I Thought the FDA was told by the Court

[gtxsliarmor]

Hello Again, It has only been 05/08/10 from My last post. I just had a bad thought I believe We are going to get no matter what the FDA teating shows about The Liquid. Ok if the say it is ok you can use Your E-Cigs and PVs all You want right after you buy Your Liquid from a Store that is charging the state Sin tax of 60+% So now the liquid that so of these sites are selling for 28.95 is now after tax $46.32!!!

You know Guys I am going to stop right Here, Because I just made myself so Mad Just thinging about how Many ways to Sunday they can tax everything used to use an E-Cig.

God Help US.

Don Swad

 

[kristin]

The "sin tax" is imposed on and tolerated for cigarettes because they are dangerous and they are trying to get people to quit.

Ecigs are not shown to be dangerous and I have great confidence that they never will be. tobacco harm reduction proponents are making headway and ecig users are a vocal and passionate bunch (compared to most smokers). The theory is that reduced-harm products will not get hit with the sin taxes, because they'll want to encourage industries to develop RH products and give incentive for people to switch to them from smoking. Sin taxes on reduced-harm products would be counter-productive.

The huge hurdle is getting the government to remove the catch-22 barriers currently in place that make it nearly impossible to get RH classification. However, with the way ecigs are catching on, the missionary-style way in which vapers share their ecig success with smokers and the fact that those users are learning about RH and how the government and public health groups have been lying about RH for the past 15-20 years means that the secret about reduced harm is going to be out sooner than later.

Therefore - no sin tax at 60% - probably just the regular sales tax for your state.

 

[rothenbj]

The "sin tax" is imposed on and tolerated for cigarettes because they are dangerous and they are trying to get people to quit.

Ecigs are not shown to be dangerous and I have great confidence that they never will be. Tobacco harm reduction proponents are making headway and ecig users are a vocal and passionate bunch (compared to most smokers). The theory is that reduced-harm products will not get hit with the sin taxes, because they'll want to encourage industries to develop RH products and give incentive for people to switch to them from smoking. Sin taxes on reduced-harm products would be counter-productive.

The huge hurdle is getting the government to remove the catch-22 barriers currently in place that make it nearly impossible to get RH classification. However, with the way ecigs are catching on, the missionary-style way in which vapers share their ecig success with smokers and the fact that those users are learning about RH and how the government and public health groups have been lying about RH for the past 15-20 years means that the secret about reduced harm is going to be out sooner than later.

Therefore - no sin tax at 60% - probably just the regular sales tax for your state.

I haven't tried missionary style sharing of my e cig, but it sounds like fun and I'll try it next time. Do you make your pitch before, during or a after? I'm assuming after, which would be old school, but what do I know.

Anyway, back on point, if Washington State can put a sin tax on bottled water, anything is possible. I'm still trying to understand that logic.

 

[D103]

I agree with you rothenbj, I believe sin tax is here to stay - that pony has been out of the barn way too long to think it is ever going to be put away. The amounts of money are staggering and to believe this is going to be given up or made up for with e-cig profits is incorrect, in my opinion. Remember, if what most e-cig suppliers and we ourselves have been saying over and over is true, that this is not a product intended to garner a "new customer base" - then there is a limited client base - forty-six million smokers (which they-the government already has by the shorthairs-sin tax). And I believe that given that scenario with a gradual switch to e-cigs from the pool of 46 million, at the current e-cig and supplies prices-with no sin tax, there is NO way the government and Big Tobacco will stand for that much revenue loss. The e-cig business is not an ordinary business, intending on ever expanding growth and revenue gains. It is, at worst, a business specifically designed to go out of business (if everyone eventually quits altogether) or at best, is a business that hopes to survive with a static customer base of 46 million. Anything different then means we and the suppliers have been lying since it means they do intend on gaining "new customers" other than the current pool of 46 million smokers. (actually it would not even be a static customer base of 46 million since we are all getting older and will eventually die)

 

[Kobudo]

The e-cig business is not an ordinary business, intending on ever expanding growth and revenue gains. It is, at worst, a business specifically designed to go out of business (if everyone eventually quits altogether) or at best, is a business that hopes to survive with a static customer base of 46 million.

You're assuming BT isn't attracting new customers to replace the ones they kill off and the few that manage to quit. Sure, fewer teens are getting hooked on cigs now, but back in the 90s when I started teen smoking was on the rise in the US -- and we did know about the dangers when we picked up the habit. As long as marketers make it look cool and the entry price seems small, teens will continue to smoke. Unlike vaping, which has a much higher initial investment that no thinking person would go for unless they were hooked on an increasingly expensive cigarette habit.

