possible tax on E-cigarettes pending in congress, PLEASE oppose this.
- Thread starter sqirl1
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
No it wasn't. It was more of a general statement made out of the frustration of having to take time out of my studying to look things up and figure out what the hell was going on with this. Something I really don't have time for.
Would have been helpful to have that along with the original post.
Thanks and good luck.
Again, BINGO. Sigh. We've tried to inform him, Cryx, but apparently he just does not want to listen to those who have done their homework and actually kept up with these regulatory/litigation issues. Nor do the words of the legislation and regulations themselves appear to sink in.
Denial, river in Egypt, etc.. . . .
I don't see this standing if it passes. Common sense ssays taxing ecigs is bad move.
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
Last edited:
No offense at all, but read the links I post. Nicotine is from tobacco. Thus it's been ruled as a "tobacco product" as much as you and I and others might disagree. The FDA originally pushed for a ruling as a medical device which would have meant an outright ban -- to the delight of the pharmaceutical and tobacco industries. Instead they ended the appeals process and settled for e-cigs as a "tobacco product" since that falls within FDA jurisdiction and appeases the tobacco companies since they are taxed to death, and big tobacco didn't like this shiny/wonderful/healthier new product (e-cigs) stealing their income w/o tax.
Now consider that the FDA could potentially ban online sales like they do cigarettes. With the ruling, envision a future where you can only buy e-cig juice locally from the mall or from big tobacco at gas stations. Yippee!!
EDIT: The proposed legislation -will- tax pipe tobacco.
I'm already ahead of you. I've being planning to buy 0mg because it -should- dodge regulation, and then add nicotine despite my hesitance to handle something that hazardous(*). However, the ruling means nicotine -is- already subject to FDA because it's a "tobacco product". The verdict is a tactical win for e-cigs, but the FDA is determined and poised to win the war. If the FSPTCA is amended, then we are truly, truly screwed.
* Just wait until some morning you take a syringe and inject some air into your high-ish VG bottle (wow nuport) because it's hard to draw the liquid. Then due to a complete fluke, a very small stream of pressurized liquid sprays into your eye. Good luck convincing everyone you aren't stoned when one of your eyes is COMPLETELY bloodshot for two days. The only plus is you got your morning nic fix before vaping...
Last edited:
Common sense if you equate e-cigs with less stress on the health industry and yourself. However, that's less profit for the health industry, less profit for big tobacco, and less revenue for the government. Sorry to be cynical is my old(er) age, but $$$ make the world go round.
Last edited:
Based on my personal reading, problems only loom for nicotine-laden juice and nicotine itself. I also see problems with non-tobacco-like flavors since they will claim the other flavors "appeal to children". As for personal responsibility, I stress to my children to NEVER start using anything addictive, despite it feels gooood, because you will use or struggle with it for LIFE. No pun intended on V4L! 
Disclaimer: I'm not a weaselly politician being woo-ed by lobbyists. Who knows where this will go? The wine compels me to state that I'm not an anti-government nut, just an independent that leans libertarian.
Disclaimer: I'm not a weaselly politician being woo-ed by lobbyists. Who knows where this will go? The wine compels me to state that I'm not an anti-government nut, just an independent that leans libertarian.
I agree, NEVER start anything that's addictive ! And I'm in trouble cuz the child in me has me hooked on the "non-tobacco-like" flavors 
I do use mostly 0mg now, thank goodness. Only have a few flavors that have nic (only because I love them & they've been outta stock in the 0mg) Thanks for the info btw 
I do use mostly 0mg now, thank goodness. Only have a few flavors that have nic (only because I love them & they've been outta stock in the 0mg) Thanks for the info btw
You can bet the mortgage on your house the FDA will try to ban non-tobacco flavors, and precisely on those specious grounds. (Of course, the orange and cherry-flavored nicotine lozenges sold by Big Pharma are totally OK in FDA's little Looking Glass Universe . . .)
That's true !! I've had an afternoon of computer time today and I've been addicted to the ECF the whole time !! At least it's a good addiction, interesting reading and vaping 
Better then some other addictions one could have right ?
Very true Ms. Anita, and the withdraws from when it goes down just as bad as alot of those worse addictions...
