Wouldn't it be better to Challenge the Effectiveness of the Policy? That it is going to Promote a Black Market and Teens doing DIY.
Neither of Which is Controllable. And Neither is Taxable.
- Status
Wouldn't it be better to Challenge the Effectiveness of the Policy? That it is going to Promote a Black Market and Teens doing DIY.
Neither of Which is Controllable. And Neither is Taxable.
Unbelievable ---gmail sent my CASAA notifications to junk. This quietly passed:
https://legislature.vermont.gov/Documents/2020/Docs/BILLS/H-0026/H-0026 As Introduced.pdf
Can they really enforce this?
I don't get it. So what is a wholesale/retail dealer supposed to do with it if you can't ship it out? Am I missing something? Can they only ship it out of state? Cripes, if you're a vaper in Vermont looks like you'll have to get a dealer license to receive diy supplies.gmail sent my CASAA notifications to junk. This quietly passed:
https://legislature.vermont.gov/Documents/2020/Docs/BILLS/H-0026/H-0026 As Introduced.pdf
Can they really enforce this?
If I understand correctly, we can get them, they’ll just be taxed at 92%. I’m not sure how they make the determination, or how it will be implemented. Is it at the discretion of the (web based) business...no idea. Are they going to tax all products from entire websites? What if I buy an empty glass bottle from MFS, for example? What if I order from FT, or a foreign vendor? No clue. The bills have massive support in the Capital. They will go through, if you live in Vermont you need to stock up before July 1st.
H.47 is worded so loosely, they could tax water at 92%.
“Other tobacco products” means any product manufactured from,
4 derived from, or containing tobacco that is intended for human consumption
5 by smoking, chewing, or in any other manner, including products sold as a
6 tobacco substitute, as defined in 7 V.S.A. § 1001(8), and including any liquids,
7 whether nicotine based or not, or delivery devices sold separately for use with
8 a tobacco substitute”
NICOTINE BASED OR NOT?!?! Wtf
“Other tobacco products” means any product manufactured from,
4 derived from, or containing tobacco that is intended for human consumption
5 by smoking, chewing, or in any other manner, including products sold as a
6 tobacco substitute, as defined in 7 V.S.A. § 1001(8), and including any liquids,
7 whether nicotine based or not, or delivery devices sold separately for use with
8 a tobacco substitute”
NICOTINE BASED OR NOT?!?! Wtf
I agree, as others have said...it's not going to happen. If/when teens want something badly enough, they'll darn sure find a way to get it. Forcing them to find alternative sources, and the additional expense to them, won't stop them from having their Juuls and their salt nic pods. It'll be just another example of the, "where there's a will...there's a way".
Geez...to me, that statement seems like a huge generalization and/or exaggeration on both your part...and on the part of the teens. Either that, or in Vermont you do really have a serious problem with your teens...with underage vaping and/or with being truthful.
I've talked with more than just a few teens about this in the last 4-5 months myself. Their ages ranged from 14-19, and some are vapers and some aren't. Not a single 1 of them said that "everyone they know" has an addiction to Juul, or any other pod system. The closest to that (from 8 of the 23 teens)...was that "lots of kids" were using them, even at school. Answers from the other 15 were all less than that. By the way, I was either vaping while talking to these teens, or they were aware that I was a vaper. I also personally knew most of them. So I seriously doubt they weren't being truthful with me.
So...what about the decades when many teens have smoked, instead of vaping? There was no clear and present danger of a generation, or even 2, addicted to nicotine then??? Seems to me like most of us on ECF have been there/done that already! It's not something new now. It's just in a different form.
Well, they certainly can't stop you from buying diy supplies, except maybe the nicotine. All of that falls into cosmetic and cooking supplies.
I’m not so sure. The wording of the bill is pretty broad, I guess we’ll find out how aggressive it is when implemented.
Well, that's just plain stupid. All the folks/industries out there who buy pg and vg to make soaps and other toiletries will be affected. And so will gourmet chefs/food industries who need flavorings for their products.
I really Don't see PG, VG, Food Flavorings being effected by this Legislation.
Either as Internet Restricted. Or as subject to the Tax.
Juul hasn't been fighting this for nearly a decade, as we have. They don't understand yet that the ANTZ won't be placated. They don't want a solution to the "epidemic" because it furthers their agenda. The ultimate goal is wiping tobacco and nicotine from the planet. If that's achieved by all adult smokers dying off, so be it. Smokers' lives only matter if they're under the age of 18. (This is not cynicism, some ANTZ have actually said the former and they clearly believe the latter.)
It's been pointed out to them numerous times that kids who are vaping were very likely to have been smoking if vapor products didn't exist. Now, when the smoking rates go up after vaping goes down, they will claim it's because the vaping kids moved on to smoking rather than the fact that they took away the only safer alternative for kids who were already going to smoke.
I came across this article by accident, it raises my frustration level even more. It is interesting to hear the students views.
@ValleyVapes EssexVT, it seems to support what you said earlier, the legislators know this wont stop it, but they feel they have to do something rather than nothing.
If only they had put even a little thought into it they might have been able to fix the one problem that needs to be solved rather than creating new problems, potentially deadly ones.
Up in Smoke: Students Grade Lawmakers' Anti-Vaping Efforts
@ValleyVapes EssexVT, it seems to support what you said earlier, the legislators know this wont stop it, but they feel they have to do something rather than nothing.
If only they had put even a little thought into it they might have been able to fix the one problem that needs to be solved rather than creating new problems, potentially deadly ones.
Up in Smoke: Students Grade Lawmakers' Anti-Vaping Efforts
Sorry, I missed your question earlier. The reason it only goes to six right now is because they are on the committee. If (or when) it goes to the full floor, the CTA will be updated to include the full Senate.
That is the 92% tax we have been discussing. Serious question though, why 92%? Why not 90%, or 100%, or even 95%? 92 just seems like a strange choice. Although I see some other states doing like 67% and other weird numbers. Are these idiots using a random number generator to determine tax rates? Maybe they are just pulling numbers out of their ...?
It’s the same rate at which they tax traditional tobacco products. So, a pack of the brand I used to smoke is about $12, I guess they figure the average teen can’t muster that kind of scratch. No idea how they came up with the weird number.
The land of Bernie Sanders wants to stifle freedoms?
Say it aint so.....
Say it aint so.....
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
