Posts Tagged ‘tax’

Tobacco tax aims to reduce smokers

Thursday, March 11th, 2010

In case you think just American and UK pipe smokers are getting screwed…

Viet Nam News

Updated March, 11 2010 10:14:38

HA NOI — An increase in the tobacco tax will help reduce the number of smokers in Viet Nam, according to an overview survey on tobacco tax in Viet Nam conducted by the Public Health University on Tuesday in Ha Noi.

“The low price of tobacco is one of the reasons for the increasing number of smokers in Viet Nam,” said a member of the survey group, Nguyen Tuan Lam.

“The tax on tobacco was set at 45 per cent of the retail price, lower than the 65-80 per cent recommended by the World Health Organisation (WHO),” Lam said.

According to statistics from the National Tobacco Prevention Programme, Viet Nam is burdened with uncontaminated diseases, including those relating to tobacco. Health authorities estimate that there were about 40,000 smoking fatalities in 2008, and the number would increase to 50,000 per year by 2023.

“In Viet Nam, a 10 cent increase in the tobacco tax would reduce consumption by at least 5 per cent, stop 300,000 smokers, save 100,000 from dying and make nearly VND1.9 trillion (US$100 million) in taxes to the Government budget,” said Lam.

In Viet Nam, nearly 50 per cent of men smoke, 65 per cent of them aged 25-45. Medical spending relating to cancer and heart and lung diseases reached over $75 million in 2005.

“Tobacco prevention measures have been applied in Viet Nam before. However, they’ve mostly been ineffective,” said the rector of the Public Health University, Le Vu Anh.

Researchers said that money spent on food instead of tobacco could help 11.2 per cent of poor families move above the poverty line. A reduction in tobacco consumption would also help improve health conditions, which in turn would help reduce tobacco- and smoking-related diseases.

The survey also recommended raising the tax on thuoc lao (a kind of Vietnamese tobacco smoked via a bamboo pipe) to VND1,000 /100 gram. The item is currently tax-free.

Research from the World Bank said that a 10 per cent increase in the tobacco tax would reduce 4 per cent of the demand in high-income countries and 8 per cent in medium- and low-income countries, though sales would still increase about 7 per cent. Money saved by people giving up cigarettes would be spent on other goods and help create jobs and increase taxes for governments. — VNS

Democratic proposal outrages puffers

Monday, February 22nd, 2010

The Daily Item

By Rick Dandes
The Daily Item

SUNBURY -

Valley smokers are incensed at two congressional Democrats’ proposal to increase the tax on pipe tobacco a whopping 775 percent.


Buck Reibsame smokes a pipe in his office at home near Selinsgrove. Robert Inglis/The Daily Item

Ron Rothermel, of Sunbury, is among Valley pipe smokers outraged by the plan to raise the tax from $2.8311 per pound to $24.78 per pound — the same rate that is imposed on roll-your-own tobacco products.

Many Valley smokers saw an opportunity to save money by buying special blends of pipe tobacco to make their own cigarettes after a higher roll-your-own tobacco products tax took effect last year.

“I smoke cigarettes and occasionally pipes,” Rothermel said. “I wish I hadn’t started smoking, but I did, and I resent the government’s actions. I feel they are picking on a certain class of people and taxing that class. The proposed tax is ridiculously high. It certainly could affect whether I buy pipe tobacco in the future.

“If this tax passes,” he fumed, “what’s next? Since excessive intake of sugar is unhealthy and leads to obesity, will they tax sugar? And what about fried foods? Are they going to tax french fries?”

Where is it all going to stop? Rothermel asked.

The widespread anger is a reaction to House Resolution 4439, or the Tobacco Tax Parity Act of 2010, introduced by U.S. Reps. Steve Cohen, of Tennesee, and Lloyd Doggett, of Texas.

Cohen, reached Friday in Washington, D.C., said the idea for his bill originated last year, after passage of the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) Reauthorization Bill, which increased tobacco taxes to provide tens of millions of America’s children with health insurance.

Since its creation in 1997, CHIP has been funded through revenue generated by federal tobacco taxes.

As part of the CHIP law, roll-your-own tobacco is taxed at a $1.54 an ounce, while pipe tobacco — the exact same product — is taxed at 17 cents an ounce, Cohen said.

“Higher cigarette taxes have proven to be an effective way to discourage children from smoking,” Cohen said. “However, it was only weeks after President Obama signed the Children’s Health Insurance Program into law that the tobacco industry figured out a way to exploit a loophole in the bill that endangers the health of children.

“Roll-your-own tobacco has historically been a small part of the cigarette industry,” Cohen said, but “the exploitation of this loophole enabled roll-your-own tobacco to capture an increasingly large portion of the market. Further exploitation of this loophole has the potential to cost the government more than $30 million a month in lost revenue.”

Instead of folding in the face of high taxes, tobacco companies quickly responded to the roll-your-own tax increase by all but shutting down those brands and reinventing them under a less-taxed category — pipe tobacco.

The tax? About a tenth of roll-your-own tobacco, at $2.83 per pound.