That doesn't even consider the global market. There are still parts of the world where kids start very young -- before they hit double-digit ages.

I see e-cigs as a niche market that should grow and decline constantly as folks switch to vaping from smoking, and eventually quit vaping as well. As long as BT keeps selling poison, a percentage of "replacement smokers" will eventually switch to vaping in their attempts at smoking cessation.

 

[rothenbj]

D, I did the math in another thread yesterday. I'm about into a year now. I have somewhere between two and three years inventory in my cabinet, wine cooler and freezer. I would have spent as much in five months had I kept smoking. That's nearly $10k over three years in my pocket.

My supply will probably still be available to some extent. I use about a can of snus a week and vape only a few drips a day and that's only because I like those kid flavors. The keep me from eating sweets. A long way from two to three packs a day.

 

[D103]

Kobudo - you are right of course - I didn't actually forget or overlook that BT continues to gain new customers, rather it is precisely that fact that links the e-cig industry to BT in the eyes of our opponents. Their viewpoint seems to be that the e-cig business' long-term future relies on people continuing to smoke-then switch to vaping or merely start vaping since it has been protrayed as 'safer.' We all know better and you spelled it out very well, but I worry that the 'perceptual link' will weigh very heavily against us.

 

[Kobudo]

Kobudo - you are right of course - I didn't actually forget or overlook that BT continues to gain new customers, rather it is precisely that fact that links the e-cig industry to BT in the eyes of our opponents. Their viewpoint seems to be that the e-cig business' long-term future relies on people continuing to smoke-then switch to vaping or merely start vaping since it has been protrayed as 'safer.' We all know better and you spelled it out very well, but I worry that the 'perceptual link' will weigh very heavily against us.

I don't see why it should. I mean, the nicotine gum/lozenge/patch are inextricably linked to BT and haven't suffered from the association. Heck, people like the idea of those so much they are willing to completely overlook that they aren't much more effective than trying to quit cold turkey.

 

[DJ Colburn]

Here's what I don't get. The nicotine in e-liquid, and the tobacco flavoring, is still made FROM tobacco. Rather than punch us in the nads for using our PV's, Phillip Morris could support the use of vaporized nicotine themselves! Instead of making cigarettes, they make the juice, the batteries, the atomizers.

Dear gods, did I just suggest that Big Tobacco work WITH us in getting e-cigs popularized? Maybe I'm not feeling well.

 

[boston joe]

hi all i'm still a newbie to vaping and ECF. but I've been reading a lot of the threads and the FDA BS. i can go to the corner and buy the 2 things that kill more people (ciggs and booze) but they want to ban a healthier alt. to smoking. well like my gun they can pry my PV from my cold dead hand. i was a pack and a half a day smoker for 21 yrs. i started vaping 3 weeks ago and down to 5-6 ciggs a day now. thanks to a link i just joined CASAA. lets all hope the FDA gets out of our business

 

[rothenbj]

hi all i'm still a newbie to vaping and ECF. but I've been reading a lot of the threads and the FDA BS. i can go to the corner and buy the 2 things that kill more people (ciggs and booze) but they want to ban a healthier alt. to smoking. well like my gun they can pry my PV from my cold dead hand. i was a pack and a half a day smoker for 21 yrs. i started vaping 3 weeks ago and down to 5-6 ciggs a day now. thanks to a link i just joined CASAA. lets all hope the FDA gets out of our business

Welcome aboard joe (I was just going to abbreviate your screen name and thought better of it ). Yes, it is a wonder on what they're doing but we'll do what we have to do. Hopefully, logic will eventually over ride.... BS.

I was about double your years smoking and double the smokes when I moved to the PV. I dropped down to your level right away. Hopefully you'll be able to eliminate them also. It took me 7 months and I needed a little more help, but everyone's different. There certainly is a lot of help available here. Good luck.

 

[jfdpl686]

Question regarding the original topic...
Is it safe to order from china now? Or is the FDA still messing with parcels?
I've ordered twice. The first one made it in less than 10 days (regular shipping) while the second took more than a month.

Are we safe now? What about ordering liquids? Or is best get only parts?

Thanks.

 

[Ariel_MX]

Same question as jfdpl686.

I live in México, the e-cigs are banned here, we, the Mexican vapers, still placing orders from China, eventually some orders are retainded in the Mexican customs and returned to China, it is just a matter of luck because they do not check every package, if the package enters for revision, for sure they will retain it.

I was thinking in sending my orders from China to USA, so a friend there could bring them to me, but i do not know if it is safe to order from China in the USA.

 

[Janetda]

The situation in the US is pretty much the same here. I think most shipments make it in, but occasionally there are packages that get sent back.