The #1 reason states want PV's banned.

[MoonRose]

This explains why NY wants PV's banned and is also the reason all other states want them banned as well. If smokers stop smoking then the states will lose all that money they are getting from the taxes on analogs. They don't give a for our health, they want us to smoke so they can keep collecting the mega bucks from the taxes.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/22/nyregion/22budget.html?_r=1

 

[jj2]

Well we'll be seeing a lot more NYers around here.


--------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------
Consider me your recycling center for njoy Pro, Smoking Everywhere Gold, Cloud 9, Smoke 51 Trio, and DSE103 useless batteries.
Other hardware if it’s still usable.
Those I loan out to/give to thank you.
----------------------------------------------
Support CASAA
CASAA | The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-Free Alternatives Association
Don’t forget to donate to IVAQS research
CASAA.org

 

[ezmoose]

The political selling point of cigarette (tobacco) taxes has been to fund smoking prevention programs and offset health care costs. Care to guess how much of that money is actually used in this fashion versus funding other priorities?

 

[K.P.]

They don't give a for our health, they want us to smoke so they can keep collecting the mega bucks from the taxes.http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/22/nyregion/22budget.html?_r=1

If this were actually true, there would be no indoor smoking bans.

 

[pianoguy]

Article from 3 years ago:

22 Million New Smokers Needed: Funding SCHIP Expansion with a Tobacco Tax | The Heritage Foundation

Smokers should feel proud - they're paying for everything ;-)

 

[5cardstud]

In Washington they just went ahead and voted for a buck a yr. for a few yrs.

 

[kristin]

If this were actually true, there would be no indoor smoking bans.

Indoor smoking bans have no consideration for the health of the smokers - just for bystanders.

Indoor bans don't say, "Quit smoking." They say, "Go smoke outside."

It's a win-win for politicians.

If they REALLY cared about health, they wouldn't just ban smoking indoors. They'd ban it altogether. The only thing preventing that is money (Big Tobacco profits, tax revenues and not having to fund a war on a black market that would form.) Since smokers only make up 21% of the population in the U.S., they aren't anywhere close to being a majority of the voters - so it's not like they (as a special interest group) hold any political clout to keep smoking legal.

 

[ezmoose]

Here's some novel uses of the tobacco tax revenue!

NoCigTax.com Cigarette Taxes - Where Does the Money Go?

 

[MoonRose]

Hmmm ... cig taxes are supposed to be used to fund stop smoking programs ... maybe would should demand that they do just that and start paying for all our PV supplies to keep us from smoking analog cigs ...

 

[Cyia]

It's a contradiction is what it is. Let's up the tax on analogs, tell you that the price is up that high because we want you to quit and you might as well spend your money trying to quit. But here is the problem. If the 21% of americans who smoked just up and quit, the country would fall apart. The big wigs of the tobacco industry would have to export product at triple the rate to even keep even a tiny bit close to the revenue they are making off the 21% here in the states. Politicians would be SOL, especially the FDA since the tobacco industry lines their pockets, politician's pockets and any one else who favors for their side including the the pharmaceutical company. This is why i don't read or watch the news. It's depressing, it makes me want to punch a lot of people in the mouth. Ignorance is a too common of a thing here in the states and it's sickening to say so but it's the absolute truth.

 

[CaptJay]

This explains why NY wants PV's banned and is also the reason all other states want them banned as well. If smokers stop smoking then the states will lose all that money they are getting from the taxes on analogs. They don't give a for our health, they want us to smoke so they can keep collecting the mega bucks from the taxes.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/22/nyregion/22budget.html?_r=1

You sound surprised?
Smokers keep a lot of things funded - they'd rather we died paying taxes than have everyone else pay a share and possibly lose votes.

 

[MoonRose]

Hehe ... well the hubby and I are doing our parts to reduce the revenue that the government gets from smokers.

Hubby and I stopped smoking just over 3 weeks ago = lost gov revenue from taxes on 2 cartons a week.

