|
 |
Apr-13-2009Smokers who roll their own cigarettes see tobacco prices jump(topic overview)
CONTENTS:
SOURCES
FIND OUT MORE ON THIS SUBJECT
Atlanta - High cigarette taxes curtail smoking and reduce the habit's societal costs. They also take a big bite out of the earnings of America's poor, who smoke cigarettes at nearly twice the rate of the average American. That's the paradox of the new 62-cent federal tax on tobacco, a historic hike that puts the average pack of smokes at $4.80 ''' $3.10 of which is taxes. Ironically, wealthier smokers of high-end cigars aren't likely to see any increase during their next visit to their local Tabac, since cigar rollers and dealers have vowed to absorb a new "per stick" hike for cigars. Balancing national health benefits with the potential fallout of higher taxes ''' including possible clashes between law enforcement and Americans who resort to the black market or use overseas websites for their tobacco needs ''' are only a few of the quandaries for state lawmakers, Congress, and President Obama, who reportedly has been trying to quit the habit himself. What differentiates this tax hike from previous efforts is that it's the largest one yet that doesn't contribute at least some funds to helping people quit. It comes at a time when many cash-strapped states are cutting such programs. "It depends what side you're on: If you think are a great way to raise revenue, it's good. [1] There have been more than 80 tobacco tax increases in 40 states in the past 10 years. "Most legislatures realize that it's a win-win-win," says Peter Fisher, vice president for state issues at the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. "It's a win for health reasons, it's a win when it comes to state finances, and it's a win with the voters." Support for tobacco taxes diminishes when at least some of those revenues are not used to help smokers quit, Mr. Fisher acknowledges. To that point, this month's federal tax hike will go entirely to funding the SCHIP program, a federal health-insurance plan for children. Even the nation's smoking czar has concerns about taxing smokers while not using some of that money to help them quit. "There does need to be more thought given to how tax revenues can be poured back into helping them get off the habit," says Matthew McKenna, director of the CDC's Office on Smoking and Health.[1]
BOSTON (AP) - Health advocates say New England states have failed to live up to their promise of using money from the tobacco settlement for prevention programs. Officials are releasing a report Monday they say details how these "broken promises" about where to spend the 1998 tobacco settlement funds have shortchanged millions of children and put them at risk for taking up smoking. According to a statement from the American Cancer Society, New England states will spend only 2.3% of the $1.8 billion in tobacco settlement and tax revenue on tobacco prevention programs this year.[2]
On a Friday afternoon, Ashley Biggs worked the counter at Tobacco World in downtown Harrison. There may have been a stream of customers coming in, but she was clear about the effect the tax increase has had on sales. "They've dropped, extremely," she said. Customers had some mixed feelings about how the tax has affected their lives. One customer asked not to be named because she works with children and fears repercussions from parents if she were identified as a smoker, but she did have an opinion. She said she had written to tobacco companies asking them if they had considered filing a lawsuit against the government for the rise in tobacco tax and not on other unhealthy habits. "It seems like smokers are targeted," she said. Larry Landers of Harrison agreed with her, adding that he thought the new tax was "ridiculous." He said tobacco could have been outlawed years ago, so he sees no reason to "take it out on us now." Landers said he hasn't cut back on smoking, although he has started rolling his own cigarettes from loose tobacco.[3] When tobacco tax increases went into effect April 1 to fund the federal portion of the Children's Health Insurance Program, smokers began plunking down around 60 to 70 cents more per pack, reflecting a federal tax that rose from 39 cents to 1.01. (Actually, the cigarette companies raised the prices more than a month before April 1, so cigarette smokers have been paying well in advance.)[4] Health Minister Yeh Ching-chuan (left) said on April 10 that the health surcharge on tobacco will be increased from NT$10 to NT$20 per pack of cigarettes starting June 1 to discourage smoking and raise funds for the country's health insurance program.[5] Currently, a pack of cigarettes sells for NT$55 on average. Yeh estimated that the surcharge, which currently contributes NT$20 billion a year to government programs, would generate between NT$32 billion and NT$36 billion after the increase, but he said he would not mind if his projection turned out to be too high. "If more people quit smoking, the government's revenues from the health surcharge will decrease, but this is something the government would love to see," he said. Yeh indicated that NT$1.4 billion, or about 4 percent of the health surcharge, will be used to help low- and middle-income families pay part of their health insurance premiums.[5] The federal cigarette tax jumps from 39 cents a pack to $1.01, an increase of 158 percent. In the weeks and months to come, the higher taxes will likely help spur more people to stop smoking, which will reduce health care costs for those who quit.[6] A 62-cent a pack increase on cigarette taxes has some UA students struggling to keep up with their addiction. The 62-cent federal tax that began earlier this month is in addition to the 56-cent tax passed by Gov. Mike Beebe in mid-March, leaving Arkansans paying a $1.15 tax on each pack of cigarettes they buy. The federal government grants a 3-cent price break to business owners for tax implementation costs, but for some students, the financial burden is becoming too much - though they haven't quit smoking. "It's just too much.[7]
Cottingham spends about $40 a month on cigarettes, smoking about a pack a week. Though he hasn't had trouble buying cigarettes, he has had to make compromises. "I've had to move down to cheaper, grosser cigarettes," he said. "Even those cost $4 or $5 a pack. They used to be $2 or $3." For junior Sarah Gibbs, the tax increase this month has forced her to make some lifestyle changes. "Let's just say I don't spend money on anything except cigarettes and Taco Bell," she said. Gibbs smokes a pack a day and spends $55 a week to keep up with her habit. Until the tax increase this month, Gibbs also had been supporting two other people's habits, but now she can only keep up with her own, she said.[7] The tax increases burden one group not usually high on anyone's radar: The seriously mentally ill. "These tax increases have unintended consequences, especially for the seriously mentally ill, people with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder," Anthenelli said. "They smoke at rates three to four times the general population, and they can ill-afford the tax increase. They're mostly on fixed incomes." Anthenelli said that with their degree of addiction they're going to be most adversely affected by these kinds of tax increases. Everyone's better off not smoking, he said, but people with mental illness can't always access the same smoking cessation aids available to the rest of the population. One study from New Jersey published earlier this year found that adults with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder spent more than 27 percent of their monthly income on cigarettes.[8]
