Smoking declines as taxes increase.
Smoking declines as taxes increase.
A USA Today report “finds that higher state taxes on smokers have produced sharp declines in consumption. The amount of decline in smoking is directly tied to the size of the tax increase.” Some examples:
– Cigarette sales fell 18% in North Carolina last year after the tax was raised in two steps to 35 cents from a nickel.
– Connecticut has increased its tax to $1.51 from 50 cents per pack in 2002. Since then, per capita consumption of cigarettes has fallen 37%.
– New Jersey raised its tax to $2.40 from 80 cents in 2002. Smoking has dropped 35%.
By contrast, South Carolina has kept its lowest-in-the-nation cigarette tax at 7 cents, and cigarette consumption there has fallen only 5 percent since 2000. Congress is currently considering raising the federal cigarette tax as a way to pay for expanded government health care for children.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
As a smoker, I say raise the tax to $5.00 per pack!
August 10th, 2007 at 9:51 amMost smokers will tell you, it’s not the money, it’s all the negatives, and them finally able to kick the habit. But nice try TP, we could also say that the worlds increasing temperature, has an influence on the decrease of smoking.
August 10th, 2007 at 9:55 amRaise that tax and use it for healthcare.
NOT Chimpy’s failed occupation of Iraq.
August 10th, 2007 at 9:55 amSo instead of letting people freely choose what they want to do with their lives like Americans… out government is forcing behavior by taxing? Doesnt sound very free to me.
August 10th, 2007 at 9:57 amlol, when has america been “free”?
August 10th, 2007 at 9:58 am“nice try TP”
No, nice try, USA Today.
Give credit where credit is due.
August 10th, 2007 at 9:58 amneed more money? LEGALIZE POT & TAX IT!
August 10th, 2007 at 9:59 amex-smoker here…
August 10th, 2007 at 10:01 ami truly can’t imagine why anyone would pick up this
deadly, filthy, stinking habit…
there are better ways to cope and/or “look cool”…
i was pretty dumb when i took it up 30+ years ago…
…
A USA Today report “finds that higher state taxes on smokers have produced sharp declines in consumption. The amount of decline in smoking is directly tied to the size of the tax increase.†Some examples:
– Cigarette sales fell 18% in North Carolina last year after the tax was raised in two steps to 35 cents from a nickel.
– Connecticut has increased its tax to $1.51 from 50 cents per pack in 2002. Since then, per capita consumption of cigarettes has fallen 37%.
Did they measure this by “in state” cigarette sales? If so, there may be some methodological problems with this result. Could it be that folks are going to another state to buy their cigs?
Cheers,
August 10th, 2007 at 10:02 amThis is the real reason Chimpy is threatening to veto child care for kids, funded by higher cigarette taxes.
His inbred redneck base are all smokers from tobacco states!!
Chimpy’s rating: 25%
Smokers in the US: 25%
Coincidence? I don’t think so.
August 10th, 2007 at 10:03 amFWIW, I do support raising the taxes.
Cheers,
August 10th, 2007 at 10:03 amSo instead of letting people freely choose what they want to do with their lives like Americans… out government is forcing behavior by taxing? Doesnt sound very free to me.
Comment by Gerald Gibson — August 10, 2007 @ 9:57 am
August 10th, 2007 at 10:04 amIf I could freely choose, as an American like you say, whether or not the taxes I pay end up paying your Medicare costs to treat your emphysema and lung cancer from smoking, I’d choose to let you suffer and not subsidize your medical bill because you’re an idiot who smoked instead of listening to the advice of ANY DOCTOR or medical professional that smoking is a health hazard.
#
“nice try TPâ€
No, nice try, USA Today.
Give credit where credit is due.
Comment by Tom3 — August 10, 2007 @ 9:58 am
#
need more money? LEGALIZE POT & TAX IT!
Comment by Fan_of_Man — August 10, 2007 @ 9:59 am
Tom3,
Ok, you’re right, but TP is still spreading the propaganda. IMHO.
We’ve all known smokers, or smoked, really how many quit when that pack jumped up another 20 cents?
—-
Fan,
Amen… And lets grow hemp again for all the wonderful things it can be used for.
August 10th, 2007 at 10:05 amjust think back in the day 9 out of 10 DOCTORS preferred CAMEL cigarettes!
August 10th, 2007 at 10:06 am#15 – damn straight! hemp is a wonderful NATURAL thing….
