Do taxes on products really curb vices?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Edwin1961
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

Edwin1961

Guest
Today in Ohio, new taxes go into effect.
Sales Tax on ONE pack of cigarettes went up 70cents. A carton of cigarettes has increased $7.00 just in taxes…

When local, city and state governemnts increase taxes (aka sin tax) does this REALLY curb those vices brought upon by the products used?

BTW: I don’t smoke and never really started.
 
40.png
Edwin1961:
Today in Ohio, new taxes go into effect.
Sales Tax on ONE pack of cigarettes went up 70cents. A carton of cigarettes has increased $7.00 just in taxes…

When local, city and state governemnts increase taxes (aka sin tax) does this REALLY curb those vices brought upon by the products used?

BTW: I don’t smoke and never really started.
Click to expand...
No…I started smoking when smokes cost $1.50 they are now up to $5.50…still have not stopped.
 
No, they just hurt the poor people. Liberal Democrats try to claim they are the party that helps the poor people yet they raise taxes on everything from cigaretts to gas to food and clothing. Democrats have never met a tax they don’t like and they claim to be the party for the poor people.

Allow me to get on a political rant for a minute or so, that’s the difference between the Democrats (communist/socialist) party and the Republican (American) party. The Democrats want to have as many people as possible recieving government assistance. The Democrats view success as how many people are recieving government assistance, the Republicans view success by how many people no longer need government assistance.
 
40.png
Petertherock:
No, they just hurt the poor people. Liberal Democrats try to claim they are the party that helps the poor people yet they raise taxes on everything from cigaretts to gas to food and clothing. Democrats have never met a tax they don’t like and they claim to be the party for the poor people.

Allow me to get on a political rant for a minute or so, that’s the difference between the Democrats (communist/socialist) party and the Republican (American) party. The Democrats want to have as many people as possible recieving government assistance. The Democrats view success as how many people are recieving government assistance, the Republicans view success by how many people no longer need government assistance.
Click to expand...
BTW: Our governor is a Republican…and NOT well liked even by his party.

I am sure if my mother were alive today, she’d stop because of the cost. BTW she died from lung cancer.
 
No they don’t. People will smoke, drink or whatever no matter what taxes they impose. When I saw a sign at a gas station "Sale—$5.75 a pack for X brand I was shocked what the heck is “normal” price??? BTW gas prices are out of control but I still will drive.
 
40.png
Edwin1961:
Today in Ohio, new taxes go into effect.
Sales Tax on ONE pack of cigarettes went up 70cents. A carton of cigarettes has increased $7.00 just in taxes…

When local, city and state governemnts increase taxes (aka sin tax) does this REALLY curb those vices brought upon by the products used?

BTW: I don’t smoke and never really started.
Click to expand...
as I recall when the campaign to add and increase these taxes began, the purpose was to fund sports stadiums and ballparks, and the legislators actually hoped more people would smoke and drink so they could collect more money.
 
40.png
puzzleannie:
as I recall when the campaign to add and increase these taxes began, the purpose was to fund sports stadiums and ballparks, and the legislators actually hoped more people would smoke and drink so they could collect more money.
Click to expand...
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: **That is rich! **
 
Yeah, the Democrats wanted to fund free health care by cigarette taxes. I remember Rush Limbaugh saying if they did that then we would all be obligated to smoke to make sure people have health care LOL!
 
Pretty funny. 🙂

I remember thinking that when cigarettes got up to $1.00 a pack, I would definitely quit.

$4.00 a pack later… 😦

I think higher taxes might get some people to quit. But, committed addicts (raising my hand, here) will gripe and keep on smoking.

Elizabeth
 
40.png
ElizabethJoy:
Pretty funny. 🙂

I remember thinking that when cigarettes got up to $1.00 a pack, I would definitely quit.

$4.00 a pack later… 😦

I think higher taxes might get some people to quit. But, committed addicts (raising my hand, here) will gripe and keep on smoking.

Elizabeth
Click to expand...
WIth the new tax in Ohio, a carton, I think, is nearing $50.00 or more!

Come on, someone else from Ohio chime in and let me know for sure on this!
 
40.png
Edwin1961:
Today in Ohio, new taxes go into effect.
Sales Tax on ONE pack of cigarettes went up 70cents. A carton of cigarettes has increased $7.00 just in taxes…

When local, city and state governemnts increase taxes (aka sin tax) does this REALLY curb those vices brought upon by the products used?

BTW: I don’t smoke and never really started.
Click to expand...
Nope…at least not across the board. I used to work in Tobacco Tax Enforcement for Oregon’s task force, and what we frequently saw was that it often simply moved the puchase to the black market–e.g the internet. If you increase taxes beyond a certain point, you actually decrease the revenues and increase bad will among the public. The only place it makes a possible dent to consumption would be the young, but that has to be combined with enforcement such as the decoy programs.
 