While tobacco tax increases will drive most adults to get help giving up cigarettes, Anthenelli said, "When you're schizophrenic, you just don't fit into the average smoking cessation class." Several medications are available to help smokers who are trying to quit, but little research has been done to see how well the medications work for people with mental illness, he said.[8] They're trying to get us the quit by rasing taxes, but when everyone does quit, they''ll come at us with another tax increase because they lost revenue from increasing taxes on tobacco. Smoking outside. people whining and crying because someone is smoking next to them outside? Last time I checked smoking outside, which there is a lot of open space with a breeze, is not a problem.[3]
Gov. Bev Perdue wants to increase the cigarette tax in North Carolina by $1 per pack to help fill revenue gaps. Given tobacco's deep roots and strong traditions in this state, any one of these developments would have been considered heresy not that long ago. That was then. n the interest of the broader public's well-being, it is the right thing to do.[6] In some cases, the system would require paying certain specialized doctors, like neurosurgeons, to be on call and near enough to a hospital to help a patient in need during what is called "the golden hour" immediately after a serious injury or stroke, Barham said. Barham also said officials knew the tax would help reduce tobacco use because of the expense, which would also reduce the amount of smoking-related illnesses such as lung cancer, heart disease, stroke and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). He said cigarette manufacturers raised their prices before the state and federal taxes went into effect, and that increase was more than either of the two taxes. He said, government officials were prepared for the fact that the tax would be blamed for the price increase.[3] Biggs said sales of cigarettes and other tobacco products are down following state and federal tax increases[3] The bill increases taxes for all tobacco products, with proceeds funding the State Children's Health Insurance Program and programs encouraging people to kick the habit. It may be working. "I'm quitting anyhow, no sense paying all this money to kill myself," Dobbins said.[9] The Senate State Children's Health Insurance Program Bill went into effect Wednesday, April 1, effectively raising taxes on all tobacco products.[9]
In our state alone, we spend more than $2 billion on health care costs directly caused by smoking, and 9,700 people die from tobacco each year -- the leading cause of preventable death. The faith community simply cannot ignore this tragedy because we spend too much time burying mothers, fathers, sisters, and brothers who die because they became addicted to tobacco products when they were young.[10] Few, if any, countries, had even a single person working full-time on tobacco control. I also faced the formidable opposition of the trans-national tobacco companies, who identified Asia as their future," she said. Mackay, 66, said there had since been a "sea-change in attitudes" towards the fight for stricter tobacco controls in the intervening years but made it clear she believes the battle is still far from won. "Cigarettes are the only product on the market that when used as directed kill one-third to one-half of its consumers and continue to affect the health of those who don't even smoke," she said. "They kill more people than car accidents, AIDS and drugs combined - causing one death every six seconds. It is time society stops tolerating a product that poisons its users."[11]
Asthma and Respiratory Foundation executive director Jane Patterson says smoking tobacco described as 'light' and 'mild' is not better for health and is not safer to smoke compared with smoking regular tobacco. In 2005, 44% of the manufactured cigarette brands listed for sale contained at least one description, such as light or mild. Patterson says the tobacco industry has promoted light and mild cigarettes as'safer' or as an alternative to quitting, when all along it has known that these products are not better for health, or safer to smoke, than regular tobacco.[12] SGA has debated the sale of tobacco products on campus and the Student Health Center has already made efforts to help students quit smoking.[13] This included 27% of Maori and 40% of females surveyed. Those who reported smoking light and mild were asked why they smoked these types - 23% gave some health-related reason for their choice, and a further 5% thought that light or mild cigarettes were 'less addictive' and/or 'made it easier to quit'. The NZ Commerce Commission recently warned the tobacco industry to remove the light and mild descriptions from tobacco products, because they mislead customers about the health risks of smoking.[12]
The John Tung Foundation, an anti-smoking group, recently criticized the DOH for only spending NT$160 million from the surcharge funds to help the public kick the habit of smoking, while shelling out NT$600 million to subsidize tobacco manufacturers to print or affix the new marking. Yeh replied, however, that the DOH has already received confirmation from four major tobacco manufacturers, including Taiwan Tobacco and Liquor Corp., that they will do the markings themselves at no extra cost to the government. For small tobacco manufacturers who will affix a sticker to their cigarettes, a subsidy of NT$10 million will be paid by the DOH's Bureau of Health Promotion rather than be taken out of the health surcharges, Yeh said.[5] To avoid confusion and profiteering, cigarette manufacturers will either print or affix a sticker reading "NT$20 health surcharge" on each pack to help differentiate between old and new cigarettes. Yeh said that starting June 1, tobacco distributors cannot raise the price of cigarettes that do not have the "NT$20 health surcharge" marking, though they can continue to sell them. Government agencies will monitor the market to prevent distributors from hoarding cigarettes ahead of the June 1 launch date and selling them for a higher profit margin, he added.[5]
The new surcharge means the average price of a pack of cigarettes will rise by between NT$10 and NT$15. ''The most significant thing about this increased surcharge is that we will use 4 percent of the surcharge to help poor people pay their National Health Insurance premiums,'' Yeh told a press conference at the health department yesterday afternoon. He said the 4 percent was expected to amount to between NT$1.4 billion (US$42 million) and NT$1.5 billion. Yeh said that those in Taipei whose monthly income was less than NT$17,655 would qualify for aid from the surcharge which would cover 50 percent of their monthly NHI premiums. For those whose monthly income is between NT$17,655 and NT$26,483, 25 percent would be covered.[14]
DOH chief Yeh Chin-chuan said most tobacco suppliers will print the new surcharge mark directly on the cigarette pack for new shipments. His department plans to spend about NT$10 million to produce 1x2 cm fine-print marks to be attached onto cigarette packs to distinguish the products in inventory from those supplied after the date.[15]
