Hawaii Bill using MN laws as precedent to pass their own laws?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Hulamoon

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 6, 2012
8,636
43,358
64
Waikiki Hawaii
Can anyone tell me how the 95% taxation of e-cig components and taxation of online sales works in Minnesota - I couldn't find anything specific. Hawaii is using MN as precedent, and I want to see if they indeed are in effect and if so how effective such in-state and online tax is. Hawaii is also a purist Democrat state, and we know what that party is fussing about in Congress lately. Thanks
 
Last edited:

Bill Godshall

Executive Director<br/> Smokefree Pennsylvania
ECF Veteran
Apr 2, 2009
5,171
13,288
66
MN only taxes e-cig products sold in brick and mortar stores that contain nicotine (so mods aren't taxed), and MN has not attempted to collect taxes on any e-cig products sold on the Internet.

The definition of e-cigs (that would be subject to taxation) in proposed legislation is critically important, as its one thing to tax e-liquid (and disposables and prefilled cartridges), but its a much bigger problem if all e-cig components and accessories are also subject to a excise tax).
 

molimelight

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Nov 11, 2013
260
427
Columbia, MO
MN only taxes e-cig products sold in brick and mortar stores that contain nicotine (so mods aren't taxed), and MN has not attempted to collect taxes on any e-cig products sold on the Internet.

The definition of e-cigs (that would be subject to taxation) in proposed legislation is critically important, as its one thing to tax e-liquid (and disposables and prefilled cartridges), but its a much bigger problem if all e-cig components and accessories are also subject to a excise tax).

Bill,

Do you know if they tax based on percentage of nicotine or strength of nicotine? That's always been a "back of the mind" concern of mine, that state legislators will copy bad legislation from other states, since the state legislators I've had experience with in Missouri, by and large aren't what you would call big thinkers.
 

Ipster

Ultra Member
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Nov 8, 2012
1,066
1,977
Hawaii, SAR,HongKong (Stanley)
If someone from MN could verify-
"nic" containing products are more easily "categorized" as "tobacco products"
with lawmakers logic following- all tobacco products are taxable in the state.
the CASAA meeting this week discussed the FDA choices/limitations at Fed level
(will we fall under the guise of "tobacco product" or "Drug") hopefully the former.
Is there any posted discussion from MN lawmakers related to these "desciptions"?
Any thruth to this premise?
thanks in advance for f/b.
All the best.
 

Hulamoon

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 6, 2012
8,636
43,358
64
Waikiki Hawaii
Here's the testimony that bothers me Bill - it's from the Hawaii Department of Taxation,' below that is the actual bill deferred till 2/25....

"The (State) Department (of Taxation) provides the following technical considerations for the Committee's
consideration. First, the Department notes that the definition of "electronic smoking device" in
this measure includes "cartridges" and "other components of the device." Based on Section 1 of
this bill, the intent appears to be to tax each individual device, cartridge, refill, etc., whether sold
separately or sold in conjunction with devices themselves. If it is the Legislature's intent such
components be taxed when sold separately, as opposed to merely when sold in conjunction with
devices themselves, the Department recommends changing the term "electronic smoking device"
to "electronic smoking product" and amending the definition as follows:

"Electronic smoking [device] product" means any electronic product that can be used to vaporize and deliver nicotine or other substances to the person inhaling from the device, including but not limited to an electronic cigarette, electronic cigar, electronic cigarillo, or lectronic pipe, and also includes any cartridge or other component of [the] such device or related product, whether sold separately or sold in conjunction with the device.

Along with the change to the definition, the Department further recommends the
following change to the proposed new Section 245-3(a)(14), Hawaii Revised Statutes:
(14) An excise tax equal to per cent of the wholesale price of each [electronic smoking device kit, electronic smoking device nicotine cartridge, or electronic smoking device nicotine refill] electronic smoking product sold, used, or possessed by a wholesaler or dealer on or after [October 1, 2014] January 1, 2015, whether or not sold at wholesale, or if not sold then at the same rate upon the use by the
wholesaler or dealer.

