As the U.S. government throws tax money on the banking bonfire, you have to wonder how many billion-dollar notes are left in the Washington ATM machine for health-care reform. If an income-tax hike isn’t in the cards for 95% of Americans, there will surely be a revenue hunt elsewhere.
The last time a president was looking for major health-reform dollars, it was Bill Clinton, and he targeted tobacco. The reform didn’t happen, but federal, state, and municipal taxes on cigarettes soared from about 52 cents a pack in 1994 to $2.22 per pack in 2007.
Despite that rise, tobacco tax revenue falls far short of the health-care bill associated with tobacco-related disease.
Why pick on tobacco even more?
According to data from R.J. Reynolds, total tobacco taxes in 2007 were $22.4 billion. The company is outraged about that, but consider this November 13 statement from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): “Smoking in the United States causes 443,000 deaths annually and costs $193 billion.”
Now 443,000 is one of those hideous death counts that numbs the mind. But I’m betting we’re all a bit better these days at processing numbers like $193 billion. And if that’s what smokers are costing the economy, shouldn’t they—so to speak—help bail out health care?
Here are the laudable things about a new health-costs tobacco levy.
- It wouldn’t tax people for something they depend upon for their lives or livelihoods.
- Although not every smoker gets sick, and it can take several decades for sickness to set in, the tax can reasonably be thought of as a health-insurance policy for high-risk addicts, rather than a scattershot “sin tax.”
- There’s evidence that higher cigarette costs drive down consumption (as happens with alcohol), which may be why the tobacco companies rail against hiking taxes. (The only real news in the CDC report was that there was a healthy one-point drop in American smoking rates between 2006 and 2007, from 20.8% to 19.8%, but the government’s goal to drop rates to 12% by 2010 is doomed.)
Next page: Do the cons outweigh the pros?
Comments (85)
Here in Europe, most cigarettes cost even more than 10 dollars… i guess they just pay too high taxes for governments to put oressure on them… i hate cigarettes, i hate the smoke it gives and i hate the fact that my loved one is addicted to it! Stinky and costly!
WebbieGurl
The problem is, that by dying earlier, smokers actually SAVE health care costs, compared to non-smoker who live longer, but incur more health care bills as a result. See “The Health Care Costs of Smoking” in the New England Journal of Medicine.
Rogue says…
That makes Clinton more admirable then… There are just too much market for this useless product. Aside from it being useless (at least as how I see it), it is very damaging and it is a murderer.
Why can’t government put some advertisements too in disagreement to sexy advertisements of cigarettes? They might run ads about cancer and stuffs to appeal to smokers that smoking is NEVER good!
On the other hand, tobacco companies give employment to many and feed the governments its needed taxes… but as you have said, it can just be increased in terms of prices and lower the cost of basic needs such as food instead.
This is a completely unfounded argument. Taxing cigarettes is a regressive tax which is already way larger than it should be. Cigarettes have become the scapegoat of modern society in many ways, yet this country was built on the tobacco trade. Tax those that can afford it rather than following your misguided moralistic beliefs that cigarettes are bad.
So you want to pull more money from people who probably can’t even afford to fill their tanks because they have a habit.
*golf clap*
I have to say I read that entire article and I still don’t see a point why you should tax cigarettes higher. How about this, LEGALIZE MARIJUANA AND TAX THE HELL OUT OF IT. It would generate insane amount of revenue.
I’m a smoker and allthough smoking might not be good for your health it is the way some of us choose to live our lives. I already pay taxes. I work hard and contribute to society. Why are you trying to take more money from me? Yes you might be able to force some people to quit smoking because they are too poor to smoke anymore. but seriously wtf. what makes you think it’s acceptable to dictate someone elses way of life through the uses of unfair taxation. The reason everyone wants to tax cigarettes is because they don’t smoke and so they won’t have to pay up for the stuff that that want me to be paying for for them. They also know that cigarettes are one of the most addicting things on earth so they are trying to piggyback on the cigarette companies for taxes. This tactic is just as evil as what the cigarette companies are doing so throw your cigarettes are bad morals out the window and just admit you are trying to take money from people who mentally and physically might not be able to give up an already costly habit all so non smokers can avoid paying more taxes. I’m annoyed and no I probably couldn’t stop smoking if you raised the price of cigarettes that much. It would just reduce the quality of my life further by making me even poorer and would add more stress to my life than you could imagine the stress alone is probably just as bad as smoking is. So why don’t you let me choose to live my life as I see fit and quit trying to steal more money out of my pockets.
also while you are thinking about it why don’t you ponder on the idea of making marijuana legal and imposing a small tax on it’s trade. I think you’d be surprised at the amount of extra revenue this would create in society even with just the sales tax on it. After all this is supposed to be the land of the free. With a government of the people by the people and for the people. Take a count of the number of nonviolent drug offenders clogging our criminal justice system. Take all the costs of that and add it to the sales tax you can collect for the trade of the substance and you’ll find there is a huge economic and moral gain to be made by legalizing. We all should realize by now that the current state of the laws are a huge blunder on the part of the government and society. I want a direct vote on it.. what do you think would happen? Not that we have a real democracy any more but if we did we could all vote on it and I bet we could straighten this stuff out in no time.
Taxes ought to be levied against smokers more heavily than alcohol, though I think new taxes should also be placed on alcohol as well. Motorcycle riding seems to be a state issue, like in Colorado, so levying taxes there shouldn’t be the job of the federal government because there isn’t one standard. As for alcohol, taxes should be increased due to the danger it poses to oneself, but not as much as alcohol. A key reason for this, cigarettes have second hand smoke, which is deadly for people near smokers.
Now, before people start going off on my argument that alcohol should have less taxes on it than smoking even though inebriated persons are far more likely than normal people to kill others with vehicles, one must remember that there are crimes inherit to driving drunk, even without damaging others. Second hand smoke has not been criminalized, though it can be deadly over time. As such, not only are smokers damaging themselves, but others, in long term manners. If there were crimes where second hand smoke was involved, then an equal taxation increase would be fair. However, because smoke is integral to cigarettes, unlike driving while drunk, they can’t really criminalize it without wholly criminalizing cigarettes.
I believe that taxation on smokers should be higher anyway; if cigarettes only hurt the single individual, it wouldn’t be fair to tax them more than alcohol, which is another dangerous substance. That being said, because second hand smoke is dangerous these people must be taxed more because they are endangering others significantly. Furthermore, responsible alcohol consumption will not often lead to dangerous situations in the long or short term. However, cigarettes create a long term situation due to their nature, and thus cause damage more often.
Basically, both alcohol and cigarettes should be taxed more, but cigarettes should be taxes more than alcohol overall. And motor vehicles are on a state by state basis due to differing regulations from state to state.
Here’s something better than cigarettes you can tax… tax McDonalds. How many people do you think they’ve killed compared to the tobacco industry? See how easy that was?
here’s a better idea. Legalize marijuana, which is safer than tobbacco and alcohol, despite what the people who bought into the propaganda think(0 deaths caused by marijuana smoking). legalize it, then tax it. doing that would bring in a lot of money, and save a whole lot more because there’d be no more pointless police raids and busts, fewer people in jail for nonviolent drug-related crimes.
It doesn’t cost the economy $193 billion – a large amount of that is covered by private health insurance. You can make this claim when you have universal healthcare like we do over here, as that money would then actually be a cost to the taxpayer. You also argue against yourself when you say this is to raise revenue, then a few paragraphs later say that the number of smokers would come down – well not a very efficient way of raising revenue then! What you should be advocating is a large raise of gas taxes – use of gas causes general pollution that seems to have a large influence on the asthma rates, as well as causing environmental damage that may well kill far more people that smokers ever will.
I registered just to respond to this.
No, cigarettes should NOT cost $10 a pack, nor should there be any tax hikes on it. There was a study done in Sweden, which has completely government run health-care, and they found that cigarette smokers actually take less money out of the health-care system due to the fact that they die at a younger age. More money is spent on older people in nursing homes than on smokers, so you should thank the smokers for making your grandparents stay at a nursing home that much more affordable by not taking up space as an old person.
http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/health/15293006.html
Also there have been many studies done that point at VERY small effects of second-hand smoke, i.e., it would take being subjected to second hand smoke constantly for 20 years to equal smoking 2 packs a day for 6 months (something close to those numbers, thought I think I am underestimating the amount of time it would take and I am not sure of the validity of these studies.)
Besides all this, the fact is that raising taxes on cigarettes is not going to help raise money for health-care, its just going to supplant whats paying for health-care now and that money will be shifted elsewhere.
For example, they passed the lottery in Oklahoma ~4 years ago to help supplement school costs. Instead, taxes were moved away from schools and as a result the tuition at most Oklahoma colleges and universities has doubled or more in the past 4 years.
instead of taxing the poor man’s pleasures why not go for Louis XIII and expensive cigars….typical elitists….
Hyperbole time…
While we’re at it, let’s tax the gays. And since we want to be equal opportunity, let’s tax practicing religion. Think about all those people who practice religions in the US… there’s your cash cow. And if it causes some people to stop practicing religion, well, all the better. But then we’ll have to worry about people practicing religion underground. Can’t forget about that second hand religion… that stuff kills. “God bless” can be chocked right up there with the uber deadly second hand smoke that kills bajillions of people every day… EVERY DAY!!!