August 10th, 2007 at 10:08 amWhy stop at trying to legalize pot? Hell, throw in legalized prostitution. US has to get off its holier then thou attitude. People have to remember, just because it is legal does not make it right. It just means if you do it you won’t get thrown in our over crowded prisons for stupid sh*t.
August 10th, 2007 at 10:11 amMaybe we should tax wars……
August 10th, 2007 at 10:19 amThe really insane idea is to raise taxes on tobacco in order to fund health care for kids. This makes health care for kids DEPENDENT on smokers…
Dumb. Real Dumb.
August 10th, 2007 at 10:20 amIt’s worth keeping in mind that the tax is regressive. It’s certainly a good idea but with limits- certainly no substitute for taxing the @#$%# tobacco companies, companies in general, and the increasingly landed gentry.
August 10th, 2007 at 10:28 amactually, I’m in the process of quiting, my 5th or 6th serious attempt, but this time it seems to be holding. I’m about 6 months in and I haven’t had one yet.
one of my major reasons for quiting? $$$
its not propaganda.
August 10th, 2007 at 10:34 ambut it is ignorance if you think money isn’t one of the strongest motivators in our nation.
If they raise the price of tobacco to the price of marijuana no one will smoke until proven guilty.
August 10th, 2007 at 10:37 amThe really insane idea is to raise taxes on tobacco in order to fund health care for kids. This makes health care for kids DEPENDENT on smokers…
Dumb. Real Dumb.
Comment by Harry Stottle — August 10, 2007 @ 10:20 am
Yes, you are pretty dumb.
August 10th, 2007 at 10:50 amI quit when I could no longer find even the generics for less than $2 per pack. Money is definately a factor.
August 10th, 2007 at 11:58 amAny statistician can tell you that this claim is likely b.s. Just because there is a correlation btw higher taxes and lower usage, that does not mean that the higher taxes are a causal factor. I would imagine if you conducted a state-by-state comparison you’d find lower cigarette usage in states in which there was not a tax increase or even higher reductions in usage in states where the tax increase was proportionately lower than in other states.
In the end, though, I still support these measures, as they are likely a contributory factor (to some extent) to decreased smoking.
August 10th, 2007 at 12:05 pmI quit when my granddaughter was a six week old fetus.
August 10th, 2007 at 12:07 pm#20 touched on this, but what happens when the amount of smokers decrease in regards to a child insurance program funded by taxes from smokers?
Though personally I don’t disapprove of higher cigarette taxes I also don’t see how you can use those taxes to fund programs while trying to dissuade people from smoking.
August 10th, 2007 at 12:21 pmSmoking has got to be the lamest white trash habit out there well other than the assinine lottery/scratch ticket crap but to each their own. If revenue is raised and smoking declines especially amongst the youth I see two birds. Of course as the smoking declines so does the revenue.
August 10th, 2007 at 12:53 pmHey no disrespect to those of you actively quiting or whom have. I just see so much of this behavior in the population of folks I work with. I should have chosen my words with more respect to you all.
August 10th, 2007 at 1:03 pmThis is BS… why is it always the smokers fault. How about the 12 billion spent a month on iraq to pay for childrens health care or what about people having to show they can care for child and provide for a child before having one or maybe we should tax the crap out of big luxury vehicles, cell phones, homes over 5000 sq ft. What about sports equipment or makeup… all of these things are hazadous as well.
It’s funny the same poeple who slam smokers are also the one’s jogging along the side or the road thinking they are so healthy….. ever think about all the exhaust you are sucking in!
24 & 29 take a look in the mirror yfi….
August 10th, 2007 at 1:28 pmMad.. Chill. Smokers are very defensive because they realize their habit is not rationale. I support all sin taxes and blame smokers not. I regret any disrespect to you personally. I just see no value to the behavior and see it impacting many of the at risk young folks I work with. I agree many behaviors have health consequences. Smoke all you want dude. It is your business. If you can come up with a program go and and explain to the youth why they should start. It is a free country.
August 10th, 2007 at 1:35 pmWarning: Driving across shaky bridges in disrepair can be hazardous to your health!!!
Anyway, all I’ve noticed in my 55 years is that anti-smokers are just as “anti-” as anti-abortionists, which must mean anti-smokers and anti-abortionists are equally totalitarian conservatives, and are hardly “live and let live” liberals…which are the backbone of any true democracy.
“Live and let live” liberals: tolerant, accepting, promoters of a diverse, egalitarian society, respecters of individual freedoms.