Second, the Department recommends the changes to Section 245-3(a)(12), HRS, be
deleted as they would impose the tax retroactively on sellers of electronic smoking devices and
products.
Lastly, as noted in the recommended change to Section 245-3(a)(14), HRS, above, the Department requests this bill be amended to apply the tax to sales occurring on and after January 1, 2015, to provide the Department sufficient time to make the necessary changes to the forms and instructions. Thank you

RELATING TO ELECTRONIC SMOKING DEVICES.
Report Title: Electronic Smoking Device; License; Permit; Smoking; Cigarettes; Tobacco Products; Restrictions; Excise Tax

Description: Includes electronic smoking devices within the definition of "tobacco products" under chapter 245, Hawaii Revised Statutes, thereby subjecting wholesalers, dealers, and retailers of electronic smoking devices to the same licensing and permitting requirements as wholesalers, dealers, and retailers of cigarettes and other tobacco products. Increases the license and permit fees for persons engaged as a wholesaler or dealer or retailer of cigarettes or tobacco products, including electronic smoking devices. Establishes an excise tax on electronic smoking devices equal to an unspecified per cent of the wholesale price of each electronic smoking device kit, electronic smoking device nicotine cartridge, or electronic smoking device nicotine refill sold, used, or possessed by a wholesaler or dealer on or after October 1, 2014. Amends Hawaii's anti-smoking statute to prohibit the use of electronic smoking devices in places open to the public and places of employment. Clarifies that the sale, distribution, sampling, or display of electronic smoking devices and the distribution of promotional materials, or coupons redeemable for promotional materials, for tobacco products, including electronic smoking devices, are restricted in the same manner as cigarettes and other tobacco products. License and permit fees and excise tax effective 01/01/2015. (SD1)
 
Last edited:

skoony

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Jul 31, 2013
5,692
9,952
68
saint paul,mn,usa
to the best of my knowledge only pre-filled cartridges are taxed at the 95% rate.
devices and ejuice in bottles are not.they are taxed at the regular sales tax rate.
they are all illegal for minors to buy and i believe b&m's have to have have a license
to sell tobacco.
allthough the state,several counties and some small cities treat ecigs the same as analogs on property
they own or control its still up to business owners to set there own policy concerning ecigs.
our perennial goofy legislator Phyliss Kahn(insert sound drop of captain kirk screaming Kaaahhnnn!,Kaaahhnn! here)
is planning on introducing legislation to include ecigs as part of the clean indoor act effectivly
removing control away from business owners.
she has also tried introducing legislation that would have allowed children as young as twelve the
right to vote.

regards
mike
 

Bill Godshall

Executive Director<br/> Smokefree Pennsylvania
ECF Veteran
Apr 2, 2009
5,171
13,288
66
The testimony by the Hawaii Dept of Taxation (posted by Hulamoon) basically says the same thing as what I wrote (except they've basically urged the HI legislature to tax all e-cig components and accessories by recommending changes the name from "electronic smoking devices" to "electronic smoking products", and by recommending a new definition (that would apply to accessories and components).

Hawaii vapers need to tell legislators that taxing e-cig products threatens (and may reduce) sales by B&M retailers located in the state, while benefiting Internet sellers located in other states and countries (as no state has even attempted to collect unpaid tax revenue from cigars that are sold over the Internet to consumers in the 48 states that tax cigars, and because the only way a state can legally collect taxes on Internet sellers located in other states is by suing them for their customer records, and then sending bills to consumers from that state who are listed in the customer records of Internet sellers).

During the past decade, many states sued Internet cigarette sellers demanding their customer records (for customers from their state), and then sent tax bills to the smokers who bought those untaxed Internet cigarettes.

But no states have tried to collect unpaid Internet tax revenue from any Internet cigar or e-cig companies (probably because the cost of collecting the revenue is greater than the tax revenue it would generate).
 

Hulamoon

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 6, 2012
8,636
43,358
64
Waikiki Hawaii
Thanks Bill, as always! I'll email the senators regarding this. As Hawaii's politicians are only a .... sniff behind New York's, I feel very strongly if we don't nip the local buggers' heels right now, then Hawaii could be the precedent other states start using. While I'm but one, I'd hate to think it happened right under my nose and did nothing.
 

Bill Godshall

Executive Director<br/> Smokefree Pennsylvania
ECF Veteran
Apr 2, 2009
5,171
13,288
66
Here's a news article about the AZ revenue dept sending a $4,000 tax bill to an AZ smoker for buying cigarettes online (and failing to pay taxes).
3OYS: Man owes $4000 in taxes for cigarettes purchased years ago | azfamily.com Phoenix

Lots of states have done this to collect cigarette taxes, but I've never heard of a state doing the same thing to collect unpaid OTP taxes (from Internet sales), and I'm not aware of MN doing the same thing for online purchases of untaxed e-cigs.

Unless/until MN (or any other state that enacts an e-cig tax) begins suing out-of-state Internet e-cig sellers for their customer records (from purchases by residents from that state), e-cigs purchased from the Internet will remain untaxed.

Even if/when MN (or another state that begins to tax e-cigs) begin to demand customer records from Internet e-cig sellers (which is likely to be at least several years down the road), they'll almost certainly target customers of the largest Internet e-cig retailers several years before they go after the hundreds of small Internet retailers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread