I see it as a Cash Grab for a State
But the Question still remains, Why does the Tax need to be More than on Regular Cigarettes?
Policy Makers need to be put on the Public Record with the Answer to this Question.
Is taxing vaping impractical?
- Thread starter sofarsogood
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I see it as a Cash Grab for a State
But the Question still remains, Why does the Tax need to be More than on Regular Cigarettes?
Policy Makers need to be put on the Public Record with the Answer to this Question.
Their trying to protect their ongoing income from the MSA, they hope we will continue smoking if vaping is more expensive.
Desk murderers all.
I don't know US state politics all that well but up here it's easier to amend a law than to create one...
I feel like it'll be a lot easier for them to jack that $.05 tax to $1 per ml than it would have been to institute a 95% tax in the first place...
That's fine. If a Policy Maker wants to come out and Publically state this, so Be It. At least they are being Honest.
BTW - Calling someone a "Desk Murderer" doesn't make Dealing with them any Easier when Trying to reach a Compromise on a Bill Amendment.
Just Say'n.
They may tax it. Wherever we live. All we can do is object to that.
They may argue that people are using products that deliver equivalent amounts of nicotine to cigarettes.
They tax cigarettes.
They will argue, on nicotine volumes alone, that they are entitled to raise tax on this basis.
Watch and wait. The EU are making these arguments as we speak.
It would be very stupid of them to push most people back on to tobacco and the rest underground.
Watch and wait.
They may argue that people are using products that deliver equivalent amounts of nicotine to cigarettes.
They tax cigarettes.
They will argue, on nicotine volumes alone, that they are entitled to raise tax on this basis.
Watch and wait. The EU are making these arguments as we speak.
It would be very stupid of them to push most people back on to tobacco and the rest underground.
Watch and wait.
They may tax it. Wherever we live. All we can do is object to that.
They may argue that people are using products that deliver equivalent amounts of nicotine to cigarettes.
They tax cigarettes.
They will argue, on nicotine volumes alone, that they are entitled to raise tax on this basis.
Watch and wait. The EU are making these arguments as we speak.
It would be very stupid of them to push most people back on to tobacco and the rest underground.
Watch and wait.
I am under No Illusion that e-Liquids use will be Taxed in the USA at a Rate that is Aligned with a the Tax on PAD Smoking. I think that is All but a Given.
But what is kinda Shocking is the Rates being Proposed by Some States.
Rates that I would like Policy Makers to Publically Comment on. And State Clearly for the Camera what their Justifications are?
We are what? Whatever, good luck.
(And no, ee cummings has nothing to do with your way of posting!)
ygUDuh!
(And no, ee cummings has nothing to do with your way of posting!)
ygUDuh!
You know they will go to great lengths attempting to avoid this, right? Most career politicians have developed considerable skill in the art of evading the tough questions, 'cause those skills are essential to remaining in office.
Please tell us more.
Developed?
I think there is an Avoidance Gene that is Expressed in some Individuals more than Others.
---
I'll PM you.
I am curious about this myself. Especially if there is any way to help.
The Best thing for an Individual to do is Join and Donate to Groups like CASAA and SFATA.
And then to get signatures on a Pro e-Cigarette Letter and send it to their State / Federal Reps. Know a Doctor? A Lawyer? How about a College Professor? Get them to Sign. And, of course, get Everyone who is 18 Years or Older who can Sign their Name to sign it also.
And what would be Wrong with Sending a Favorable Study or Article to your Local Paper or News Agency? Or ask you Favorite B&M to hand out Fliers to ECF Advocacy Threads?
But here's the Clencher. What would happen if you could Another Person to do what I just Mentioned? And then they could get Another.
The Sum Total of the Active Members of the ECF makes up Less than 1% of the Active Vapers in the USA. These people need to be Reach.
What is this "compromise" of which you speak?
Right now, we have everything we want. What is it that we could be offered in exchange for not opposing whatever regulation they propose?
You seem to be using the more modern version of the word. Allow me to link an explanation: via the Lawdog Files
SUBSIDIZE VAPING
or just leave it alone
or just leave it alone
How about the above counterattack? If it improves overall health, they should help out vaping. Except they don't need to (but could).
Tobacco funds are supposed to go to the health fund and offset the costs of smoking. If vaping avoids these health costs, what are the taxes for? If it reduces these costs, we're accomplishing one thing those tax monies should be paying for.
Taxing vapor even at 1 cent a gallon, as part of the tobacco system, has a big unexpected problem: it makes vapor-only stores less competitive with tobacco stores, since it requires the shop become allowed to sell tobacco.
So what do you Suggest the Vaping Community do then?
Last edited:
Become politically involved. CASAA could easily become a force very similar to the NRA, IF (biggest word ever in politics) we could get folk to join and be motivated, we wouldn't need to allow legislation to ever become a problem
Instead, we're arguing about what regulations we can live with. That isn't "compromise", it's "capitulation". Guess folks don't read my sig
Instead, we're arguing about what regulations we can live with. That isn't "compromise", it's "capitulation". Guess folks don't read my sig
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