Totalitarian conservatives: the Bush administration, Blue Dog Democrats, religous fundamentalists, anti-abortionists, anti-smokers, racists, sexists, etc. etc. All those who believe that if they can just “clean-up” our society, then our democracy will be made better…not realizing that their calls for “censorship” are the sign of a totalitarian police state and not a democracy.
August 10th, 2007 at 1:36 pmRaise that tax and use it for healthcare.
NOT Chimpy’s failed occupation of Iraq.
What idiocy! You realize that if you drive smokers out of the market, you aren’t getting any funds for healthcare!
August 10th, 2007 at 1:36 pmIf I could freely choose, as an American like you say, whether or not the taxes I pay end up paying your Medicare costs to treat your emphysema and lung cancer from smoking, I’d choose to let you suffer and not subsidize your medical bill because you’re an idiot who smoked instead of listening to the advice of ANY DOCTOR or medical professional that smoking is a health hazard.
Smokers do us a favor. Dying quicker, hopefully before 65, saves us money on Medicare!
August 10th, 2007 at 1:37 pmDid they measure this by “in state†cigarette sales? If so, there may be some methodological problems with this result. Could it be that folks are going to another state to buy their cigs?
Cheers,
Of course. People from across the nation used to buy cigs in NC. Now they’ll head to other states.
August 10th, 2007 at 1:43 pmWhat idiocy! You realize that if you drive smokers out of the market, you aren’t getting any funds for healthcare!
Comment by m12 — August 10, 2007 @ 1:36 pm
But as your smoker numbers decline so do your healthcare costs.
August 10th, 2007 at 1:47 pmAs a smoking Liberal I disagree with the constant tax raises when alcohol kills tons of people a year as well but you don’t see taxes getting raised on it.
As a Liberal, I am disgusted by the way you other Liberals sound about smoking. You don’t sound Liberal, that’s to say the least. You sound like your saying “Every one’s free… to be just like me”.
Calling smokers “White Trash” is no way to solve a problem or get smokers to see eye to eye with you “dbadass” and I suggest you change your screen name to djackass if you want to continue that kind of behavior.
In fact you don’t see people get so intoxicated from cigarettes that they cause car accidents and kill innocent people.
You don’t see chain smokers abusing their spouses and children the way alcoholics do and you don’t see cigarettes causing people to make stupid decisions the way alcohol does.
If there is a drug in this country that should be taxed more it is alcohol for I am damn sure alcohol destroys more lives much more profoundly than cigarettes.
August 10th, 2007 at 1:49 pmJulie: I suggest you revist number 30 where I acknowledged a poor choice of words. I agree Alcohol and all sin related taxes should be increased.
August 10th, 2007 at 1:51 pm# 28 The answer to your question is that the government would need to raise cigarette taxes again which would just lead to further downward spiral of underfunding or tax something else in addition to cigs. Neither is an acceptable solution IMO because they just lead to neverending debate/arguing and unnecessary rancor.
If the government and Americans are really serious about addressing the health related problems associated with smoking, I
suggest the following proposal.
By Act of Congress, On Jan. 1 , 2012, The mass production and mass importation of cigarettes is prohibited. PERIOD.
No need for an expensive bureaucracy to oversee and enforce because there can no longer be any factories producing cigs by the millions or ship loads of foreign cigs imported.
If a person has the desire and lives in an accomodating climate they are free to grow their own tobacco for PERSONAL consumption. Go for it.
If a person wants to travel out of the country and bring back a suitcase full of cigs. No Problem.
People will not able to go down to the local convenience store to buy cigs because they just won’t be there.
This will give smokers 5 years to quit, farmers and cig producers 5 years to find alternative crops and/or products to manufacture.
I am guessing that this simple law would result in 95 % + reduction in cig smoking
It would be interesting to see who protests the loudest, smokers,
August 10th, 2007 at 1:55 pmfarmers, cig companies, Senators, Congressman, or the government bureaucracy due to loss of tax revenue.
OK, whoever wrote that steaming pile of animosity let me tell you, BRAVO, for making Liberals look bad, we need more Liberals making Liberals look like insensitive jerks, you know, it really helps the Democratic Party.
August 10th, 2007 at 1:58 pmSmart people like you need to reevaluate your comments before you post them, lest your comments become ammunition for the Right Wing to use against the Left. But it’s not like you ever thought of anything like that, that would require foresight.
Julie:
August 10th, 2007 at 2:01 pmNH has no hemet law for motorcyclists. I think it is stupid but respect the individuals choice to do so. When an accident results in tramatic head injury, should my healthcare costs help cover the individual who clearly knew riding a motorcycle without a helmet was stupid?
