New e-cigarette tax bill - join Popvox and oppose it
- Thread starter rolygate
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I was kind of sad to see that some people who wrote in praising e-cigs mistakenly voted FOR the bill instead of against it! Other than that, did you catch any of the comments from those in favor? What a bunch of ignorant, non-informed feebs! OMG! Kind of nauseating actually. And very very sad.
Opposed- current info from website-
S. 1403: IDEA Full Funding Act
A bill to amend part B of the Individuals with ... (more about this bill)
POPVOX Nation:
8% Support
92% Oppose
(1,477 users)
S. 1403: IDEA Full Funding Act
A bill to amend part B of the Individuals with ... (more about this bill)
POPVOX Nation:
8% Support
92% Oppose
(1,477 users)
From what I can understand section B strikes the tax increase on small cigars and cigarettes. What this means is that besides RYO only the least harmful tobacco products get a tax increase, and it is a hugh tax increase.
Last edited:
Stubby,
That's what I read, too. Remember, they're here to help (if you're able to fill the coffers).
That's what I read, too. Remember, they're here to help (if you're able to fill the coffers).
I doubt that support has gotten any stronger, just that we've kind of hit a wall.
Kind of like we are about to do on the petition.
I doubt that support has gotten any stronger, just that we've kind of hit a wall.
Kind of like we are about to do on the petition.
I don't think the petition has hit any wall. In fact, I think we may get very close to that 5k this weekend. I'm just hoping reaching the minimum doesn't slow down the signatures.
Unfortunately, the petition itself only addresses E Cigs and not as well as it could. I just read a response in the law sub-forum from someone's Senator and is first sentence stated that he hated tobacco use. The lack of understanding on the whole subject of smoking/tobacco/nicotine by the vast majority of individual, brought on by decades of lies, makes the battle so difficult.
1 3/4 years ago I was among the uneducated and turned my nose up at the idea of using smokeless. However, the people on this forum got me thinking, which got me reading and then allowed me to finally find the product(s) that can be used individually or jointly as potential alternatives to the worst form of tobacco use.
I am beginning to have enough knowledge of all the variables- E Cigs, nicquid, WTA liquid, snus and snuff to be able to offer possible alternatives to anyone attempting to quit smoking. I certainly learned over 43 years what didn't work well. I'm still looking for Stonewall and Ariva, just to understand them.
We as a consumer group need to get those in power to understand the difference between smoking and the alternatives. They also need to understand that taxing smokers more and more just sends them to the underground and taxing smokeless like it's the same as smoking is just absurd. The easy target is no more.
Well, I was watching things slowing down, and I feared the worst.
I've seen first hand how little some of us vapers are willing to put in to save what we have.
But I just looked at the petition, and since this afternoon, our numbers have gone up quite a bit.
Hopefully the inevitable wall is far off in the distance.
Well, I was watching things slowing down, and I feared the worst.
I've seen first hand how little some of us vapers are willing to put in to save what we have.
But I just looked at the petition, and since this afternoon, our numbers have gone up quite a bit.
Hopefully the inevitable wall is far off in the distance.
DC, I don't believe it's the vaper in us, I think it's the smoker in us. We've allowed ourselves to be pushed further and further to the "back of the bus". You think the outdoor bans will stop at parks and stadiums and 25 feet from "public buildings"? Not a chance.
Think where 25 feet from a public building puts you. On Main Street, USA you may legally smoke on the center line of Main Street. Then all they have to do is exempt drivers for any responsibility to injuries caused by a driver hitting a pedestrian standing in the middle of the road and it's open season.
Now we quit smoking and they're still after us, but it's not discrimination because we're not a protected class.
It's been open season on us dirty addicts for a long time. We're the new second class citizen, and that is done with the full support of the tobacco control industry and the PC crowd. I get this nagging feeling that this bill was largely written by the TC gang as an attack on harm reduction. The bill would push people to smoking and away from smokeless tobacco.
Something rather sad about many of the comments in the opposed section is the persistent idea that so-and-so switched to e-cigs and are not now using tobacco etc,etc. It is very much implying that tobacco is the problem as opposed to smoking, and in particular inhaling smoke.
This one caught my attention
It appears there is still lots of work to do.
well here's the thing: the tax increase on smokeless tobacco is pretty bad, don't get me wrong, but it wouldn't make ST TOTALLY UNAFFORDABLE like it could potentially do to e-cigarettes. ST would STILL be far cheaper than patches or gum, I'd just be paying $5.50 for a can of general instead of $3.50. would it be more expensive? yeah, for sure. would I still buy it and would it still be readily available in my local smokeshop? I'd think so. Now E-cigs on the other hand.... that's an entirely different matter. think about it like this: what if they say 1ml is the equivalent of one pack of cigs? that'd mean one 30ml bottle of juice would be like $50 plus! much worse than the ST aspect of the bill!
The bill doesn't put any immediate tax on e-liquid. There is potential tax as it opens up the possibility but that's about it. The effect on smokeless is immediate and devastating. A can of Swedish snus would go up $2.40 a can. In Wisconsin where I live we have the highest smokeless tobacco tax in the country. Added together a can of General would likely be around $10. The bill essentially pushes everyone who uses tobacco/nicotine towards cigarettes and very much discourages people from trying smokeless. I'm not saying it couldn't have a potential effect on e-cigs but how much remains to be seen.
The point is this whole bill would be a death sentence for tobacco harm reduction on all levels. I was simple pointing out the misconception many people have, even within the e-cig community, that tobacco is the problem.
you do have a point there, here in missouri there's virtually no state tobacco taxes at all so it wouldn't be as bad here, but you're right, in other states like yours this would destroy the Harm Reduction movement. But I will say this: the minute this bill passes, they WILL go straight for e-cigs the way this is written. that's the whole reason the put the "other tobacco products" section in there in the first place, what else is there that could possibly be what they're talking about? just curious but is the ST tax over in WI higher than the cig tax?
Not sure what the state tax on cigarettes is but a carton cost about $70 for premiums (Marlboro Reds, etc). The state smokeless tax is 100% of wholesale. That includes dissolvables as in Stonewalls which the state classifies as smokeless. Apparently there is some confusion as to what the FDA classifies them as. If those folks from the TC gangs keep calling them candy I may start giving them away for Halloween.
Wish I lived in your area- I want to trick or treat at your house!
But seriously- this bill is what it is: An attack on alternatives to smoking. The party line appears to be abstinence or MAXIMUM health damage.
:-(
Ande
The next FDA TPSAC hearing on dissolvables was scheduled for Nov 3 but has been postponed (no mention of when it will beheld.) Part of my planned presenation read:
BTW: I was in KMart today and in Giant (big supermarket chain on the east coast). In both stores, the Nicorette products are shelved out in the open and some products are even on the bottom shelf.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