Or you could just look at the fact the people who smoke and have health insurance already pay more for their health insurance. My extra tax comes in the form of higher premiums every pay period. And while my level of smoking has yet to cause any major medical issues, I know if I continue to smoke, it will, eventually.
What about taxing children? These same people who don’t have health insurance because they can’t afford it are the same people who get fat government checks every year for having kids they can’t afford to raise so we give them huge tax credits. Instead of that tax credit, use that to pay for government health insurance. CTC is $1000 per child. That’s about what I’d pay to have a dependent on my health care plan. EIC? Just goes towards booze and cigarettes anyway. If these are supposedly the people who would be unfairly taxed by taxing cigarettes even more, take away their handouts and give them healthcare.
As far as the effect of taxing someone in my position because I choose to smoke but am socially responsible enough to not smoke around non-smokers, pay for my own health insurance at higher than normal rates because I truthfully report that I am a smoker… well, I still drove my 16 mpg car when premium was around $4.50/gal… $10/pack isn’t too different.
Why not tax cigarettes? Because regardless of the fact that you are helping someone’s health and that you’d think it’s for their benefit regardless of their addiction. Because regardless of the fact that tobacco corporations pray on peoples lives and profit from the death of their hypnotized clients it helps the people who run this country get through their day, because while they’re nailing in the floor boards or painting the third floor of the mansions and homes of the privileged, the needy, and the mediocre they look forward to that fucking smoke break. While they cook and serve your food they look forward to their smoke break. The coffee and cigarette that will make it through another eight hour day of manual labor. Because some of us cannot afford to be complacent with 10 dollar packs while we smoke a pack a day to lift the lumber you don’t have to. Darwinism? nothing about Darwinism can relate to humanity, because we are no longer natural in the sense of “survival of the fittest”. The natural factors that apply to Darwinism don’t apply to a society addicted to itself; to capitalism. Cigarettes are terrible and wonderful. Tax something else because I’ll take the good with the bad.
ok screw that. of course non-smokers are gonna be for tobacco taxes. TAXES WILL HURT THE ECONOMY BECUZ PEOPLE WILL STILL BUY CIGARETTES! smoking is very hard to give up, people won’t give up just becuz they cost ten bucks. im a liberal but i cannot stand these super liberals who just feel the need to tax every little thing. screw this bull
Are you serious?
How about, the government stops bailing out banks, auto manufacturers, airport companies, and helps the regular people by giving them healthcare? huh? no…that’s unamerican.
Don’t you libs ever see the inherent problem in your ‘tax’ things you don’t like schemes? Here, let me spell it out for you… tax cigarettes or tobacco to the point that next to nobody can afford it, then you loose that revenue. Lib’s can’t stand to loose that government money, so you’ll have to tax something else – oh, someone already mentioned McDonalds. OK, do that to the point that nobody will go to McD’s. So, now you have to move it again, and it keeps going and going until eventually we’re all eating the same bland heath food and even it is taxed because all other industries went out of business. WHY DON’T YOU LET PEOPLE BUY THEIR OWN HEALTH CARE – so that you don’t have to worry about other peoples habits!!! But, I hope you all get your way. Obama will never get a second term if your extreme left wing freaks get your way. Especially if he starts taxing coal like he said he would (cap and trade / same difference IMHO). Too many average people wont be able to afford electricity and they wont even be able to calm their nerves with a good ol cigarette because you want that to cost $10 dollars as well. Let me ask you libs something… Is there a tax that is not a good tax? Seriously, is there no end? What gives you the right to (in essence) pick and choose what an individual gets to do with their life?
So if the US Government if the government is going to tax cigarettes by 10000% to cover the cost of health care, Then we also need to taxes Beer, Wine, Hard liquors by 20000% to cover there health care costs. Drunk drivers kill more people and puts more people in the hospital then smoking (or even secondhand smoke) does. While we’re at it lets toss in taxes to cover the health care cost on foods. Obesity is more of a problem and drain on health care then smoking. Airborne pollutants cause more respiratory and lung cancer then smoking does too. So the government should also tax the air we breath by your logic.
The Facts are the government in the US is not a socialist government and more, more Democrats are no longer living by the Tax and Spend mentality of the past. Public mandated health care in the US is a fantasy that is a Nobel sounding endeavor to public that is voting on candidates for public office. The facts are it is an unworkable idea in the US because we are not socialist and are not likely to except a socialist mandated forced health care system.
If Socialism in any degree were to be forced onto the people, Our Founding Fathers have provided the people with the power and road map to take care of that problem in short order. After they took a good long spin in their graves.