"The labs will be ready by December 2009. We are not really creating new labs but upgrading and building capacity in existing labs so that they are in place as fast as possible," a ministry official said. He added, "Testing cigarette content is a statutory requirement but since we don't have a single such lab, we have been unable to investigate whether the information given by tobacco companies on the level of tar and nicotine content in their products is true." These labs will contain a smoke machine, that will mimic humans puffing cigarettes during which it will collect the smoke and analyse its carcinogenic content. Its puff per minute will tell scientists the volume of carcinogenic substances being inhaled and exhaled.[16] Austin Halbert is a 10th grader at Crest High School and a contributing columnist for The Star. Put that cigarette down, it's time to read. It is no secret that a disturbing percentage of teens have tried smoking cigarettes at least once and that many become addicted to nicotine when they are still under legal age to buy tobacco. Cigarette manufacturers go to extreme measures to promote their products without taking any measures to prevent underage children from using them.[17] When the smoker inhales through the device, air flow is detected by a sensor, which activates a heating element that vaporizes a nicotine solution stored in the mouthpiece. Manufacturers and retailers of these products claim that electronic cigarettes are safe, and even that these products can help smokers quit traditional cigarettes. No clinical studies have proven these products are effective in helping smokers quit smoking, nor have any studies considered the safety of these products' long-term health effects. While the FDA has indicated it will evaluate electronic cigarettes on a case-by-case basis, it has not taken any enforcement action against these products, which are currently being sold in mall kiosks across the country and on the Internet.[18]
"You can't afford to quit, but you can't afford to smoke." The woman mentioned earlier, the one who asked not to be identified, said she only smokes about a half a pack or less a day, so she's not really cut back yet. "But I have considered going out of state and buying cigarettes out of state," she said, admitting that she and her husband had considered quitting in the past and are considering it more now. Noah McCreary agreed with her on one point. "It's best just to go to Missouri and buy them," he said, "but don't they want to make you a felon for that these days?" Laws concerning bringing tobacco from out of state are in a state of flux, officials said, but possession of more than a carton and one pack is a criminal offense. McCreary said he has cut back and has always smoked cheaper brands to save money. "But now it's even harder," he said. Trish Taylor of Harrison said she's not smoking any less. "It's just costing more money," she said. "It's just ridiculous. It's just another way for them to get more money." Even Biggs said she has no plans to quit smoking yet. "I ain't quitting," she said.[3] We're now at a punitive level of taxation." Rather than quit, he says, many smokers are likely to turn to overseas tobacco sites as an alternative, or buy them in states with lower tax rates or from tax-exempt areas such as Indian reservations. That's a concern for Florida legislators considering a $1 tobacco tax increase. Lawmakers are debating whether to put an "Indian tobacco stamp" on tax-free packs sold on reservations, making it a $1,000 misdemeanor for a non-Indian to possess them. This week, the Florida Senate removed a provision that would have given police agencies half of those fees, fearing what some called "cash register justice."[1] In doing so, it took away the last legal option that smokers have for getting relatively inexpensive cigarettes. Bell Tobacco manager Greg McDonnell said he reminded his customers as much as he could of the impending tax increase as April 1 approached.[4]
No matter how addicted you are to tobacco, you can live without it, it is still a discretionary item. People trade down, especially when they are skint." Ash, the antismoking group, points out that during a recession, while the prohibitive cost of tobacco increases the incentive to quit, many of those who do not give up downgrade from cigarettes to rolling tobacco. While it is difficult to compare the price of ordinary cigarettes with rolling tobacco - because roll-up smokers choose how much tobacco they use in each cigarette - the recommended retail price of a packet of 20 Lambert & Butler, a cheaper brand, is £5.22.[19] Health officials say the beneficial impact of the tax hike will ultimately outweigh the costs. "When you take a look at poor smokers, yes, some of them will continue to smoke and carry a higher burden in taxes and price," says Mr. McKenna. "But most of them will either quit or decrease the amount they smoke."[1] Proponents of the tax hike say that as many as 1 million Americans are likely to quit as a result, and up to 2 million teenagers may never start. This could reduce the burden on health and social costs by some $44 billion, according to the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. Millions are likely to cut back on their smoking, which also lowers health risks, though not as much as quitting altogether.[1]
Most people are "against" tobacco and the evils of smoking, right? Many politicians with no backbone jump on that bandwagon at every turn. Picking a certain group of consumers, who choose to purchase a legal product, for a tax hike is at its core unfair. This idea of taxing a product that poses health risks is even scarier.[6] Smoking and consumption of tobacco products are injurious to human health and is termed the greatest single health hazard for mankind today. Harmful substances in tobacco may cause such fatal diseases as cancer, heart disease, blood pressure and asthma. It is estimated that tobacco-related diseases kill more than one-third of those who use it.[20] Of the numerous stipulations in the 285 page MSA document, included are payments to the government, by tobacco companies said to subsidize healthcare expenses related t o tobacco use, but most importantly to educate children to the harmful effects of cigarettes, and other tobacco products. The MSA went further to govern the type, location and content of advertising these companies could use to promote and sell their products. The manufacturers were being forced to attempt to bankrupt their own companies by reducing their ability to market their product.[21] Electronic cigarettes, alternatives to cigarettes and other tobacco products, are battery-powered devices that use a vapor to deliver nicotine to smokers.[18] The labs will start with testing tar and nicotine content followed by other substances like carbon monoxide," an official said. The Cigarettes and other Tobacco Products (Packaging and Labelling) Act makes it mandatory for all tobacco manufacturers to mention the percentage of nicotine and tar in their products. "Unfortunately, we have failed to press the manufacturers into declaring their tar and nicotine content because we don't have labs to check the information.[16] Part of the idea behind the tobacco tax in Arkansas was to fund development of a trauma system in the state. Some smokers were surprised when they found out the trauma system wouldn't be a new building of any kind, but a network for communication between hospitals and emergency personnel to better handle serious injuries and illnesses. "It's not about a center it's about a system," Ed Barham, public information officer with the state Health Department, said.[3] A recent study published in the American Journal of Public Health said that if every state funded smoking cessation programs at federally recommended levels from 1995 to 2003, there would have been between 2.2 million and 7.1 million fewer smokers in the United States by the end of 2003. The report will be discussed today at the State House, two days before states receive their next round of settlement funds.[22] Just $13.5 million of the $730 million the Bay State receives annually from tobacco taxes and tobacco settlement revenues — which have flooded in since a 1998 settlement between all 50 states and the tobacco companies — goes toward smoking prevention programs.[22] Our state, ranking 41st in the nation, currently spends $3.7 million. That's less than 7 percent of the CDC's recommendation and only 1.3 percent of the states total revenue from tobacco.[21]