Smokers of pipes and cigarettes responded by buying up pipe tobacco.


Roll-your-own brands disappeared overnight, replaced with pipe tobacco brands carrying the same names.

Tobacco companies on their Web sites said they were just trying to find a legal way to stay afloat after being saddled with an enormous tax increase.

This, Cohen said, is why he introduced the bill, which is now in the House Ways and Means Committee.

House Resolution 4439 has not yet been scheduled for a floor vote, and may not be, said Josh Drobnyk, an aide to U.S. Rep. Chris Carney, D-10, of Dimock.

After all, there is only one co-sponsor.

Of the legislation, Carney said: “I am focused on measures that will improve our economy and ease — not increase — the tax burden on our working families during these tough economic times.”

The tax burden is the point of contention, pipe tobacco users said.

If the bill passes, taxes on tobacco — sold both by the gram and by the ounce — would rise to:

  • $2.43 per 50 grams
  • $2.74 per 2 ounces
  • $10.98 per 8 ounces
  • $24.78 per 16 ounces

These costs would be in addition to the price pipe smokers pay for those amounts of pipe tobacco. For example, with the average price of a 100-gram tin of McClelland Frog Morton about $13.20, the new price would be $18.06.


Government manipulating us, smokers charge

Buck Reibsame, of Selinsgrove, is steamed about the proposed hikes, as are many of his friends.

“I wouldn’t mind a fair tax, with maybe a 6 to 7 percent hike, but this one, if passed, would be outrageous,” he said Thursday.

“I’ve been smoking for about 40 years and I’ve never seen such an attack on a group of people like this one. If those politicians want to do something to raise revenues, how about cutting back on their perks?”

The government, added long-time smoker Jon McLaughlin, of Selinsgrove, is trying to legislate how he lives through tax manipulation.

“Last year they went after roll-your-own smokers,” said McLaughlin, a smoker for 41 years. “This year, they’re going after anything and everyone. It’s just about raising money. It’s always about money.”

What and who is to benefit from the tax increase? asked Bill Jennings, of Lewisburg.

“Don’t people in Congress have much more important things to worry about? And what could possibly be their justification for a tax amount of $24.78 per pound on something that often doesn’t cost that much to begin with?” he asked, and paused for a second. “Oh yeah, I get it. This tax is intended to make it so only the wealthiest can smoke pipes. Well how about that? Come on legislators. Be serious.”

Jennifer, a worker at a local smoke shop, who asked that her surname not be used, said she switched to pipe tobacco, instead of roll-you-own, and began rolling it into cigarettes. “The price was worth it,” she said. “And taste-wise, I didn’t find much difference.”

Now, she may have no choice but to pay higher prices.

Pipe tobacco is nominally coarser and somewhat moister than most blends of cigarette tobacco. But there are no regulations that say it has to be that way. The federal government says the only difference between the two is how the two tobaccos are labeled.

“The bill punishes pipe smokers and retail tobacconists,” said Jonah Johnstone, a smoker from Selinsgrove. Johnstone thinks this is nothing more than an attempt to rope in more taxes from roll-your-own cigarette tobacco re-labeled as pipe tobacco.

A tax increase of 775 percent on anything is ludicrous, Johnstone said.

“It could conceivably destroy an industry of pipe craftsmen, small farmers, tobacco blenders and retailers.”


A heavy hit for retailers and producers

“If this law passes, it could hurt out business a lot,” said Michelle Longenberger, an employee at Puff Discount, in Sunbury.

Pipe tobacco represents 30 to 40 percent of the shop’s business, Longenberger said.

“We sell everything from small pouches of tobacco, for 94 cents, to larger cans, for $16. Most customers who buy are simply rolling their own cigarettes. It’s what I do. You can roll a fair number for less than $2 total. Of course, that would all change if taxes were raised to the proposed levels.

“I really hope the bill doesn’t pass.”

Copyright © 1999-2010 cnhi, inc.

You know, I consider myself somewhat liberal, but I have to tell you, nothing would make me happier than lynching these two representatives.

Shughart: Tax is no pipe dream

Saturday, February 6th, 2010

htrnews.com

This tax is no pipe dream
February 5, 2010

I am a college professor. My job description therefore requires that, among other things, I wear a tweed sport coat with leather elbow patches, grow a beard, spend two days a week in the classroom, and smoke a pipe.

That last essential trait is now under attack. A bill before Congress proposes to increase the federal excise tax on pipe tobacco, making it equal to the recently enacted tax on loose cigarette tobacco purchased by smokers who “roll their own.” If passed, the bill would tax pipe tobacco at nearly $25 per pound, an increase of 775 percent over the current level.

Tobacco smoking is bad for one’s health. To my knowledge, however, no scientific studies have been conducted showing that pipe smokers (or cigar smokers, for that matter) have shorter lives than nonsmokers. There certainly is no evidence that nonsmokers who are exposed to environmental pipe or cigar smoke are harmed by it. Indeed, every person who smells the ambient odor of my pipe says that they are reminded of their fathers or grandfathers.

