How to Get Around Future E Cig Taxes

[CMD-Ky]

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.

z, I understand your point, we have representation, The representation that we have is utterly disgusting, they are bought and paid for. The reality is that the legislative branch has two interests, one, re-election; two, self-enrichment. We are responsible for this, we vote, we get what we deserve. I am simply so completely disgusted by the representatives I could puke.

 

[caramel]

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.

The question was about Reasonability not Relevance. We can discuss that too but please don't skip steps.

 

[AndriaD]

z, I understand your point, we have representation, The representation that we have is utterly disgusting, they are bought and paid for. The reality is that the legislative branch has two interests, one, re-election; two, self-enrichment. We are responsible for this, we vote, we get what we deserve. I am simply so completely disgusted by the representatives I could puke.

It's funny; I find that my own congressman is actually doing a hell of a job, and seems to have a head on his shoulders about this and many other things. It's funny because until the most recent election, I didn't vote for him, but always for his opposition.

The politics of vaping is making me re-examine many things, and my political tendencies are definitely changing. If the party I have most usually voted for is behind all this nannyism, then off with their heads and lucrative job trying to protect us all from ourselves. I've completely had it with that nonsense.

Andria

 

[caramel]

z, I understand your point, we have representation, The representation that we have is utterly disgusting, they are bought and paid for. The reality is that the legislative branch has two interests, one, re-election; two, self-enrichment. We are responsible for this, we vote, we get what we deserve. I am simply so completely disgusted by the representatives I could puke.

I disgree. 20% of US population are smokers. Seeking to do what they're doing in a civilized way. How exactly are their interests represented in Congress? Are they represented at all?

 

[zoiDman]

The question was about Reasonability not Relevance. We can discuss that too but please don't skip steps.

But if something Isn't Relevant, why Answer it?

Is "No taxation without representation" reasonable?

 

[zoiDman]

z, I understand your point, we have representation, The representation that we have is utterly disgusting, they are bought and paid for. The reality is that the legislative branch has two interests, one, re-election; two, self-enrichment. We are responsible for this, we vote, we get what we deserve. I am simply so completely disgusted by the representatives I could puke.

Now This... I can Not Argue with. It is Also VERY Relevant.

Especially since I come from a State where Boxer and Diane F have haunted the halls of Government for as Long as I would like to Recall.

 

[caramel]

But if something Isn't Relevant, why Answer it?

It IS Relevant. We just haven't got to that discussion point yet.

 

[zoiDman]

it is relevant. We just haven't got to that discussion point yet.

ok.

__________________

 

[CMD-Ky]

It's funny; I find that my own congressman is actually doing a hell of a job, and seems to have a head on his shoulders about this and many other things. It's funny because until the most recent election, I didn't vote for him, but always for his opposition.

The politics of vaping is making me re-examine many things, and my political tendencies are definitely changing. If the party I have most usually voted for is behind all this nannyism, then off with their heads and lucrative job trying to protect us all from ourselves. I've completely had it with that nonsense.

Andria

Yes!

[Add characters]

 

[CMD-Ky]

I disgree. 20% of US population are smokers. Seeking to do what they're doing in a civilized way. How exactly are their interests represented in Congress? Are they represented at all?

Technically only, there are elections, there are resulting representatives. That these people stink to high heaven does not mean that they are not technically representatives. Primary elections are where it is at. Do not vote fre the same people every two, four or six years at primary time. The lesser of two evils is a general election decision only, not the primaries.

 

[Mailablemage]

Current generetions have KILLED the music and entertainment industrys.. Whether it downloading steal royaties and driving up prices or bootlegs. Then whinning whenever something mightbe offensive to somebody.. By the way you get the Governemnt you VOTE for. So if they are doing things WE don't like....
Who's fault is it?

That's not actually true! just saying...

Online Piracy Does Not Negatively Affect Digital Music Sales, May Actually Help Music Industry

 

[beckdg]

Are you Saying that we Don't have "Representation" today?

I will.

I've yet to see it.

Please show me the light.

Tapatyped

 

[jpargana]

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.

This.

One just has to look at the new European TPD, to clearly understand this is the ultimate goal.

Remove 2nd /3rd generation devices (the ones that *actually* work) from the market.

Allow innefective 1st generation devices only, *as long* as they're sold by BT. No big deal if those do not work for most new vapers: from "their" POV, it's irrelevant whether you buy cigarettes OR cig-alikes from BT. EVERYONE still gets their share of the cake. No more "unregulated" (meaning, hard to tax) devices out there to thin out the gravy train.