It is a fact well known for many years that when taxes increase,sales of cigarettes fall. It is also known that the sales of cigarettes in Nevada goes up each time California increases its taxes. Hmm, now why does it work like that.
California has reached the point that further tax increases will likely result in such lower sales that total tax revenues will fall. That is an incentive to not raise the taxes any more.
August 10th, 2007 at 2:12 pmSmokers do us a favor. Dying quicker, hopefully before 65, saves us money on Medicare!
Comment by m12
You do realize that the healthcare costs for those dieing from tobacco induced cancers are astronomical. you aren’t saving any money by having them get sick buddy.
August 10th, 2007 at 3:07 pmYou do realize that the healthcare costs for those dieing from tobacco induced cancers are astronomical. you aren’t saving any money by having them get sick buddy.
Comment by konflikt — August 10, 2007 @ 3:07 pm
No, we still do. The medical costs of those tobacco cancers are outweighed by the incredible burden of long term nursing home care and long term payment Social Security and pensions.
August 10th, 2007 at 3:33 pmNH has no hemet law for motorcyclists. I think it is stupid but respect the individuals choice to do so. When an accident results in tramatic head injury, should my healthcare costs help cover the individual who clearly knew riding a motorcycle without a helmet was stupid?
Nope, which is why universal health care is an absurdity! Leaving aside your specific example of helmets, almost everyone in this country takes poor care of themselves, as the push the costs onto others!
August 10th, 2007 at 3:35 pmBut as your smoker numbers decline so do your healthcare costs.
Not in proportion. The 25% of this nation that smokes consumes some fraction of the entire healthcare bill, and of that sum, only some smaller fraction is actually due to smoking.
But as they quit, you lose 100% of your revenue source.
August 10th, 2007 at 3:38 pmComment by Wrangler92
Your money does not trump my freedom…
NO ONE LIVES FOREVER… stop pretending like they do.
When it comes time to die I will be the one to pay that price … not you… so let me live my life the way I want to within the privacy of my own damn body at least.
Stop all the crap comming out of cars, factories, CAMP FIRES, and the crap in our tap water… and EVERY PIECE OF DUST IN THE AIR THAT WE BREATH…
Life is NOT about avoiding it until you finally die… it is about LIVING IT…
P.S. I have never smoked a cigarette in my life… it is about the principle of individual liberty…
August 10th, 2007 at 4:50 pm#14 Wrangler
Its a wonder why you aren’t a vegitarian.
Then again I am absolutely game for the inurance company to discriminate against those who don’t take care of their health. It effects not just my taxes but my pay check too. Guaranteed, you would see alot of people off their butts and staying in shape if it cost them more money not too…
I wonder if you guys hit up marijauna smokers and how stupid they look when they are high as you do a cigarette smoker. You guys practically break out the guillotine on a smoker… so much for choice.
August 10th, 2007 at 5:20 pmGerald don’t you know… LOL… part of liberalism is completely eliminating the “pain” of being an individual… :D…
Hitler hated smokers too and he was swell…. He even edited a photo of Stalin because it was bad for “Germans to see such a “statesman” (Hitler’s term) with a cigarette between his fingers.”
Thanks Julie for cleaning up the discourse a bit.
August 10th, 2007 at 5:33 pmthis works with any tax- the more you tax something, the less people are willing to invest their time and money ie- progressive tax rates. make people pay 50,60 or 70% taxes, and you will see a huge decline in investment and eventual tax revenue.– this is why i dont vote for dems or use expensive union labor
August 10th, 2007 at 7:19 pmconsumption has not dropped as much as they say–they only go by legal taxed sales and not Reservations or online or other methods.
August 10th, 2007 at 7:34 pm1. People usually start smoking as kids due to peer pressure. Prior to 18, their brains aren’t fully developed – that’s why they aren’t allowed to vote, etc.
2. Cigarette companies deliberately tamper with the chemicals in cigarettes to make them more addictive.
3. Cigarettes are very dangerous.
4. If a new product was introduced today that was similarly toxic, it would be banned on health grounds. That’s one of the jobs of government.
My suggestion is that government increase taxes on cigarettes and phase out current cigarette types and phase in organic cigarettes, which would be free of the added chemicals that are designed to increase addiction.
August 10th, 2007 at 9:47 pmHere’s a question for you liberal geniuses:
If taxing cigarettes reduces consumption, what is taxing capital gains or corporate profits supposed to do?
August 11th, 2007 at 9:48 am