Lincoln was the US President at the started the Civil War basically started the Civil War. Obama is using a following many of Lincoln’s tactics in his cabinet and staff appointments. A new more hideous Civil War could ignite if Socialism is forced onto the people. With the economy were it is and with many Americans out of work and the fear of being out of work is growing everyday civil unrest is starting to show itself. A serious depression and then the Federal, State and Local governments start getting new and increase Tax happy. The poor and middle class are the ones that will take the brunt of all Vice Taxes (increases and new taxes). Smokers, alcohol and other Vice products of a large average percentile are consumers or Vice Products.
Vice Taxes don’t really work in todays Internet available world. i.e. get on line and order your Smokes from a Bonded Warehouse in Switzerland US Tax free. The Liquor, Beer and Wine lobbyist will never allow new or increased taxes on their products and the drunks in Washington would never let it get to the floor for a debate.
So, as Freedom loving Americans that place great pride in our right to choose and be free. We, need to be telling our elected officials in Washington that All Taxes are too high and must be cut by 50% across the board ASAP. Washington spending needs to be cut by 85% at least and the budget must be balanced by the next budget cycle and continue (these things will fix the economy faster then tossing money at the companies in trouble). The National Debt needs to be paid off and kept paid off too (this will fix the economy long term). Currently these are the three most important things the Obama administration needs to do. Awarding failures with cash bailout monies isn’t going to fix the overall economic crisis of confidence.
Freedom Freighters must move to the back of the bus and give up their seat to any Socialist who wants it without question.
You’ve got to be kidding me, we are asking to be taxed?
How about I get to voluntarily contract with the cigarette shop to determine a price for my cigarettes?
YOU, or the GOVERNMENT have no business stealing my money because I choose to buy cigarettes.
Your faulty assumption is that 100% of the 190 billion cost of smoking to the economy is not being paid by smokers already. Smokers have health and life insurance you know, and they pay more for it. The only reason taxing cigarettes is so attractive in the United States is because it’s a political win-win. You can ask 80% of the people to support a tax on the other 20% (so it will always pass), and you get to say it’s for saving the children or whatever cute cause is the current fad.
Just another case of the tyranny of the majority with a PC whitewash.
Premise is fail. I’ve worked in health care for almost 8 years now, and I’ve got a few eye-openers for you.
1) People who live to a ripe old age are a MUCH bigger burden on our health care system. Don’t believe me? Google it, I think MSN did an article on it. It’s cheaper to care for someone dying of cancer for 6 months or a year than someone with Alzheimer’s or dementia for 30 or more.
2) Have you ever seen someone die of cancer? Quite possible, it’s not exactly rare. It’s not pleasant, but the patients are usually lucid almost up until the end, and there are chances to say good byes and I’m sorries and whatnot. People get a chance to make peace and make up. Ever seen someone die of ‘old age’? Probably not. They tend to spend their last decade or so alone most of the time, wishing they could die but not physically able to off themselves. Their kids are embarassed by them, their grandkids already think they’re dead, and the only people that have anything to do with them are the aides that come in and change their diapers.
Screw all that, I think the government should subsidize cigarettes and thank me for smoking them.
Cigs will never see that much of a tax increase with Obama in office – HE IS A SMOKER. Who new? Media quick to label McCain for his association with Alcohol, why not Obama’s tobacco use?
“Although not every smoker gets sick, and it can take several decades for sickness to set in, the tax can reasonably be thought of as a health-insurance policy for high-risk addicts, rather than a scattershot “sin tax.””
This is one of the most absurd things I’ve ever heard in my life.
If it were me, I’d make em $20 a pack!
http://www.privacy.cz.tc
Why not require Big Pharma sell their nicotine patches and nicotine gum for cheap or at least less than the price of cigarettes. Wouldn’t that help people quit? Is it because Big Pharma is making good money from all the anti-smoking hysteria?mess with that.
They shouldn’t raise the tax.
They should declare smoking illegal.
They should stop selling cigarettes.
They should raise the tax on gas because imagine how many people get sick from all those emmissions.
They should raise the tax on food because people eat more and get sick and it hurts economy.
They should raise the tax on drinks because people are drinking cheap drinks full of sugars and that makes them overveight – bottom line it hurts our economy.
They should raise the tax on condoms because less and less future taxpayers are born.
I could go like this all they… they should raise the tax on everything..including God, because religion costs them money ;)
While were at it Tax the hell out of wine and beer there bad for you too and Fast food get a 40% tuby tax since were taxing things that are bad for you.
As poiniently implied by quite a few comments here, parasiting smokers for taxes is not the way to solve our ecomomic woes or the smokers health problem. This article is an exercise in ridiculum. Wher would it end? Higher taxes on fast food? On sugary foods? On fatty foods? Heart disease is right next to cancer in number of deaths per year – actually it’s HIGHER. how about taxing everyone with an unhealthy diet? More taxes of owners of “unclean” vehicles?