With $3.54 billion spent annually in the state on smoking-related health care, and with officials staring at a massive budget gap, anti-smoking advocates see only one solution. “It would be penny wise and pound foolish to cut tobacco prevention during these tough economic times,” said Matthew Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. The last time New England states faced a budget shortfall they cut funding for tobacco prevention programs by 66 percent, the study said.[22] The study, compiled by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, says that Massachusetts funds tobacco prevention programs at 15 percent the level it should, allowing for smoking-related health care costs to remain high.[22]
Effective today, the federal tobacco excise tax will rise 62 cents per pack to fund children's health care.[6] The health surcharge levied on Tobacco will be increased from NT $10 to NT $20 per pack of cigarettes starting from June 1.[23] Department of Health Minister Yeh Ching-chuan ('''''t) yesterday said the tobacco health and welfare surcharge would be increased from NT$10 to NT$20 per pack on June 1.[14] Yeh Ching-chuan ('''''''''), minister of the Department of Health, said that the price of a pack of cigarettes is expected to increase by between NT$10 and NT$15 following the increase in the health surcharge.[5] TAIPEI, Taiwan -- The Department of Health (DOH) announced yesterday a health surcharge raise to NT$20 from the current NT$10 for each pack of cigarettes and will take effect on June 1.[15]
Yeh estimated the surcharge increase will add between NT$12 billion and NT$16 billion each year to the reserve fund for the national health insurance (NHI) program. The exact spot for placing the surcharge mark on the cigarette pack will be announced in May, he said.[15]
The increase may cause some people to stop smoking or smoke less, which is great from a public health standpoint, but terrible for revenue." Tobacconist Mark Ryan, owner of Yelm Smoke Plus and News, doesn't believe his revenue will dip significantly. He cites what happened in the state of New York a few years ago.[9] Dr Judith Mackay, labeled one of the three most dangerous people in the world in a leaked tobacco industry document in the 1980s, has received the British Medical Journal Group's first ever lifetime achievement award. She topped a poll of 10 shortlisted candidates including world-famous heart surgeon Professor Sir Magdi Yacoub, pioneering U.S. kidney doctor Dr Robert William Shrier and Indian rural health campaigner Dr Hanumappa Sudarshan. The prestigious publication, which attracted more than 7,000 votes for its poll, praised Mackay for her "tireless and courageous campaigning on behalf of patients and public health." She has been fighting for tougher tobacco controls in Asia since 1984. The award recognized her as "one of the first tobacco control advocates in Asia" and said she had played a "leading role" in advancing public policy, articulating the harms of tobacco and "exposing the nefarious tactics of the tobacco industry." She was also instrumental in developing the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, hailedas "one of the most successful international treaties in public health," the award givers noted. World Health Organization consultant and World Lung Foundation advisor Mackay, whose solo mission to cut Asian smoking levels in the 1980s gradually gained international support and recognition, said she was "just overwhelmed" at the award. "I have the greatest respect for all my shortlisted colleagues, but I have been extremely touched by the outpouring of support I have received from all over the world - and especially from Hong Kong," she told the German news agency dpa.[11]
There's a big back story here with a lot of pitfalls. It's a complicated situation with politics set to play a big role in the near future. What may surprise you is e-cigarettes may not stay on the market much longer even though they're still relatively new. It's no secret how much Big Pharma and Big Tobacco companies spend on lobbying. We watched the impact yet again this past week as the federal government upped the tobacco tax and the House of Representatives passed the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act.[18] We tax tobacco, but fail to see the hypocrisy of imposing that very tax. We tax tobacco because it's now acceptable to use smoke and mirrors to impose and raise taxes, offering lip service and empty promises. This is nothing more than a cartel arrangement that benefits both the government and big tobacco. It could be better described as a business partnership, yet far from an easy ride for the tobacco companies.[21]
Could it be that even our court system can understand the financial limit to the governments pillaging of the tobacco companies? We tax tobacco, because few people stand up for the individual rights of the common citizen. We tax tobacco because it has been demonized by the same government that collects mountains of cash from its sale and use. We tax tobacco because it's now politically correct to use the term "sin tax," while ignoring the very definition of sin.[21] Additional tax on the production and sale of tobacco products is likely to discourage the use of tobacco.[20] Add the local sales taxes collected at $4,764,730,000, and the total soars to an astonishing, $27,159,861,000 in government taxes collected from the sale of tobacco products.[21] The policy would also prohibit the sale of tobacco products on campus, prohibit tobacco advertisements in college-run publications and promote tobacco treatment services and products through University Health Services. Some of these points are already part of debate and policy on campus.[13]
Then there's Dr. Joel Nitzkin. He is the Chair of the Tobacco Control Task Force for the American Association of Public Health Physicians, recently sent a letter to Senator Lautenberg. In it Nitzkin states, "As best we can tell, on the basis of currently available research data, these products promise a risk of illness and death well under 1% of the risk posed by cigarettes."[18] In June 1994, the Mississippi attorney general brought an action, Moore v. American Tobacco Co., against various tobacco industry members, to recover health care expenses allegedly related to tobacco use in that state. Following his lead, soon many other states filed similar suits, based on the same theory. Facing this tsunami of litigation, the major cigarette manufacturers settled the first four lawsuits filed in Mississippi, Florida, Texas and Minnesota, writing specific agreements for each state.[21]