40.png
Writer:
Nope…at least not across the board. I used to work in Tobacco Tax Enforcement for Oregon’s task force, and what we frequently saw was that it often simply moved the puchase to the black market–e.g the internet. If you increase taxes beyond a certain point, you actually decrease the revenues and increase bad will among the public. The only place it makes a possible dent to consumption would be the young, but that has to be combined with enforcement such as the decoy programs.
Click to expand...
It will be interesting to see what does happen here in Ohio.

On the radio, of course, public reaction was outrage and talk about ‘going across the border’ into neighboring states. I wouldn’t doubt that the cravings of cigarettes going in the direction of the Black Market route.
 
Unfortunately tobacco is an addiction so no I don’t think the cost will stop an addict although I do know people who quit smoking (no it’s not easy) because of the cost. One struggling family wanted to buy a new home and realized that cigarettes cost them over $250 a MONTH! It was half of their rent payment. But because people buy in small portions they don’t really notice it.

However one point to make about high cigarette taxes is that this can go to fund the unpaid medical care. These same ‘poor people’ about whom we have all this handwringing not only are disproportionately more likely to be smokers, they are also more likely to need expensive health care and not have the ability to pay for it. So it really becomes a ‘user’ tax in some aspects and quite frankly I think that’s just as appropriate as someone paying for a fishing license or to use a campground.

Lisa N
 
Lisa N:
Unfortunately tobacco is an addiction so no I don’t think the cost will stop an addict although I do know people who quit smoking (no it’s not easy) because of the cost. One struggling family wanted to buy a new home and realized that cigarettes cost them over $250 a MONTH! It was half of their rent payment. But because people buy in small portions they don’t really notice it.

However one point to make about high cigarette taxes is that this can go to fund the unpaid medical care. These same ‘poor people’ about whom we have all this handwringing not only are disproportionately more likely to be smokers, they are also more likely to need expensive health care and not have the ability to pay for it. So it really becomes a ‘user’ tax in some aspects and quite frankly I think that’s just as appropriate as someone paying for a fishing license or to use a campground.

Lisa N
Click to expand...
Oregon considered an anti-smoking proposal of mine a few years ago kind of on a similar train of thought. It was geared to show how much money a lifetime smoker spends on smokes and what else it could have purchased. If I remember correcly, it added up to the price of a modest house. It’s a sad addiction…
 
40.png
Petertherock:
No, they just hurt the poor people. Liberal Democrats try to claim they are the party that helps the poor people yet they raise taxes on everything from cigaretts to gas to food and clothing. Democrats have never met a tax they don’t like and they claim to be the party for the poor people.
Click to expand...
Which hurts poor people more, a tax on cigarettes, or the cigarettes themselves? Smoking is a luxury, and cigarettes are a luxury good, which also happen to shorten your life expectancy by a few years, and burden the entire healtcare system. I see no problem with taxing them heavily. Maybe the tobacco companies should spend more effort marketing them to wealthy people… maybe it’s actually working, since smoking seems to be quite trendy among the young urban professionals these days.

I agree with you that the gas tax hurts poor people. A food tax would too, which is probably why food in the grocery store is mostly not subject to sales tax, at least where I live. Although farm subsidies are kind of a hidden food tax, which helps one group of poor people (farmers) at the expense of others. But that’s all off the topic of this thread, which is taxes on things like cigarettes and presumably liquor.

I personally would like to see a huge tax on pornography. Now that might just have the effect of transferring people from the group of paying customers to non-paying customers, but if there aren’t enough paying customers, then the supply should shrink, right?
 
Bobby Jim:
Which hurts poor people more, a tax on cigarettes, or the cigarettes themselves? Smoking is a luxury, and cigarettes are a luxury good, which also happen to shorten your life expectancy by a few years, and burden the entire healtcare system. I see no problem with taxing them heavily. Maybe the tobacco companies should spend more effort marketing them to wealthy people… maybe it’s actually working, since smoking seems to be quite trendy among the young urban professionals these days.

I agree with you that the gas tax hurts poor people. A food tax would too, which is probably why food in the grocery store is mostly not subject to sales tax, at least where I live. Although farm subsidies are kind of a hidden food tax, which helps one group of poor people (farmers) at the expense of others. But that’s all off the topic of this thread, which is taxes on things like cigarettes and presumably liquor.

I personally would like to see a huge tax on pornography. Now that might just have the effect of transferring people from the group of paying customers to non-paying customers, but if there aren’t enough paying customers, then the supply should shrink, right?
Click to expand...
Well, I understand what you’re saying, but the tobacco tax scenario is a little more compicated than that. Increasing the tax above a certain point moves the purchaser (or “addict”) to purchase the cigarettes on the Black Market. The Black Market is a catch-all phrase which includes everything from websites selling “no tax” cigarettes, stolen cigarettes, cigarettes purchased in another state (a lower tax state, unless the violator is a little on the slow side), or Export Only or “Gray Market” cigarettes which are legal only outside the United States. Anyway, once the purchaser is buying his cigs from an illegal source, any tax benefit to the state (and possibly feds) is gone. In other words, the increase in the tax rate, can actually produce a decrease in revenues from the tax. What you want is a balanced system which is just high enough to discourage use (especially in the young) and fund health programs and anti-smoking campaigns, but not high enough to actually push the addict to looking to the Black Market. Because, as soon as the Black Market is the source, only the criminals are winning.