And they still have the nerve to tell us, with a serious face, that all this is *only* out of *concern* about our health.

 

[jpargana]

Producers pass the tax or fee on to consumers and so, we pay the tax - we just don't pay enough attention to realize that. A producers is merely a tax collector. It's like taxing any evil corporation. A corporation is merely a pass through device from consumer to government. But we all cheer wildly when a corporation gets gouged by the tax man.

Not always.

When you're talking about a tax that is supposed to be payed by consumers (sales tax, for example), it is true the vendor collects the money from us, and later returns it to BigG.

On the other hand, taxes that are *supposed* to be paid by the producers do not always work that way. The *only* way those producers have to make us "pay" for the taxes *they* should be paying, is to increase the profit margin, right? Well, there's at least a problem with that: "honest" producers/vendors will accept that *they alone* must pay the tax, and therefore will *not* raise their prices. Competition, as always, will take care of greedy vendors in the end. *I* already pay *my* taxes. If a vendor tries to trick me into paying for *his* taxes, then he will have to sell at an higher price. And I can then easily support another, *honest* vendor with my wallet.

 

[caramel]

You forgot that in a market with a few major players collusion happens. Sometimes including government. Ever wondered why all cigarettes cost about the same regardless of brand?

 

[zoiDman]

I will.

I've yet to see it.

Please show me the light.

Tapatyped

Do the names Cardin and Mikulski ring a bell?

 

[Rossum]

On the other hand, taxes that are *supposed* to be paid by the producers do not always work that way. The *only* way those producers have to make us "pay" for the taxes *they* should be paying, is to increase the profit margin, right? Well, there's at least a problem with that: "honest" producers/vendors will accept that *they alone* must pay the tax, and therefore will *not* raise their prices. Competition, as always, will take care of greedy vendors in the end. *I* already pay *my* taxes. If a vendor tries to trick me into paying for *his* taxes, then he will have to sell at an higher price. And I can then easily support another, *honest* vendor with my wallet.

A business has to make a certain amount of profit, otherwise those who own the business will decide they are better off doing something else. When a business makes, say, 15% profit and the government comes along and slaps them with a 20% tax, do you really expect them to keep selling at the same price and take a 5% loss on every sale? Sorry, but your view is unrealistic.

 

[caramel]

[...] the government comes along and slaps them with a 20% tax [...]

The government is perfectly aware that they are not slapping "them", but you the end user.

 

[KattMamma]

Not always.

When you're talking about a tax that is supposed to be payed by consumers (sales tax, for example), it is true the vendor collects the money from us, and later returns it to BigG.

On the other hand, taxes that are *supposed* to be paid by the producers do not always work that way. The *only* way those producers have to make us "pay" for the taxes *they* should be paying, is to increase the profit margin, right? Well, there's at least a problem with that: "honest" producers/vendors will accept that *they alone* must pay the tax, and therefore will *not* raise their prices. Competition, as always, will take care of greedy vendors in the end. *I* already pay *my* taxes. If a vendor tries to trick me into paying for *his* taxes, then he will have to sell at an higher price. And I can then easily support another, *honest* vendor with my wallet.

Any taxes that we get hit with will be built into the price of the product - just like cigarette taxes and gasoline taxes. But at least with the gasoline tax, it ends at the pump....

When I was buying RYO tobacco before the huge 2800% tax hike on it, I was paying about $15 a pound. The built-in tax on that pound was about a dollar. So the tax went up to about $28. This would make the final price about $43, right? Wrong. Next time I went to buy tobacco, it was priced $59. So the retailer had put a markup on the tax! Then, to add insult to injury, I paid a sales tax on $59, of which $29 was tax - so I was BUYING TAXES? The whole thing just turns my stomach...

 

[Rossum]

When I was buying RYO tobacco before the huge 2800% tax hike on it, I was paying about $15 a pound. The built-in tax on that pound was about a dollar. So the tax went up to about $28. This would make the final price about $43, right? Wrong. Next time I went to buy tobacco, it was priced $59. So the retailer had put a markup on the tax!

This is not at all surprising. The retailer's mark up isn't x dollars per pound of product, it's x cents per dollar he has tied up in each pound.

Then, to add insult to injury, I paid a sales tax on $59, of which $29 was tax - so I was BUYING TAXES? The whole thing just turns my stomach...

Coming soon to e-liquids near you. The good news is, you can buy a small dedicated freezer that will hold a lifetime supply of nic base for under $200. I'm confident it's an investment that will pay for itself many times over.