We are told the tobacco tax is for health care. While I don't like extra taxes, I realize they are necessary for funding various programs.[24] After reading the April 2 column titled "Cigarette tax hike, earth still turns," I want to address the "whining" as it was called, from the smokers who still do not "get it," and the writer's assessment that increased tobacco taxes are overdue, because tobacco has been getting an easy ride for years.[21] While Imperial says that the surge in sales of rolling tobacco has extended over the past four years, the increase in demand has been so strong that it has recently introduced discount roll-your-own brands. In November 2007, it launched Gold Leaf - a value brand - and Golden Virginia Yellow in March this year. Imperial added that an increased number of smokers are "dualling" - smoking both roll-ups and regular cigarette brands.[19] According to Imperial Tobacco, Britain's biggest cigarette company and the owner of Golden Virginia and Drum, the volume of hand-rolling tobacco sold by the group in the UK rose by 7 per cent to 3,750 tonnes last year and the company believes it is on course for another significant increase in 2009. Imperial, which also owns Rizla cigarette papers, has attributed the continued surge in roll-your-own cigarettes to both the economic down-turn and the fact that more women and younger smokers are turning to the likes of Golden Virginia.[19]
The average tax take on a packet of cigarettes ranges from between 75 and 90 per cent of the total price, whereas roll-your-own tobacco is taxed at just below 70 per cent. While more smokers are turning to roll-ups, many existing roll-your-own users are, paradoxically. finding that they have to pay more for their tobacco pouches.[19] Tax on chewing tobacco also increased, from 19.5 cents per pound to 50.33 cents per pound, tax on large cigars increased from 4.88 cents to 40.26 cents per cigar, and cigarette tubes increased from 2.44 cents to 6.3 cents per 50 tubes. Tobacco retailers are concerned the new taxes will hurt their businesses.[9]
The cigarette packs have no tax stamp. Under current Arkansas law, I would be a criminal for possessing these cigarettes. Rebel wrote on Apr 12, 2009 12:13 PM: " If everyone would boycott tobacco purchases in Arkansas and go north or west to buy cigarettes, big brother would get no tax revenue, and big brother could not finance their precious trauma system.[3] If the theory works that will discourage smoking. then that means less revenue from tobacco taxes. That means, in turn, less money for those benefiting from tobacco taxes. Or does it? Does anyone believe that these special interests will simply go away? No, they will look for somewhere else to get the tax revenues from, perhaps a tax collected from general taxpayers. That is the problem with taxes that are used as both a revenue raiser and a social tool to encourage or discourage behavior. Eventually they just become a tax that we all end up paying.[6] Ryan said New York hiked tobacco taxes drastically and saw a huge drop in the number of smokers, but the state still reaped the benefits of higher revenue. "That's going to happen here," Ryan predicted.[9] Federal taxes on tobacco jumped on April 1, while numerous states -- even in tobacco-farming country -- are considering their own hikes. Other Views on Medical News.[6] Tobacco tax totals including federal, state and local excise and sales taxes are incredible.[21]
Can you live with yourself, governor? John A. Sheley Jr. Pinckneyville Tobacco taxes unfair To the Editor: I think the tobacco tax increase is unfair.[24] THE government has been urged to increase tax on tobacco products to discourage their consumption.[20] Speakers at a recent seminar urged the government to impose more tax on tobacco products in the upcoming national budget.[20]
The government promulgated the Smoking and Tobacco Products Usage (Control) Act, 2005 declaring smoking at public places and public transports a punishable offence.[20] Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Atlanta is helping India on how to conduct the tests and maintain the quality of testing. "The government will finally be able to verify the ingredients in tobacco products and the amount of harmful substances in them.[16]
The Rez Mart, owned by the Nisqually Tribe, a major local tobacco retailer, anticipates the price increase on tobacco products will cause profits to fall.[9]
Biggs at Tobacco World said that's not necessarily a cheaper route because loose tobacco went up more than packs of cigarettes. Biggs said Bugler Cigarette Tobacco used to be $15.39 a can, but it's now $35.49, an increase of about 130 percent. She said some customers have looked at the price of a can of loose tobacco and physically slammed the can back onto the shelves. "'I won't support it,' is what they say," Biggs said.[3] In a recent South Carolina study, 67 percent of people making less than $20,000 a year supported a 93-cent tax increase on cigarettes.[1] The measure increases the tax on cigarettes from 39 cents per pack to $1.01, leading some locals to say enough is enough.[9] The initial start-up cost of around $100 for charger, battery, vaporizer, etc. The ongoing costs (buying more nicotine cartridges) are around 50 cents to $1 a day (to get the same amount of nicotine as one pack of cigarettes per day). When you compare that to the cost of $150 to $250 per month (depending on which state you're in) though, it's easy to see e-cigarettes are a much cheaper alternative.[18] The net savings to a third worlder (even at electronic nicotine costs of 1.00/day) amounts to only $1/day. I disbelieve the cost you stated for of nicotine replacements - you state they cost 0.50 to 1.00 per day. All other nicotine replacement therapies are much MORE expensive than cigarettes on a daily basis (e.g. nicorette gum, patches, etc.)[18]
The cost is $79 + local tax with a 3 day money back no questions guarantee - and no one has returned one yet. They are 1/2 price of actual cigarettes, last longer, no fire hazard, no butts (and after spending Easter day with cigarette fiends my clothes smell horrible and I feel the effects of second hand smoke) and NO SMELL. If the government today would outlaw cigs tomorrow I would be one happy person.[18] I'm sure that you remember the press coverage telling us about the education we could now supply to our schools, and how our healthcare costs would plummet. The "silver lining" for the government, was that no specific guidelines were enacted for allocation of this money. Therefore, this money has been spent on items such as municipal golf courses, and dump trucks in New York, broadband cable networks in Virginia, and pasture and weather monitoring for a thoroughbred association here in Kentucky. Understanding that this money was not being spent on education; the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention developed spending recommendations for each states' share of MSA payments based on sales and smoking demographics.[21]
Sheila Wrenn. contact the Tobacco Free Boone County Coalition at 870.391.1250 or http://www.northark.cc.ar.us/bus_w_northark/AHEC/tobacco_free.htm. It is much cheaper to quit. My dad quit last year (after 60 years of smoking) and is buying a new car with the money he's saving.[3] NEW DELHI: How much nicotine and tar does your cigarette actually contain? You will know by the end of this year. The health ministry has cleared setting up of one apex state-of-the-art tobacco research lab (which will the first of its kind in South Asia) and five other labs to test the amount of nicotine, tar and carbon monoxide in cigarettes, bidis and cigars.[16] Associated Press - April 12, 2009 2:44 PM ET BOSTON (AP) - Health advocates say New England states have failed to live up to their promise of using money from the tobacco settlement for[2]