Why are people like you oblivious to the fact that cars emit billions of times more carcinogens in the air than cigarette smokers? And let’s not forget factory emmisions – some of which are not even regulated! The whole facts behind cancer aren’t even out yet – and I doubt the people who know WANT those facts explored. How much does factory emmisions, car emmissions, free undetectable chemicals and toxins factor in the cancer debate??? Do you know? can you rule those out? Can you explain why a whole neighborhood has high rates of cancer related illness, while another doesn’t – despite the percentage of smokers?
The whole second hand smoke thing is a bullfunky red herring devised to keep the big money manufacturers out of hot water. It all started right after the government started going after factories about their emmissions, then cars – which BOTH mysteriously went silent as they started going after individual, helpless smokers – blaming them for things that any idiot with a thimble of sense could see they could not possibly do.
I laugh at the stupid nimrods who try to avoid my smoking by darting between cars with thousands of times the carcinogenic emmisions blowing smoke right up their poindexter noses. They think they are doing something “smart” when they are actually looking dumb as heck. You cannot escape carcinogens – they are given off by plastics (like your ipod); by gasoline and ground gases like radon; the sewer system of all major cities gives off cancer causing gases; it fills the air from smog, pollution and smokestacks. Cooking BBQ is like smoking a whole carton of cigarettes, Einstien. The government and these ‘agencies” who are only set up to inhale money by any means necessary isn’t going to tell you that your already in the pool – you might as well swim in it. That’s something your blind backside should have the common sense to know yourself – and stop lying to yourself about how messed up things really are.
Taxing people as a punishment is wrong and will only lead to more taxation. Open you freakin’ eyes and see that it isn’t about smoking – it’s about whatever they can use to open the door to eventually tax the bazongaz out us for any “moral ill” they determine is fertile ground for siphoning more money out of our pockets – ala “Demolition man”. If they really wanted people to stop smoking, ask yourself – why don’t they just illegalize it??? Makes sense to me. But that isn’t the purpose. The purpose is to get a precedent going to tax your burro for whatever you do that they feel like taxing you for. Open your eyes and get your head out of the toilet.
There, there – have a puff and stop crying.
I will be honest. i only want cigarettes taxed because i don’t smoke and so don’t care if they get taxed like crazy. More money for government without me having to pay.
Socialism at its finest! I’m lovin it. The government really does need to tell us how to live, we don’t do a good job.
Instead of looking for more things to tax… lets just not spend as much. I know its popular to hate on smokers now adays, but that doesn’t make it right to try to tax them in order to allow the government to continue to spend money on garbage. Why not tax lame blogs instead?
Tax people with children more than single folks. They are an even bigger drain on the economy than smokers.
And you know, we are in the middle of two wars of choice. We could cut out the bombing and shooting, both of which have adverse affects on health-care costs, and instead re-invest the cash in health-care.
Or, we could tax religion. That’s just as harmful as smoking, ask New Yorkers about that.
you say tax cigarettes cost it costs more for smokers to be taken care of becuase of ther “habbit” well why not tax drugs cocain,neroin ect. ther habbits are costing the us alot more then in health care then smokers…. oh wait thats becuase the gov is the ones supplying the drugs.. they dont want to tax ther self now do they.
There should be a tax on fat people before we add MORE tax onto smokers. Fat people are a major strain on our system and yet they don’t receive the same level of scrutiny as smokers.
“First, why should smokers be targeted more than heavy drinkers, overeaters, and motorcycle riders in numskull states like Colorado that don’t require helmets?”
It’s called FREEDOM, if a motorcycleist doesn’t want to wear a helmet, it’s his death, but why the hell should it concern you. Same with seatbelt laws, the only person I’m harming is myself so why does it bother you
I agree with Anonoses… Let’s have a fat tax… Overweight people costs the health care system quite a bit, I imagine. There are more obese people than smokers in America.
While we’re at it, let’s tax the crap out of alcohol. If you want to ruin your liver or risk drinking and driving (possibly killing yourself and someone else) then you should pay higher taxes to do so.
There are other vices we could tax as well. But the main thing is, for everybody who wants to pick on smokers and stamp out smoking, remember this… If everybody quit smoking, how would the government replace that tax money? By stamping out smoking, this country would lose a lot of money in tax revenue.
Then we would need an alcohol tax, a fat tax, internet tax, porn tax, etc…
“Second, a fat, flat tax discriminates against the poor, who are more likely to have lousy health care already and spend a disproportionate amount of their income on a tobacco habit.”
Thank you for your broad, unnecessary generalization. How the hell did you get a job in journalism writing crap like this? Also, you didn’t really explain why raising the cost of cigarettes is a viable (or even remotely sensible) way to fix the economy. Cigs aren’t the root of all evil; unsupported arguments are.
making smokes more expensive would just be wrong. They are already expensive enough you want to make some tax revenue Legal Marijuana for all is what I say. When did we stop prohibition and do you think the taxes we made from selling alcohol ( which both alcohol and cigarettes are more harmful than pot) did our country well. I just think that people should really start rethinking this idea.