2 friends stopped smoking 2 weeks ago = lost gov revenue from taxes on 1.5 cartons a week.

1 friend will stop smoking next week = lost gov revenue from taxes on 1 carton a week.

1 friend will stop smoking in 2 weeks = lost gov revenue from taxes on 1 carton a week.

My sister will stop smoking next month = lost gov revenue from taxes on 1 carton a week.

Yep, we are doing our part ...

 

[kj4lxw]

Issue about banning tobacco completely if it is so dangerous is somewhat mute, imho. It is an infringement on personal rights/choice.
Too much uproar if that happened. Yes there is the money side of it, and that helps them to be sated with allowing it's use by taxation. Along the lines of 2nd amendment deal.

 

[K.P.]

According to the linked article, the new taxes would raise $440 million (per year, I assume). If this source of income for the state disappeared overnight, that $440 million would need to be made up by 19,541,453 people (the population of the state of New York). They would need to raise each person's yearly tax burden by a whopping $22.50 per year. This could be done almost imperceptibly with tiny increases to rates for income tax, property tax, gasoline tax, alcohol tax, automotive tax (I assume NY has some form) and other little surcharges.

Feel free to double-check my math. It is possible I missed a keystroke.

 

[Our House]

Sadly the amount of cigarette tax, like virtually everything else the State does, is a business decision. If the taxes raise the cigarette price too high (like say, $50/pack), people would quit smoking. If the taxes are too low, the State doesn't make much money. So they need to find a happy medium which consumers are willing to pay in order to keep smoking.

It's hard (read: impossible) to have the public health's interests in mind when making these sorts of decisions.

 

[BigJimW]

Here in Rhode Island, certain brands of cigarettes are already over $10.00 a pack. That nine and change estimate from that NY Times article is probably for the cheapest generics. I'll be willing to bet that brand name cigarettes go as high as $11/$12 a pack.

Well, I'm glad I don't have to pay those taxes anymore. That is why they want to rid of e-cigs. I'm one less payer of the sin tax.

 

[rayneinspain]

According to the linked article, the new taxes would raise $440 million (per year, I assume). If this source of income for the state disappeared overnight, that $440 million would need to be made up by 19,541,453 people (the population of the state of New York). They would need to raise each person's yearly tax burden by a whopping $22.50 per year. This could be done almost imperceptibly with tiny increases to rates for income tax, property tax, gasoline tax, alcohol tax, automotive tax (I assume NY has some form) and other little surcharges.

Feel free to double-check my math. It is possible I missed a keystroke.

Ah, but how many states' sin taxes have actually met or exceeded their goal? Not many...somewhere around 30%. (sorry, can't find the article link I was reading only yesterday)

The rest have been dismal failures, many resulting in substantial net losses that have sent legislators reeling.

I'm so sick and tired of them thinking we're actually grateful for the abuse and taxation.

 

[Drozd]

I think it's more complex than just taxes...I think it also has to do with the tobacco master settlements and securitization and tobacco bonds...many states are on the hook for selling their settlement money for payments right away and now they have to pay that money back eventually...so they've a vested interest in keeping smokers smoking...

though older check out this article: Ten years later, tobacco deal going up in smoke - The Red Tape Chronicles - msnbc.com

 

[xg4bx]

I'm in NJ and we have a fairly large pharma industry. If everybody was vaping instead of buying useless patches and gum it would put a hurtin' on their profits.

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&u...roup&ct=more-results&resnum=1&ved=0CC0QtwMwAA

pharma businesses in nj.

 

[Bill Godshall]

MoonRose is incorrect in claiming that preserving cigarette tax revenue is a reason why bills have been introduced to ban the sale of e-cigarettes in some states.

These bills (none of which has been enacted into law thanks to concerned e-cigarette consumers) have been introduced by liberal Democrats who oppose smoking but who have been duped by the inaccurate and misleading claims about the health risks and marketing practices of/for e-cigarettes by CTFK/ACS/AHA/ALA and the FDA.