I would have no issue with this if we had hardware that did not need constant replacement or maintenance.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Taxation of E-Liquid in the US
- Thread starter Coastal Cowboy
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
-
- Tags
- litecigusa provari
- Status
Now I'm about to start putting my money where my mouth is
Well I'm trying damn PayPal
Well I'm trying damn PayPal
Last edited:
I have said this before.. I think you all flatter yourselves about how much we are cutting into BT. I read BT sold 5.5 trillion analogs in one year. Those numbers are staggering.
I also see the only portion they can really tax is the nicotine. And right now it does not look like there is enough of that going out the window to gain any serious tax dollars from. I would assume that is changing, or the government is getting greedier ( is that possible?) I would think our nicotine base prices is going to increase about tenfold. That will knock out all the part timers and leave the path open for corporate america to step in.
However, I am sure the black market will live on, just like it always does.
I also see the only portion they can really tax is the nicotine. And right now it does not look like there is enough of that going out the window to gain any serious tax dollars from. I would assume that is changing, or the government is getting greedier ( is that possible?) I would think our nicotine base prices is going to increase about tenfold. That will knock out all the part timers and leave the path open for corporate america to step in.
However, I am sure the black market will live on, just like it always does.
Always expect miracles.......
It starts small but grows.
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ow-urging-ca-legislators-oppose-sb-648-a.html
It starts small but grows.
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ow-urging-ca-legislators-oppose-sb-648-a.html
The only state currently taxing e-cigarettes is Minnesota and it had nothing to do with tobacco company lobbying. Minnesota added e-cigarettes to the definition of tobacco product back in 2010, long before tobacco companies entered the market. Unfortunately, CASAA found out about it after it had already passed, but in 2013 issued a Call to Action when the tax was raised to an outrageous 95% of the wholesale price, per disposable e-cigarette or refill cartridge. (Refill bottles seem not to have been specified, but based on the language of the law, it would likely be per wholesale bottle cost.) The tobacco tax is in lieu of state and local sales tax and is the same as the tax imposed on novel tobacco products (not the same as cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, roll-your-own or chew.)
While CASAA still fought the tax, it's important for people to see just how such a high tobacco tax actually effected the e-cigarette market. Because cigarette taxes were also raised at the same time (it kicked in this July) it seems to still be a boon for the e-cigarette market: E-cigarette stores boom in Minnesota after cigarette tax increase - Minneapolis / St. Paul Business Journal
The worry that a tobacco tax applied to e-cigarettes would make them just as expensive or nearly as expensive as traditional cigarettes didn't happen in Minnesota. Because the wholesale cost of refill cartridges are around 10¢ each (or less, depending on bulk sale costs), the tax on a 5 pack of cartridges would only be 48¢. That would make a $5 pack $5.48. If it was taxed under the state and local sales tax, it would be up to $5.44 depending upon local taxes. A 10 ml bottle of liquid with a wholesale cost of 95¢ would theoretically be taxed 90¢ in Minnesota. The state and local sales tax on a $10 bottle would be up to 79¢. So, if a retailer sold a 10 ml bottle for $10 it would cost $10.90 under the tobacco tax or $10.79 under the sales taxes. Meanwhile, one pack of brand-name cigarettes costs $7 - $8. (The Federal government currently has no tax for "other tobacco products" such as dissolvables and e-cigarettes and it would take an act of Congress to create one. That could take years and will only happen if we can't convince them that there is no justification for a Federal e-cigarette tax.)
So, even though we will still keep fighting these taxes as being completely unjustified (and because tobacco taxes are too easily increased,) folks should know that the concern that e-cigs falling under a tobacco tax will automatically make e-cigarettes unaffordable or anywhere near the cost of traditional cigarettes may be unfounded. That doesn't mean we won't keep fighting them, though!!
While CASAA still fought the tax, it's important for people to see just how such a high tobacco tax actually effected the e-cigarette market. Because cigarette taxes were also raised at the same time (it kicked in this July) it seems to still be a boon for the e-cigarette market: E-cigarette stores boom in Minnesota after cigarette tax increase - Minneapolis / St. Paul Business Journal
The worry that a tobacco tax applied to e-cigarettes would make them just as expensive or nearly as expensive as traditional cigarettes didn't happen in Minnesota. Because the wholesale cost of refill cartridges are around 10¢ each (or less, depending on bulk sale costs), the tax on a 5 pack of cartridges would only be 48¢. That would make a $5 pack $5.48. If it was taxed under the state and local sales tax, it would be up to $5.44 depending upon local taxes. A 10 ml bottle of liquid with a wholesale cost of 95¢ would theoretically be taxed 90¢ in Minnesota. The state and local sales tax on a $10 bottle would be up to 79¢. So, if a retailer sold a 10 ml bottle for $10 it would cost $10.90 under the tobacco tax or $10.79 under the sales taxes. Meanwhile, one pack of brand-name cigarettes costs $7 - $8. (The Federal government currently has no tax for "other tobacco products" such as dissolvables and e-cigarettes and it would take an act of Congress to create one. That could take years and will only happen if we can't convince them that there is no justification for a Federal e-cigarette tax.)
So, even though we will still keep fighting these taxes as being completely unjustified (and because tobacco taxes are too easily increased,) folks should know that the concern that e-cigs falling under a tobacco tax will automatically make e-cigarettes unaffordable or anywhere near the cost of traditional cigarettes may be unfounded. That doesn't mean we won't keep fighting them, though!!
Minnesota isnt NY and other out of hand states with their insane taxes...Just because it's not so
bad in one state doesn't mean it won't be in other states.
All states /politicians must be treated the same and feel the pressure when increasing or making up new taxes. These DB's are always wanting to tax tax tax ,regardless if it's pennies or dollars they need to know they will be voted out !
Mark my words..as this industry grows so will the taxes ...even in Minnesota .
bad in one state doesn't mean it won't be in other states.
All states /politicians must be treated the same and feel the pressure when increasing or making up new taxes. These DB's are always wanting to tax tax tax ,regardless if it's pennies or dollars they need to know they will be voted out !
Mark my words..as this industry grows so will the taxes ...even in Minnesota .
Actually, New York taxes "other tobacco products" at 75% of wholesale cost. That's less than Minnesota.
Yes, it could go up in the future - which is why we still fight them. But it would have to be extremely high to get even close to making e-cigarettes cost anything near the same as cigarettes in New York.
Yes, it could go up in the future - which is why we still fight them. But it would have to be extremely high to get even close to making e-cigarettes cost anything near the same as cigarettes in New York.
Last edited:
Of course i wouldn't be happy about it.....but i would pay twice that before i let myself get bullied into going back to tobacco. I'm investing in my health here.
I'd slightly less sad, because my ejuice would arrive from China in a big package labeled "VITAMINS."
But no less mad, grrrr.
I can only hope it's a tax and not an outright ban on juices made by the small artisan makers.
I primarily DIY, but taxes don't bother me as much as bans do. If we had a choice of one or the other, I would chose taxation. I am pretty prepared no matter what happens, but I would pay the taxes and keep on vaping.
- Status
