyrob]

Thats because there going to put analogs, and e cigg's in the same pot ..

 

[armchairnomad]

We need to replace them all.

This has done any good...when? The money required these days to win an election is so enourmous an amount that anyone that can win is so beholden to whatever industries funded them the most that they will not be able to govern based on the people's needs, and will only work to pay back those who put them there in the first place. Replacing them all won't do anything without a repeal of citizens united, and a complete reform of funding for elections.

 

[armchairnomad]

The FDA can not levy a tax without Congress allowing it to do so.

Call your congressman, educate them NOW!

The FDA can't levy a tax at all. They leave that to the legislative branch. But to think they aren't working together isn't a thought based on reality.

 

[armchairnomad]

Want to know why the federal government and state governments are so afraid of e-cigs? http://blog.turbotax.intuit.com/2010/06/22/how-much-is-the-government-making-off-of-tobacco/

 

[armchairnomad]

I hate when articles don't note the "published" date. No idea how old that article is. I think it's from 2012 though.

 

[jkmtwo]

The FDA can not levy a tax without Congress allowing it to do so.

Call your congressman, educate them NOW!

The FDA can't levy a tax at all. They leave that to the legislative branch. But to think they aren't working together isn't a thought based on reality.

Did you actually read what I posted?

 

[armchairnomad]

Did you actually read what I posted?

Yes...I did. I see you said "the FDA can't levy a tax without congress allowing it to do so" which implies that the FDA can levy a tax as long as congress approves.

 

[hippieben]

Thank you for bring this to my attention, I have contacted my senators.

 

[jkmtwo]

Did you actually read what I posted?

Yes...I did. I see you said "the FDA can't levy a tax without congress allowing it to do so" which implies that the FDA can levy a tax as long as congress approves.

I don't even know where to start.....YES....THAT IS TRUE.....its Congress who has the power to tax.....BUT....its the FDA that will make that recommendation.

Truth be told, Congress has the power to shut this whole thing down. The FDA can't just put forth regulations, Congress has to approve them, or at the very least look the other way.

 

[Butters78]

To be honest if I can still buy nic base from wizard labs for example I won't mind paying a few bucks more in tax if it's reasonable. I'm still scared they are going to make it illegal period.

 

[sbdivemaster]

"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws."
-- Ayn Rand

Government is not your friend, folks.

 

[Drael]

Tobacco will clearly one day become globally, a very lucrative black market, due to being taxed off the legit market.

That will result in a massive loss of government income, and major crime related issues, which will eventually force them to reconsider their position in favour of harm min.

It's too popular, and too addictive for a strong puritan mentality to have any positive effect whatsoever. It's doubtful any other new "vice" would ever allow itself to be taxed so heavily, apart from currently illicit drugs - so its govt revenue, straight down the toilet eventually with the puritan anti- approach.

As for e-cigs, it seems incredulous anyone would tax them especially at this early stage. It's impossible to ethically or logically justify.

In fact anything less than acitvely encouraging snus and e-cigs as smoking alternatives is somewhat equivilant to manslaughter or gross negligance/malpractice, because it essentially results in massive loss of life.

And what happens then, nicotine farming from that australian tree? (that is not in anyway definable as "tobacco"). Loop-hole seeking?

Legislation only works when its reasonable, when its unreasonable, people ignore it, and avoid it.

 

[armchairnomad]

That will result in a massive loss of government income, and major crime related issues, which will eventually force them to reconsider their position in favour of harm min.

I doubt it. Look at the drug war. That's been going on for 40 years, and the federal government certainly isn't about to secede that war in favor of harm minimization.

Although possibly harm minimization to their budgets if that were to happen. Of course most likely not, as then they could just satisfy all their prison industrial complex lobbyists with more prisoners to lock away.