How about we target the number one killer of people in the United States first, heart disease. It is ridiculous to attack smokers, because certain people don’t like it, when they should be going after people for being morbidly obese. Why not institute a Sin Tax on fast food? Pizza? Anything fried and fatty? Oh, because it would effect too many people? We know you’re going through hard times, so eat away your depression. But for heavens sake, don’t smoke, it’s bad for you.
“Would you like to Super-Size that?”
“Yes Please!”
Wouldn’t it make sense to let people smoke, but deny them health benefits if they get lung cancer, thus giving them the responsibiity to decide if smoking is worth a near certain early death. Smokers are taxed so much already and cigarrette taxes in my state go to fund everything from pre-K to healthcare. In actuallity when you see someone smoking you should thank them, they deserve a freaking medal for putting up with all the taxes and bullshit the government heaps on them. Without tobacco tax revenue many states would go deeply in the red.
Smokers are an easy target because they arent going to band together or protest, most will just pay the tax and engage in the activity that gives them a little joy and release from their day to day grind. Many of the antismoking folks are power hungry assholes who wish they could make everyone do as they say and they’ve found a small, unpopular segment of society they can push around and so they do, but believe me they would tell you what to eat, drive, drink, and where to live if they could. These people use all their power and money to force others to think like them, and that’s called fascism assholes.
This is exactly what they have done in Canada. It does seem to lower smoking rates, but in Canada where tax money pays for everyone’s healthcare it makes sense. In the US, people pay for their own plans, so I’m not sure this is the correct answer. With that said, I use an electronic cigarette from http://www.e-cig.org/sale and it wouldn’t be effected by a price increase ;)
I think we need to reevaluate where these taxes go.
Most states didn’t spend the settlement money they got on health care. Instead spent it on things like golf courses. My state spend the money on kids health care not smokers.
Two taxing a choice is really hard since there are a lot of choices in America.
Three we need to restructure our tax system government spending.
We spend 40 billion on the war on drugs every year. Other nations don’t spend anything near that and they are not falling down the slippery slope.
We can’t even grow hemp which would cut down on our farmer aid bill. ND wants to grow it badly along with the 33 industrialized nations.
This article is a crock, of pure hatred for a certain population. With all the taxes they do pay in why don’t you give them one free rehab on smoking no you give them a hot line and tell them to call???
Rather than suck on their life savings slowly over the course of their life.
Well, one thing is for sure. Those who pay the taxes hate it and those who don’t pay taxes want more taxes. By the By, in Calif. in the mid 80’s it was reveled that the American Cancer Society paid the World Healt Orginization $4million to study second hand smoke. After a 15year study of 50,000 persons who were subjected to ’shs’ it was found to have absolutly no affect or causallity to cancer. The ACS was so upset they junked that report and issued their own witch found billions of people who died because of second hand smoke. That is how the ‘STATE’ stopped smoking in bars.
Please excuse the misspellings. Smoke got in my eyes
We could also tax fast food. Health risks associated with that dwarf that of tobacco.
Or maybe alcohol. Thats not only a health risk but also a public safety risk.
You cannot legislate morality and frankly its not the government’s job to try and control people’s behavior this way with taxes. I can understand insurance companies wanting to charge more to insure a smoker or similar items, but a government tax simply to punish I couldnt agree with.
Yeah lets tax self righteous bloggers too. With people losing jobs and their 401ks are you really going to tell people not to smoke or drink? Yeah take that away too…. you make me sick
It’s a drug and we’re addicted… make them more expensive and we will break into your houses and steal to pay for them.
-Denis Leary
Taxation without representation. Wasn’t that part of what the Boston Tea Party was about? Perhaps the Declaration of Independence made mention of. This country was founded so that the Federal government (i.e. The King) wouldn’t impose new taxes that the individual states didn’t agree on. This REPUBLIC of America was succeeding from the King in order to not be a monarchy and have someone else decide how these colonies (later states) would run themselves. Independence was the goal. Although I am against smoking, drinking, gambling, I don’t believe the federal government should be imposing any tax laws, especially new ones. The states should decide this matter for themselves. The Federal government, like the monarchy back in England needed to provide two services. Protection from foreign threats, and the punishment of evil doers. That is it. You disagree…check the Declaration of Independence, and the United States Constitution.
Better to tax know nothing bloggers instead. Please explain how smokers are costing anyone anything. Is the CDC claiming that smokers are not paying their medical bills while non smokers do? Stop spreading disinformation and just plain lies. Moron.