I better stop talkin here or I'll be in trouble fer bein off topic
Not true hon. I am willing to listen, I just disagree. I've never been to Egypt, and the only thing I'm in denial about is my alcoholism.
I know most will hate me for this, but I'm not a steadfast supporter of non-taxation of e-cigs. It's a luxury item IMO, not a necessity. If it happens, it happens. The only thing I would be completely against is any outright ban of the product itself.
At some point the logical step is to ban all nicotine items including ecigs but it would have to happen over several generations. By keeping them on the market and taxing, that's worse. The steps make sense even though I don't like them.
1 Taxing. make it expensive so people not addicted are less likely to be able to continue/pick up the habbit. Yet allowing those who still use have access but realize rough times are coming. Things are about to change. Also lowers merchent profits hinders industry.
2 Down the line ban ALL nicotine products period. Ecigs, cigerettes, patch, all of it.
Putzing around like they are its inhumane. Cigarettes need to be pulled. Maybe 50 years later ecigs. So I'll protest with the rest of you. But in the end, there needs to be an end. Not profit off of the sick and dying.
Why is it when I type ecig on YouTube 50% of the videos seems to be people under 30? Sure younger people are more tech savvy. All I'm saying I wonder how many young people are using ecigs being cheap vs smoking expensive cigs if they weren't available. Overall ecigs are a great item. I'm wondering if its turning into a fad. Something has to be done for future generations. Taxing only goes so far. Teaching DARE programs only do so much. It simply needs to be banned at some point if nicotine is ever a thing of the past. Touchy subject cause its not black and white. Please don't flame me. Just posting a different side of the overall picture. I'm angry that its the government that profits here!!
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
1 Taxing. make it expensive so people not addicted are less likely to be able to continue/pick up the habbit. Yet allowing those who still use have access but realize rough times are coming. Things are about to change. Also lowers merchent profits hinders industry.
2 Down the line ban ALL nicotine products period. Ecigs, cigerettes, patch, all of it.
Putzing around like they are its inhumane. Cigarettes need to be pulled. Maybe 50 years later ecigs. So I'll protest with the rest of you. But in the end, there needs to be an end. Not profit off of the sick and dying.
Why is it when I type ecig on YouTube 50% of the videos seems to be people under 30? Sure younger people are more tech savvy. All I'm saying I wonder how many young people are using ecigs being cheap vs smoking expensive cigs if they weren't available. Overall ecigs are a great item. I'm wondering if its turning into a fad. Something has to be done for future generations. Taxing only goes so far. Teaching DARE programs only do so much. It simply needs to be banned at some point if nicotine is ever a thing of the past. Touchy subject cause its not black and white. Please don't flame me. Just posting a different side of the overall picture. I'm angry that its the government that profits here!!
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
Last edited:
Prohibition is completely insane if you're supposedly the land of the free. It does nothing but increase crime rates because people are going to do what they want no matter what the law says, and prohibited items will still make it's way into the country..... Stepping out of this thread now...
I'm definitely not in favor of prohibition. Period. Or banning(same thing). Period.
Taxes. From my perspective, not necessarily bad.
Sorry Morandir sir, I disagree with your attempt to state an opinion, and then walk away from the thread. I think the discussion could only benefit from your intelligent thoughts/opinions, whether or not we agree/disagree. There doesn't need to be unnecessary sniping and overblown conflict. So far I've seen none of that in this thread. Rational minds can discuss the issue without it getting out of control.
Taxes. From my perspective, not necessarily bad.
Sorry Morandir sir, I disagree with your attempt to state an opinion, and then walk away from the thread. I think the discussion could only benefit from your intelligent thoughts/opinions, whether or not we agree/disagree. There doesn't need to be unnecessary sniping and overblown conflict. So far I've seen none of that in this thread. Rational minds can discuss the issue without it getting out of control.
Personally prefere it to be illegal vs legal and taxed. Black market will always be there and crime as well. Its all about minimizing the damage. Now pot I'm very shocked it passed under "medical" use. Good for the grean stuff
but nicotine brings nothing to the table. Nothing it contributes to society. It represents death. Wouldn't be surprised if in some school text book they mark the last 60 years the ash ages or something. 25% people addicted to a lethal substance that the government taxes and profits. We should be ashamed. OK, getting to cought up here. "Leaves his soap box the way he found it, well used".
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