So, why are pipe smokers selectively being targeted by Washington? The answer is political opportunism. The federal government has been on a spending binge since George W. Bush occupied the White House. Over the past nine years, America’s taxpayers have been burdened with unprecedented expansions in the federal budget to finance new educational mandates (“No Child Left Behind”), new healthcare initiatives (Medicare Part D, to pay for granny’s meds), two wars on terrorism (Iraq and Afghanistan), failed economic “stimulus” plans and the bailouts of irresponsible financial institutions.

With annual budget deficits now running at $1.4 trillion, Washington is desperate for revenue enhancements (i.e., new sources of tax revenue). Rather than increasing taxes on a broad basis, which predictably would elicit broad-based opposition from already overburdened taxpayers, it is politically expedient to single out minorities who cannot bring effective power to bear in the legislative marketplace. And so we have seen proposals to tax those who have sacrificed wages in return for generous, “Cadillac” health-insurance plans, to tax the consumers of junk food and carbonated soft drinks, and to tax transactions in common stocks.

It is naïve to think that our elected representatives are attentive to the public’s interests. What presidents and the members of Congress do in practice is to transfer wealth to the special interests that are critical to their re-election prospects. It is therefore not surprising that they finance those wealth transfers by taxing groups that are not important to them electorally.

And so the tax burden falls most heavily on anyone, anywhere who is politically impotent, especially if they can be portrayed as the consumers of products that, on the flimsiest of scientific evidence, harm themselves or impose costs on others.

That mindset unleashes the nanny state to run amok. Pipe and cigar smokers are no threat to the public’s health. Even if smoking a pipe or a cigar harms the consumers of those products, that harm is borne privately and thus is not an issue of public policy concern.

But it unfortunately is if tax policy is predatory, with the aim at raising revenue from any group that cannot marshal effective political opposition to it. Perhaps it is time to add pipe tobacco, junk food and soft drinks to the agendas of the tea parties now being organized to oppose a government that is everywhere more intrusive.

William F. Shughart II, a senior fellow at the Independent Institute, is F.A.P. Barnard Distinguished Professor of Economics at the University of Mississippi. He is the editor of Taxing Choice: The Predatory Politics of Fiscal Discrimination (Independent Studies in Political Economy)
.

Holy Jumpin’ Jesus! Stop a 775% Tax Increase on Pipe Tobacco!

Tuesday, January 26th, 2010

Pipes Magazine

January 23rd, 2010

No Pipe Tobacco Taxes!H.R. 4439, the Tobacco Tax Parity Act of 2010 was introduced on January 13, 2010 and would raise the tax on pipe tobacco 775% from $2.8311 to $24.78 per pound.

As a service to the pipe smoking community and the industry of pipe makers and pipe tobacco producers we have set up a free service that will automatically send emails to your Senators and Congressmen.

In 15 seconds – Email Your Senators and Congressmen for FREE
Stop a 775% Tax Increase on Pipe Tobacco!

- We have already typed the letter for you. The system does everything. Just enter your address, we find the right contacts and send them your opposition to the tax increase.

In 15 seconds – Email Your Senators and Congressmen for FREE
Stop a 775% Tax Increase on Pipe Tobacco!

- You can add your own comments too!

In 15 seconds – Email Your Senators and Congressmen for FREE
Stop a 775% Tax Increase on Pipe Tobacco!

- Really make an impact by having a real letter printed on paper and hand-delivered. (This cost $3 per letter and is optional. You are given the choice at the end.)

A tax increase of 775% on anything is ludicrous. This will kill many small businesses and an historical tradition.

Download the bill here

Cigarette Smokers Infinitely More Stupid Than Pipe Smokers

Tuesday, January 12th, 2010

There is an image of pipe smokers being overly educated, erudite, snobs. Well, the truth is that we just look that way because cigarette smokers are often more mentally stunted than us. I’m not smart, but check out these examples of cigarette stupidity.

These two pictures are packages opened in Customs and intercepted by the Postal Inspection Service. They were imported to get around state and Federal Taxes. Busted, busted, busted.

FW_ Picture_Page_2_Image_0001 FW_ Picture_Page_1_Image_0001

Okay, that may be a little harsh. I mean, that’s just one person importing cigarettes illegally, and probably planning to resell them at a profit.

But, then again, check out these bizarre inventions by cigarette smokers.

Rainy Day Cigarette Holder, 1954

Rainy Day Cigarette Holder, 1954

President of Zeus Corp., Robert L. Stern, smoking a cigarette from his self-designed rainy day cigarette holder.

Photo: YALE JOEL
Mar 01, 1954

Would it work in Washington state when it rains sideways?

Cigarette Pack Holder

Cigarette Pack Holder, 1955

Photo: Jacobsen/Getty Images
Jan 01, 1955

Look ma! Lung cancer in one smoke.

Cigarette Holder Built For Two

Cigarette Holder Built For Two, 1955

Photo: Jacobsen/Getty Images
Jan 01, 1955

God, that’s romantic.