I haven't purchased a single vape specific item since 10-1. Feels weird. I haven't popped into the B&M either.
Ah, I didn't realize that. Makes sense now, thanks.Zero nicotine eliquid is not included in the proposed taxed.
Yep, I understood it to be a potential loophole for SF's flavor ban.At least for the time being, several things are pushing open system eliquid distribution in the direction of zero nic flavored eliquid and nicotine in an unflavored solution sold in a separate package. It's the only way a shop will survive in San Fran, the tax all over Cali going over 60%, uncertainty of zero nicotine eliquids future coverage by the deeming regs
Im done with my hissy fit, Its the Italian in me.Not sure what the answer is but going back to analogs ain't it...
do it, super easy, old saying "just keep it simple stupid"Ive been toying with that a lot.
Sadly there's still a $5k/5year penalty for possession of products on which the tax has not been paid.A replacement bill has been proposed. http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS...d=0&billBody=S&billTyp=B&billNbr=0508&pn=0504
Still $.05/ml proposed to replace the 40% tax. I like that "eliquid" is defined in part by "contains nicotine and flavoring".
This is crazy. I have an idea of what's going to happen when more get into homemade. Don't want to give any govt stooges ideas though.
Does this apply to juice with no nicotine?
I think it does help small shops. The 40% wholesale tax means a shop has 40%more money tied up in inventory, and for a small business, having more tied up in inventory is an extra whammy at income tax time.Amazingly, Jake Bucher's testimony included the following false statement: "the per milliliter tax at the point of sale a fairer method of taxation than a wholesale tax".
I'm curious why you say that, Bill?
The way I see it is: The more who learn how to DIY, the fewer will return to smoking when the FDA's hammer drops next year.