Something to think about wrote on Apr 12, 2009 2:02 PM: " You know it is really dumb to tax tobacco and not so much on alcohol because you can smoke for many many years and possibly get cancer or maybe not even end up with any of the tobacco related diseases, but you can drink one time and drive and kill someone.[3] Goodness wrote on Apr 12, 2009 9:48 AM: " So we're being taxed higher for a trauma system. better communication for doctors and hosptials. that's fine. Why aren't they taxing alcohol? And if they really wanted to raise the taxes on something to make money for this system, why wouldn't they tax something that everyone uses. toilet paper? Milk? Eggs? My mother is not a smoker, my husband and I are. She also feels the tax is not helping anything. We now buy our cigarettes from the north, because we won't spend the money to purchase them here when we go up there anyways for work.[3] Effective immediately, all taxes on tobacco should be rescinded, all no-smoking signs should come down, all monies confiscated from Big Tobacco should be returned and all schools should adopt curriculum to teach children how to properly light and inhale cigarettes and should teach them about the contributions to society made by smokers.[25] Instead Schlader walked out with a small 5.50 pouch of Bali Shag. "The gut check has certainly kicked in," said Schlader, who has rolled his own cigarettes since 2003. Now, he says, "I'm seriously considering" kicking the habit altogether. Schlader and other roll-your-own enthusiasts are suddenly paying more - much, much more - than they're accustomed to for the pleasure of smoking. That's because Congress figured out - with the help of Philip Morris and other big cigarette companies - that there was an untapped gold mine in roll-your-own tobacco.[4] I have never smoked and have no desire to start but if it actually helps let it be. The word on 'taxing' is e-cigs are not tobacco based so it doesn't fall under current tobacco laws and they are not advertised as systems to stop smoking so they don't fall under that catagory, but if there is money on the table an elected lawmaker won't waste time in getting their hands in the pot for the illusionary 'good for all'. A relative noted that after 2 or 3 weeks his taste buds started working again and he could enjoy food like before he started smoking.[18] A recent smoking cessation report from consultancy firm Visiongain says, "E-Cigarettes will revolutionize the face of tobacco smoking and could pose a threat to the smoking cessation market." As you might expect, a product like this will be in very high demand.[18]
'Ten years after it began to receive millions of dollars annually in tobacco settlement funds, Massachusetts still spends very little on programs meant to reduce smoking, according to a report released today.[22] Once you have caught your breath, add the $7.2 million paid by the tobacco companies to the government to honor the MSA and your grand total becomes, $34,359,861,000. This doesn't include bonus payments to the government figured in for 2008 through 2017, and yearly increases for each year thereafter. I would consider these "windfall profits."[21] In 2007, our government "generated" more money from tobacco every 60 seconds ($65,328), than the average smoker brought home in an entire year ($34,975).[21]
According to The Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, still 1-in-4 Kentucky high school students smoke, and 6,500 new smokers come from Kentucky each year.[21] "I just buy the cheapest I can find." A smoker for about 40 years, Collins said he doesn't plan to modify his habit. Typically, he smokes half a cigarette, then discards the remainder. "It's just like any other tax, like on gas -- just another way they can bleed us."[9] "I might be 20 years old, but I've smoked since I was 10 years old and I'm not going to quit." She later admitted that her parents didn't know she started smoking at such a young age. One man, who also asked not to be identified, listened to Biggs that afternoon and agreed that he isn't going to quit. He also said he's ready to fight against the tax if possible. "They're going to have to repeal this just like they did prohibition," he said.[3] I just can't wait till all of us smokers quit smoking and the ony way the government can make up the lost revenue is by passing that tax to everyone.[3] "If you want to screw the government out of taxes, quit smoking." Ryan prides himself in being a little offbeat, encouraging clients to stop smoking, even if it means he loses a customer. The tax hike, he said, leaves him with mixed emotions. "To put everything in the big picture and talking about economic recovery -- yes, I support the tax, but for the average Joe -- no, it's not a good idea."[9]
What's next? Should the government slap an extra tax on food that has high levels of sugar and fat? The tax hike was obviously bad timing because it will hurt retailers as well as tobacco farmers. Franklin County tobacco farmers may be facing a 20% drop in revenue as a result of this tax. Allowing the government to keep stepping in and using economic muscle to wrestle those choices away is a slippery slope indeed.[6] Tribal tobacco tax revenue covers all court services, the Indian Child Welfare office, rental assistance and housing programs, tribal police and tribal development.[9] Part of the reason why rolling tobacco is cheaper is that HM Revenue & Customs charges less tax on loose tobacco.[19]
According to a report published by HM Revenue & Customs, the amount of hand-rolling tobacco legally on sale in the UK has risen from 3,454 tonnes in 2006 to 4,154 tonnes in 2008, as smokers have since been forced to buy nonsmuggled tobacco.[19]
When Kentucky doubled its tobacco tax earlier this month, Anthenelli, director of the TriState Tobacco and Alcohol Research Center at the University of Cincinnati, praised the move, believing it would push some current smokers to quit and keep some youth from starting.[8] In view of that, it is unfair for the burden to fall solely on tobacco users. Everyone should pay their part. Why not impose such a tax on water or food? Everyone then would be paying their part. This tobacco tax will actually generate less money as it now stands. Out of all those who smoke, some will quit. Others will reduce their purchases.[24]