Simple solution, legalize marijuana!
obesity is the #1 cause of health related problems and deaths in the united states. i guess we need to raise the cost of groceries and put a scale at each register to assess the weight of each consumer, and if overweight the cost goes up and the extra funds should go to off set the heath care cost. after all fair is fair right.
Should a person who’s family has a higher risk of cancer pay more health insurance even if they have never tested positive for anything? Should a child born with genetic disorders be forced to pay more to live because they were born different? Should a child that comes from a family with a history violence be forcefully sterilized to prevent violence in society? Should everyone that is not described as what “normal” is be charged more? This is just another form of segregation, you can’t prove that smoking is either nature or nurture, there is evidence that supports some people are genetically inclined towards smoking, if that’s true then you are thinking about taking one group of people that for all intensive purposes is predisposed to something and making them pay above everyone else to exist in the way they are designed. Fact of the matter is we all are to responsible for society and the cost of health care(if we want it that is). Until we the people of humanity stop trying to force our bigoted views on our brothers and sisters then we will have not grown up, we will just have found new ways to do the same old human M.O.. What I’m trying to say is if your going to segregate out smokers then lets be honest about it, instead of trying to say it’s for the betterment of society, be honest and outright exclaim you are looking to make them second hand citizens. Even Hitler admitted what he was doing, doesn’t seem like it’s asking to much for cigarette Nazi’s to do the same.
You should be a politician because it seems like you too are making decisions with statistics that you clearly don’t understand.
And how did this get on dig??? Its cause of idiots just like Scott Mowbray we are in a financial crisis. You cant compound your thinking or something mang???
no, im fine with the price of cigs right now. why dont you pick on furries or something?
Idiocy runs rampant in this article.
Many smokers, like myself, pay for health insurance, meaning they are already contributing to the $193 billion in smoking-related health care.
What is the cost of heart disease-related health care? Should we add enormous taxes to the fast food industry?
Cigarettes have, as another commenter stated, become a scapegoat. If you’re a non-smoker, it’s easy to call for higher taxes on cigarettes… easy and ethically disgusting. Because the bottom line is that cigarettes are legal; smoking is a personal decision; and people shouldn’t be punished for making that decision.
This is all ignoring that the cost of smoking-related health care isn’t the problem with our economy right now. And smokers aren’t to blame for the current problems. We’re all to blame, and we all suffer from it. Therefore an appropriate solution is one in which we all sacrifice equally.
Look, I’m a smoker and I’m very much tired of all the attempts to elliminate smoking. If I want to indulge in a habit which might endanger my health, then I d*mn well should be able to. And as for healthcare costs, why don’t we target unplanned pregnancies, sports injuries or fireworks accidents? Sound unfair? Well, it all is.
One of the objections that the author so blithly ignores should be explored, it’s essentially a way to tax poor people disproportionatly. Clearly unfair, especially when President-Elect Obama smokes, proving that it’s okay for the rich elite folks to smoke (google it) without penalty and poor people have to take on disproportionate tax burden. If the tax could be made progressive, I’d be fine with it, but your expecting poor people who just weren’t educated to face withdrawl and lifestyle changes (or more poorness), while rich people can just pay a little more.
Lets tax breathing. Every time you take a breath (especially worse in some areas) you are breathing in some of the same substances in cigarettes as well as many other cancer causing substances not found in cigarettes. If this is our mindset in this country, where we tax everything that is dangerous to us, then we need to start taxing more heavily in the Alcohol, Firearms, Automobile, Fast Food, and many other commonplace industries that are used more widely. If we are going to start taxing one group of people more than another based solely on the activity taking place this is not the country I want to live in and I believe our founding fathers would be disgusted in this injustice. Land of the Free indeed.
Also, by this reasoning, some races incur higher health care costs than others (Asians, actuarially, have lower health care costs per capita than African Americans, for example). By this twisted, purely actuarial driven ‘logic’ we should be increasing certain races’ income taxes to help with the burden of health care. Some of us, don’t completely ignore civil liberties the way the author does.
Perhaps we should also tax fat people more when they buy Twinkies.
Or we could legalize marijuana and tax that….
You guys talk about taxes like it’s a good thing. There is NOTHING GOOD about DC further running our lives. If you want to tax cigarettes… do it on the state level. That’s what the constitution calls for.
Besides, cigarettes just kill people before the expensive health care issues come up. In most cases, death by nicotine is much less expensive than life in and out of a hospital. Think about that as you’re hopping off your high horse trying to ruin other people’s life my making them pay an unproportionate amount of your taxes.
Small Gov’t FTW!!!
