• Need help from former MFS (MyFreedomSmokes) customers

    Has any found a supplier or company that has tobacco e-juice like or very similar to MFS Turbosmog, Tall Paul, or Red Luck?

    View thread

How to Get Around Future E Cig Taxes

Status
Not open for further replies.

AndriaD

Reviewer / Blogger
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jan 24, 2014
21,253
50,519
61
LawrencevilleGA
angryvaper.crypticsites.com
I was Kinda looking for a Dollar Value per Day.

Because "tobacco Products" are not Taxed the Same way that Other Items in the USA are Taxed.

Yes, but e-cigs are NOT tobacco products; just because they may end up calling them that, doesn't make it true.

Andria
 

zoiDman

My -0^10 = Nothing at All*
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
  • Apr 16, 2010
    41,132
    1
    82,599
    So-Cal
    Yes, but e-cigs are NOT tobacco products; just because they may end up calling them that, doesn't make it true.

    Andria

    Not Saying it Does. Or Doesn't.

    Just commenting on what Will Happen. Because I think there is Almost Not Chance that e-Liquids that Contain Nicotine will not be Deemed a "Tobacco Product".

    Sure... A Comet could hit Washington DC between Now and say August or September of this Year. But the Chances of that happening is Kinda Small.

    So we might as well start thinking about what Will Happen with e-Liquids that contain Nicotine.
     

    Mogar

    Super Member
    ECF Veteran
    Jun 18, 2014
    301
    357
    Dallas TX
    Tax is a slippery slope....
    I am sure that if the government says "you know what you all are being taxed a lot already, we will impose a flat $0.01 tax per mil of liquid regardless of the nic level" Most people will say, "sure why not, its not that much".... seems reasonable.
    A few months later they will put through a bill for roads, however somewhere in the 500th page of this bill it will say "to help pay for these roads, we will increase the tax of juice by an additional 0.01 per mil" Most will not even catch it, but since it is already being taxed they can do this (think of cost of gas and the 0.009 per gallon).
    A few months later they cant balance the budget and decide that they need to increase the tax again. Then again. Then again. before you know it, the taxes on it will be higher than the cost of the product as it is with analogs.
    Do not say it cant happen. It has happened and will continue to happen as long as we allow it to START.
     

    house mouse

    Vaping Master
    ECF Veteran
    Verified Member
    Oct 24, 2010
    3,063
    8,967
    BFE
    I do not think a "shut it down" is their objective. Vaping has allowed millions of us avoid paying them their Danegeld. We used to pay big money in taxes and we no longer do. I used to spend over $4k a year on cigarettes, more than half of which went to taxes. Vaping already costs government tens of billions in lost revenues every year, a number that just keeps growing.

    I mean shut it down in that cig alikes will be the only e-cigs left on the market and those will be sold by BT. I do believe that's their objective. They still get the taxes whether the consumer struggles with getting what they need from a cig alike or gives up in frustration and goes back to smoking. And,as a bonus to their BP buddies, when consumers can't quit with what is left to them to work with and they decide to try again they'll head back to BP for Nicorette, chantix or whatever the current "cure" is at that time. Only to relapse back to cigarettes again with nothing to show for their efforts but a thinner wallet. That's been their status quo over the past couple of decades and my belief is that they want to maintain it.
     

    zoiDman

    My -0^10 = Nothing at All*
    Supporting Member
    ECF Veteran
  • Apr 16, 2010
    41,132
    1
    82,599
    So-Cal
    Tax is a slippery slope....
    I am sure that if the government says "you know what you all are being taxed a lot already, we will impose a flat $0.01 tax per mil of liquid regardless of the nic level" Most people will say, "sure why not, its not that much".... seems reasonable.
    A few months later they will put through a bill for roads, however somewhere in the 500th page of this bill it will say "to help pay for these roads, we will increase the tax of juice by an additional 0.01 per mil" Most will not even catch it, but since it is already being taxed they can do this (think of cost of gas and the 0.009 per gallon).
    A few months later they cant balance the budget and decide that they need to increase the tax again. Then again. Then again. before you know it, the taxes on it will be higher than the cost of the product as it is with analogs.
    Do not say it cant happen. It has happened and will continue to happen as long as we allow it to START.