Rosa Thomas, wellness coordinator for the Student Health Center, said a program called 'Adopt-a-Smoker' was implemented in November during the Great American Smoke Out to provide support to students who were trying to quit smoking. Thomas also said the Student Health Center has tried to offer 'Quitting' classes and also refers students to 215-QUIT, a program she said fits better into a student's schedule. The Student Health Center offers educational classes about smoking, and Thomas said this is the best way to prevent students from smoking.[13] 'The reason many people smoke has to do with advertising,' Thomas said. She said many cigarette brands, such as Virginia Slims, target women specifically. She also said the advertisements are 'very enticing' and help students see smoking as a way to deal with stress. The Tobacco-Free Campaign comes in the midst of some frightening statistics: according to the CAC press release, 50 percent of people who continue to smoke will die of smoking-related illnesses during their lifetime. Based on the national rate of smoking among college students, which is 24.4 percent, more than 6,000 students smoke on campus, and more than 2,000 of these students will die prematurely from smoking.[13] The government wants 5 cents a cigarette no matter whether you roll it yourself or not." A smoker since age 14, Ryan said he loves his job, and urges customers to smoke a pipe if they want their nicotine habit satisfied for cheap. As an upside, Ryan said his business has seen more foot traffic since April 1. "At least people are checking and saying, 'Let's see what this guy's got,'" Ryan said.[9] When cigarette debates arise, a topic that often comes up is why a person begins to smoke. Is it because they want to be cool, to fit in or to rebel? This debate is insignificant. The question that really matters is why they stick with it, and what efforts can be made to prevent fatal nicotine addictions from reaching an even more frightening rate. Popular belief is that smokers need a security blanket, something to lean to when they are stressed or upset.[17]
Smokers are also likely to compensate for smoking 'light' cigarettes, by inhaling more deeply, holding smoke in the lungs for longer, covering manufactured cigarette ventilation holes with the fingers or mouth, or smoking more frequently.[12] The study is looking at how well an already-approved smoking cessation medication works for smokers who are also affected by schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. About 80 percent of adults with schizophrenia smoke, he said. "This group is motivated to quit, but they have a harder time breaking the addiction, and in many ways, less access to treatment," he said.[8] Maybe the trick for smokers with intentions to quit is not a nicotine patch, but a place of refuge that is not in the form of poison. It's time for a new security blanket. Cleaning or doing simple chores is excellent for stress relief and away for one to get his mind off of the factors that led them to begin smoking. One will most likely gain more respect points with his parents if they are doing chores rather than setting themselves up for chemotherapy.[17] There are dozens of smaller private competitors which have popped up all around the world (and will likely continue to do so). It has other businesses so it's not a 100% pure play on the growth of e-cigarettes. At this point in time even without the political risks involved, it's a heck of a risky position to take. This is the perfect situation of how a new technology could revolutionize an entire industry. The established firms are going to pull what strings they can to prevent competition, but they'll only be able to hold out so long. People want to quit smoking and in countries where e-cigarettes have been outlawed (e.g. Canada) that hasn't stopped folks from buying them.[18]
Whether to allow smoking should be up to the owners of businesses. It appears as though smokers will be the cash cow for the government. What would happen to the economy if everyone quit? Where then would the money come from? It's ironic that a harmful habit pays for health care.[24] There will be less money coming in. If smokers are paying extra taxes for health care, they should be allowed to smoke in public.[24]
Research shows that most Americans support tobacco taxes ''' not surprising, since 80 percent of Americans don't smoke. Even many low-income Americans think it's a good idea.[1] Though they hit poor Americans hardest, stiff taxes on tobacco can reduce healthcare costs by billions.[1]
Now the U.S. Senate has a historic opportunity to protect children and save lives as it considers The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. While this legislation would help protect all Americans from the ravages of tobacco, it includes specific provisions to protect our nation's children from this deadly addiction.[10] By passing the Family Smoking Prevention and Control Act, Congress can take a major step to protect our children and reduce the terrible toll of tobacco on our community. You can do something really important for our children and families by contacting your members of Congress and telling them to vote for this bill that will protect families and save lives.[10]
The bill includes strong, effective restrictions on advertising and marketing of tobacco products to children.[10] On April 2, the U.S. House of Representatives approved legislation granting the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authority over tobacco products.[10] According to a press release by the CAC, the tobacco-free policy would prohibit tobacco use on all college property, including residence halls. It would also prohibit the free distribution of tobacco products on campus, along with affiliated fraternities and sororities.[13]
While a complete ban on the use of tobacco will not suit to the present reality of demand and consumption certain corners of building and rooms at workplaces may be earmarked for smoking.[20] In other tobacco related news, more than 400 complaints has been filed with the anti-smoking John Tung foundation since the indoor public smoking ban was put in place three months ago. Lin Ching-li, the director of the foundation'''s tobacco hazards prevention division, said that cases of employees complaining about their employer and supervisor smoking have increased.[23] In related news, the John Tung Foundation yesterday made public a list of locations where there have been the most complaints against smokers breaking the smoking ban.[14]
Yelm resident Leon Collins is among the smokers who decided the tax increase is painful, but not enough to give up smoking. "It's a bunch of crap, a whole bunch of crap," Collins said. [9] Smokers are smoldering over recently-enacted tax increases on cigarettes, cigars and more.[9] Although part of the move was to make the habit so expensive that smokers are forced to quit, some smokers are smoldering with anger and are vowing to fight the tax increase.[3]
If a tax increase will save lives in Northwest Missouri, where illnesses from smoking exceed the norm, then we see the wisdom in that. We join with those concerned that a levy weighing heavily on low-income people is designed to fund insurance for others who are better off financially.[6] Biggs said some people coming into the store after the first tax increase were noticeably angry and took that anger out on store employees. "They didn't understand why we did it, but we didn't do it," Biggs said. "It was our government."[3]
I don't want my kids around it. Nor do I frequent establishments where smoke looms in the air. Anytime a tax increase or new tax is proposed, things are rarely as they seem. This tax increase is no different.[21] TR wrote on Apr 12, 2009 11:58 AM: " Remember this unfair tax increase when you go to vote.[3]
Congress singled out roll-your-own tobacco for a whopping increase of 2,000 percent, raising the per-pound tax from 1.10 to 24.78.[4] Schlader would have to fork over 67 - a 148 percent increase. It wasn't in stock, anyway. The Bell Tobacco Shop can order it for you, but the store no longer keeps Stockholm Blend and other big cans and pouches of loose tobacco on its shelves.[4]
