Vermont bill (HB71) would tax e-cigarettes at 92% wholesale price

[DJ RyckRak]

These people seem to never stop. Why don't they tax skate boards, snow boards, skies and the like. There has been definite proof that there is a health risk with those products.

Soon, my friend- soon.

 

[cabingal]

Here in Minnesota we already have a 70% tax on e-cigs but only on products containing nicotine. So, if you buy a disposable they tax the whole device. Otherwise it applies to filled cartomizers or e-liquid.

 

[Renolizzie]

Here in Minnesota we already have a 70% tax on e-cigs but only on products containing nicotine. So, if you buy a disposable they tax the whole device. Otherwise it applies to filled cartomizers or e-liquid.

Really? Do you just buy online for your juice then?

 

[cabingal]

I am a vendor so I have to pay the state taxes on everything I sell that contains nicotine at 70% wholesale. So, If I buy a $100 bottle of nicotine I pay the state $70 in taxes. If I was to sell pre-filled cartomizers I would pay for the cost of the carto and the juice (because it contains nicotine). Obviously this is a labor of love for me.

 

[Placebo Effect]

Unfortunately, it appears this bill passed the House on Friday. It is now awaiting action in the Senate.

Between Kentucky, Maryland, New Mexico, etc. there has been so much to do that this Call to Action was neglected. Once a committee assignment is made available, we'll need to come out strong against this.

 

[Koman]

Unfortunately, it appears this bill passed the House on Friday. It is now awaiting action in the Senate.

Between Kentucky, Maryland, New Mexico, etc. there has been so much to do that this Call to Action was neglected. Once a committee assignment is made available, we'll need to come out strong against this.

Hmm...interesting to see how it will turn out!

 

[Placebo Effect]

The good news is that the Vermont State Legislature is adjourned until next Tuesday, March 12th.

The bad news is that the bill has yet to be assigned to a Senate committee. I am going to do some research -- hopefully tonight -- as to what committee past tobacco tax bills have been sent to. We could always do a CTA that covers both the Senate Health Committee and the Senate Tax Committee (or whatever committee handles tax and revenue).

 

[VapRVixN]

Just so you guys know, this is not a tax on e-cigarettes... Unfortunately going and emailing these yahoos that run the state I live in might get them thinking about taxing it considering how many people outside of the state are sending email about it. This bill was just a rewording of some of the already in place laws and doesn't reclassify e-cigs out of the Tobacco Substitute class, as such is not included in the new wording for the tax and licensing purposes.

 

[DC2]

Just so you guys know, this is not a tax on e-cigarettes... Unfortunately going and emailing these yahoos that run the state I live in might get them thinking about taxing it considering how many people outside of the state are sending email about it. This bill was just a rewording of some of the already in place laws and doesn't reclassify e-cigs out of the Tobacco Substitute class, as such is not included in the new wording for the tax and licensing purposes.

Please coordinate with Greg Conley (Placebo Effect) from CASAA.

From post #19 above...

If you want to discuss privately, my e-mail is gconley@casaa.org.

 

[Placebo Effect]

The Vermont Attorney General's office recently informed an interested party that they do not read HB71 as taxing e-cigarettes, so this thread can be closed.

The wording of the legislation CASAA is facing is getting more and more confusing by the way.

My apologies to those who I criticized for not thinking this was an e-cig tax bill.