Instead of writing this kind of articles, you should probably get a life… How old are you, 16? Oh, let’s all believe in everything our governments tell us (and now they tell us that cigarettes are bad, bad, bad for you). So are so many other thing, what, you wanna bar them all? So much about the democracy in the US, you guys wouldn’t know the thing if it hits you in the head, regularly, every day…
many smokers are already buying their smokes online much cheaper, and they come from the Republic of Moldova (never heard of it, but thats what it says on the pack). Since there are absolutely no taxes on them, whole cartons (10 packs) of name brand smokes can be found as cheap as $13. Raise the price of smokes here, and people simply buy online. Then we will be supporting some foreign economy rather than our own. How is that beneficial?
They cost over 10 in the UK and I’m perfectly fine with that! I’m all pro smoking freedom, but have no intention of paying for their treatment later in life!
Several people in my family have died of cancer and my brother-in-law was diagnosed with cancer from second hand smoke. As a child, I detested the constant exposure to it and it made me ill. $50 a pack would be fine with me. Save lives.
This article makes me want to extinguish my cigarette into your eye!
One thing to remember here is that smokers ALREADY pay more for health insurance BECAUSE they are smokers.
Also, consider the fact that tax on cigarettes in some states can nearly double the cost overall. I mean sure, it’s a choice to smoke. The choice already comes with great consequence, so why increase that even more?
If the price of cigarettes keeps increasing people are still going to buy. My wife said she’ll still pay $10 a pack if it came down to it. LOL…I’m glad I quit smoking
I would like to see the numbers for what is paid on tobacco tax and how much is being put on the health care and not on anti-smoking ads or taken for some other purpose.
If a smoker smokes a pack per day, for 30 years and that tax money was invested, how much would it total?
While we’re at it, why don’t we overtax red meat, milk, soda, twinkies, sugar, crisco, all fast food, bars, restaurants, cars, sports…
Here’s a study for you:
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/337/15/1052
“Conclusions
If people stopped smoking, there would be a savings in health care costs, but only in the short term. Eventually, smoking cessation would lead to increased health care costs.”
Why, you ask? Because, just like overweight folks, smokers die much earlier, which means they need less health care… We die of cancer. You die of old age and take 15 years of increasingly expensive long term care to do it.
Excessively taxing cigarettes, alcohol, and sex (films, etc) is just another way for the government to try to legislate morality. “Prohibition didn’t work? Well, heck! Let’s just make it too expensive for them to do it and make some money in the process!”
And then what? What is the government going to go after once they lose the tax revenue from tobacco companies folding once smokers stop buying because they can’t afford it?
I hope it’s something YOU get a little bit of pleasure and enjoyment out of.
i think weed and ciggerettes should be legal to anyone
There is one thing and one thing only at the bottom of it all regardless; Greed. If we solve this one, what’s next?. One equals questions, two equals conlfict.
If we take away peoples ability to self medicate won’t that cause a rise in crime? Which would be worse for nonsmokers health when a smoker snaps due to lack of “medication” or has to commit a crime to fund the addiction?
Prohibition indeed
1 Bottle of pills for anger management w/o insurance is about $50.00 U.S.
Will people who take prozac or anafranil ever be in a position where they will have to steel just to pay for medication that keeps them sane?
My smoking 50 feet away from all buildings does no more damage to nonsmokers then taking pills and paying for shrinks.
What’s next?A new tax if you don’t read the bible.Those people cost us also.
I remember reading a couple months ago about a study that was done that found that smoking and being fat both actually reduced overall healthcare costs (yes laugh). It does seem like a laughable argument but maybe someone aught to do a little more looking. The study found that costs were actually less because both groups of people die earlier so the long term health care costs are less. This actually makes sense in a way a person takes less time to die so less is invested in them. Now maybe some people think that the early death and subsequent reduction in costs is out weighed by human suffering but as they say in the article, it is a choice. So let smokers be, they kill themselves quicker for your convenience. If you are going to pick on the smokers then I say its better to simply deny them government subsidized healthcare for illnesses clearly stemming from smoking. Oh and just in case anyone is wondering I do smoke but only on and off.
also cigarettes already cost $10 a pack in NYC and plenty of people are still smoking now I know economics well enough to understand supply and demand but cigs are a relatively inelastic product, so the usual supply demand effects dont hold true
#1: Never trust Clinton
#2: Cigarettes are only a foot in the door. Trans fats are next.
#3: Connected lawyers made out like bandits off tobacco. And I mean HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars.
#4: SUCKERS
Cigarettes can save lives, deadly west nile carrying mosquito avoids you. Had 2 uncles both smoked and their younger brothers did not and died 10 and 15 years younger respectively. Education is the answer and hopefully better methods to quit though this is making it harder on the poor and causing crime from those suffering withdrawals. See tribune article regarding man who attacked a couple then was released and did it again. Taxes are the nly reason their not outlawed but too much doesn’t seem to be enough for some.