    Then it sound like we had better Big Time Oppose this Bill then.

    https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/450/text?q={"search":["s450"]}

    ``(i) Other Tobacco Products.--Any product not otherwise described
    under this section that has been determined to be a tobacco product by
    the Food and Drug Administration through its authorities under the
    Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act shall be taxed at a
    level of tax equivalent to the tax rate for cigarettes on an estimated
    per use basis as determined by the Secretary.''.

    BTW - That is where I got the $1.01 per day value. Because the Average Smoker is a PAD Smoker. And the Federal Tax on Cigarettes I believe is $1.01 per Pack. Regardless of what State you live in.
     

    beckdg

    ECF Guru
    ECF Veteran
    Verified Member
    Oct 1, 2013
    11,018
    35,349
    TN
    I take responsibility for my poor choice to start and continue smoking; I chose vaping as a safer alternative. . Those who continue to vape e-liquids which Dr. F said should be avoided are as foolish as those who were regular smokers...
    Just to be clear...

    Is this a self implicating statement?

    Tapatyped
     

    CMD-Ky

    Highly Esteemed Member
    ECF Veteran
    Verified Member
    Sep 15, 2013
    5,321
    42,333
    KY
    So very true -- when the polio vaccine(s) were finally a reality and polio basically went the way of the dodo, what was The March of Dimes to do? They "adopted" muscular dystrophy, but that's a really rare condition; I suppose they may also work to raise money for ALS (gehrig's disease) research, but that's also fairly rare. They're still around, but by vanquishing polio, they nearly put themselves out of business. And that's exactly what's going to happen to the various charities that have been screeching and whining for years about quitting smoking; now there actually is a way that millions might do that easily, but are they happy? :blink: Of course not; a) they didn't invent and patent it, and b) the cure for smoking might easily put them out of business -- they will very shortly have outlived their usefulness. What hypocrites. And yes, I did just compare vaping to the polio vaccine; I think the analogy is quite apt. I don't think anyone thought that polio victims, since they were silly enough to catch it, deserved to just die, and that's the msg we need to be spreading, shouting, hollering from the rooftops.

    If we ever manage to get the dimwits in DC (and other hotbeds of that virulence called government) to figure out that vaping is NOT smoking, then yeah, it might be time for me to go my own way, but it appears that this might be a lengthy battle. Good thing that switching to vaping gives us all a much longer life expectancy. :D

    Andria
    You hit on the very organization I thought of - the Mother's March of Dimes. These groups won't declare victory and go away, too many jobs are dependent and it became not a movement but an organization. The analogy is absolutely apt.
     

    caramel

    Vaping Master
    Dec 23, 2014
    3,492
    10,692
    I am somewhat appalled. It is a "nice phrase" from the past. Well, I will stop there [self-regulation] I will save Robino1 the effort of deleting my post.

    It was his way of not answering the question.

    However, the avoidance in itself says that he couldn't find it not reasonable.

    So I'll take his answer as an Yes It's Reasonable.

    At which point, in exchange to the special taxation regime, I would ask for 20% seats in Congress to be reserved for the stakeholders - The Smokers and Vapers Party.
     

    zoiDman

    My -0^10 = Nothing at All*
    Supporting Member
    ECF Veteran
  • Apr 16, 2010
    41,132
    1
    82,599
    So-Cal
    It was his way of not answering the question.

    However, the avoidance in itself says that he couldn't find it not reasonable.

    So I'll take his answer as an Yes It's Reasonable.

    At which point, in exchange to the special taxation regime, I would ask for 20% seats in Congress to be reserved for the stakeholders - The Smokers and Vapers Party.

    I just don't see that the phrase "No taxation without representation" is very Relevant in Todays USA.

    Verses when it was coined in the 1750's.

    Please show me an Example of an e-Cigarette/e-Liquid Tax where the Taxed do not have a Right to be Represented. Once again, an Example in the USA.
     

    AndriaD

    Reviewer / Blogger
    ECF Veteran
    Verified Member
    Jan 24, 2014
    21,253
    50,519
    61
    LawrencevilleGA
    angryvaper.crypticsites.com
    If you believe that to be true then cease referring to vaporizers as e-cigs.

    Calling them e-cigs doesn't make them any more a tobacco product than the gov't is trying to do. I generally refer to my own, around here, as mods, since they're not cigalikes, but when speaking of vaping in general, then e-cigs is perfectly legitimate, because it conveys meaning to those who don't themselves partake. Conveying meaning is the entire point of communication.

    Andria
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.

    Users who are viewing this thread