There is also another dimension to this debate, and that is the honest retailer. Granted, it’s kind of hard sometimes to feel sorry for cigarette retailers, but, when I used to do inspections a few years ago, you’d come across retailers who were just losing their shirts to the internet sales. So, it’s also hinged to the livelihood of shopkeepers who are trying to obey the laws, but are watching their customers decrease to a trickle of what it once was. The Dept. of Human Services may look at this and exclaim that the reduction is due to their anti-smoking campaigns, but the evidence suggests that the high taxes don’t widely discourage cigarette purchases, but only change where and how they are purchased.

I do like your porn tax idea, but it would probably be considered an attack on the First Amendment. I wish someone could demonstrate effectively that porn is not covered, but that’s not likely going to happen. Alternatively, a tax of this nature might pour gasoline on the internet sales, and we don’t want their sales to increase either. A state DOJ attorney I used to work closely with claimed that the towns with correctional institutions often have higher number of porn retailers. If that is indeed true, it’s food for thought.
 
Taxes aren’t going to stop a vice…Saying NO however will. It takes a LOT of WILL power to say NO, but it can be done.
I quit smoking cold turkey 7 years ago after a 27 year pack a day habit. I had recently met my boyfriend, and although he never made my smoking an issue, I chose not to do it around him. He encouraged me to quit and I did…for a couple of days, After several rough days at work I decided that I “needed” a cigarette. I was on my third one, when he pulled up at my house. It was a night he NEVER came over on before. I was caught…and I knew it. What did it for me was the look of disappointment in his eyes. I stopped then and there because of “that look” and I haven’t looked back since. And we are still together …SMOKEFREE
~ Kathy ~
 
Higher taxes caused me to quit. In January, the state of Oklahoma increased their tax by 55¢ per pack. The justification was to fund a statewide cancer center and to subsidize health insurance for the poor. I had several problems with this tax increase.

Both the cancer center and the health insurance are probably worthy causes and so should be supported by a general tax. If you are going to put the entire program on the back of smokers, then they should receive all the benefits.

I also have seen the politicians in this state waste money for over 50 years and I am just tired of it. For the last 20 years I have voted against every tax increase, I don’t care what it is for. If the politicians ever start spending wisely, then I will vote to give them more money.

Anyway, if they hadn’t increased the taxes I would still be smoking. I had smoked for over 40 years and enjoyed every cigarette I ever smoked. I had never tried to quit before but found it was not very hard at all. If they cut the taxes I will probably take the habit up again. I don’t feel any better since I quit and in fact since I quit I have had two colds. I hadn’t had a cold for twenty years before quitting.

Like writer said, our governor is now crying that the revenue from the cigarette tax is lower now than before the increase. Most of the decrease I am sure is coming from people buying from Indian smoke shops and the black market, but I know of at least one person that quit and the state won’t get another nickle out of me in “sin” taxes.
 
40.png
SnorterLuster:
Higher taxes caused me to quit. In January, the state of Oklahoma increased their tax by 55¢ per pack. The justification was to fund a statewide cancer center and to subsidize health insurance for the poor. I had several problems with this tax increase.

Both the cancer center and the health insurance are probably worthy causes and so should be supported by a general tax. If you are going to put the entire program on the back of smokers, then they should receive all the benefits.

I also have seen the politicians in this state waste money for over 50 years and I am just tired of it. For the last 20 years I have voted against every tax increase, I don’t care what it is for. If the politicians ever start spending wisely, then I will vote to give them more money.

Anyway, if they hadn’t increased the taxes I would still be smoking. I had smoked for over 40 years and enjoyed every cigarette I ever smoked. I had never tried to quit before but found it was not very hard at all. If they cut the taxes I will probably take the habit up again. I don’t feel any better since I quit and in fact since I quit I have had two colds. I hadn’t had a cold for twenty years before quitting.

Like writer said, our governor is now crying that the revenue from the cigarette tax is lower now than before the increase. Most of the decrease I am sure is coming from people buying from Indian smoke shops and the black market, but I know of at least one person that quit and the state won’t get another nickle out of me in “sin” taxes.
Click to expand...
Glad that you kicked the habit! That’s another good point, though. It always bugs me when taxes are used to fund something with which there is abolutely no connection. I mean healthcare is maybe understandable along with anti-smoking programs, but if they send that to the general fund, I have problems. Oregon, being a liberal state, has one of those marijuana programs for those with supposed medical needs. The user pays a fee, and the state sends them a medical use card. While I am not a fan of this program to begin with, I find it a little underhanded that the legislature apparently just raided this fund for the state’s general fund, then I think they’re raising the fees. That’s Oregon for you…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top