The Third World is Big Tobaccos GROWTH MARKET.In the third world cigarette tobacco pack prices are less than in the the western world.[18] The Tobacco Shop on West Township Street in Fayetteville has already experienced some of the effects. Being a specialty store, the Tobacco Shop only carries tobacco, and customers roll their own cigarettes. To save money, the Shop has decreased its stock of cigarette tobacco.[7] The Central Tobacco Research Institute in Andhra Pradesh (under the agriculture ministry), which tests tobacco content for the industry, recently found high levels of nicotine and tar in Indian cigarettes.[16] Even before the credit crisis took hold, smokers flinched at paying £5.22 for a packet of 20 Lambert & Butler. Now that recession is gripping the country, they are increasingly turning to cheaper hand-rolling tobacco to get their nicotine fix.[19] In the past, smugglers had bought rolling tobacco from the Benelux countries, where tax is lower. Many smokers had then bought their discount pouches from market stalls and pubs.[19] About half of the states also are considering tobacco tax hikes, chiefly to shore up flagging state and income tax receipts.[1] The reaction to the federal tax hike has been dramatic in the past few weeks. Calls to some state "quit lines" have quadrupled since last month, to the point where Michigan had to close its line until October because it spent all its funding to handle the crush of calls.[1] The federal tax hike is considered by backers, including the AMA, to be a victory in the fight to stop smoking an improve children's health.[6] Congress should immediately tax all homosexual activity, gays should be publicly ostracized, school children should be taught the harmful effects of homosexuality, and Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller should go after Lambda Legal with the same fervor with which he went after Phillip Morris. For those who would argue that there is a big difference between smoking and homosexuality, you are right.[25]
"Nisqually Tribe sells cigarettes and collects the accurate amount of tax and doesn't give it to the state because the state doesn't have any taxing authority (on tribal land)," said Nisqually attorney Fabio Apolito. "What the tax most likely means is decreased cigarette sales," he said.[9] "The tax levels in all states have far exceeded the cost per pack imposed on society.[1] "No." Wrenn did say she is cutting back on smoking and would like to quit sometime. The cost of over-the-counter smoking cessation aids are just as expensive as cigarettes and she can't afford them. "It's a no-win situation," she said.[3] A spokesman for Forest, the pro-smoking pressure group, said: "There are far more people smoking roll-ups, partly because of the cost, but partly because of the fashion element. Roll-ups have a slightly more antiestablishment feel to them. Cigarettes are getting more and more expensive, and in a recession you can hardly say they are essentials.[19]
Sheila Wrenn of Harrison was a Tobacco World customer last week. She explained that she's been smoking since she was 12 and doesn't plan to stop now. "I work 59 hours a week, for crying out loud, and can't even afford to buy cigarettes," she said. She said drunken drivers kill people. "But are they raising the taxes on alcohol?" she asks.[3] The TriState Tobacco and Alcohol Research Center is recruiting adult smokers affected by schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder for a study of an already-approved smoking cessation medication.[8] Imperial Tobacco told The Times : "The consumer base for roll-your-own has changed in recent years. It was once the sole domain of older male smokers but has become more socially acceptable among adult smokers of all ages and both men and women." About one in four smokers roll their own in the UK.[19]
Smoking is related to COPD, heart disease, cancer, etc. However, it is not the only threat to one's good health. What about obesity, sedentary lifestyles, alcohol and drugs? Smokers don't hurt their bodies any worse than those who eat fast foods two or three times per day and watch television and spend hours on the computer every evening.[24] Cigar smokers began paying around 40 cents more per cigar, and pipe tobacco also saw a significant increase.[4]
'Educational classes let students know about the harmful effects of smoking,' Thomas said. Thomas said she thinks prohibiting tobacco advertisements would help students stop smoking.[13] The measure is supposed to discourage smoking and help raise funds for the National Health Insurance system.[23] The DOH will also allocate NT$10 billion to the financially strapped National Health Insurance program.[5]
Gov. Sanford has every right to decline the money that Obama is trying to force on his state. What strings are attached to it? Usually these types of funds last only a few years with the states funding them if the programs are to continue. Maybe Gov. Sanford realizes that all that glitters is not gold and that this type of gluttonous spending, cloaked at "stimulus spending", will lead to national bankruptcy. Maybe Mr. Sanford also realizes that he could be "fired" by the Obama team if he accepts the money much like the GM CEO. [24] In no way do they represent the view of harrisondaily.com. Lost my mother wrote on Apr 12, 2009 7:11 AM: " My mother endured the last year of her life in a miserable state - fighting lung cancer, COPD and a host of other diseases as the result of her 40+ years of smoking.[3] Karen wrote on Apr 12, 2009 7:43 AM: " The best way to quit smoking is still cold turkey.[3] I wouldn't mind it as much if the money would actually do some GOOD like building hospitals that were maybe worth something, unlike that worthless place we call NARMC. Beebe won't be getting any extra money off of me, because I am proud to say that I have quit smoking because of this.[3]
All you Obama supporters need to quit crying. You brought this on yourself. This is a tax that Bush blocked when he was in office. This tax just made me mad enough to quit. Now that I've quit I vow not to be one of those A-hole non smokers that do that pathetic fake cough when someone near them lights up [3] Though some smokers say they are cutting down on cigarettes, many have taken a stand: They won't quit.[3] While it is estimated that about one third of roll-your-own smokers use filters, some health experts argue that there is little difference in the health risks posed by filtered cigarettes and roll-ups.[19] Even after the surcharge hike, many public health experts say that cigarettes will still be too cheap.[23] For instance, David Sweanor, who has worked with many health regulators including the WHO, said in a recent interview, "If there is anyone who believes cigarettes are no more hazardous than e-cigarettes I'd recommend a remedial course in basic sciences."[18] Recently, New Jersey Senator Jim Lauterman tried to put an end to e-cigarette sales in the U.S. Sen. Lautenberg is also the author of a law banning smoking in buildings that house federally-funded facilities that serve children. This would subject them to FDA approval. The costs of which would stifle the small upstart companies who make e-cigarettes and delay their access to the open market.[18]
Oh, by the way alcohol can cause just as many family problems as tobacco, just ask all of the children that grew up in houses with an alcoholic parent versus the children that grew up with parents that smoke.[3] Staff Photo/James L. White Ashley Biggs works the counter at Tobacco World where Noah McCreary stopped in for a pack of smokes last week.[3]
Big Tobacco would naturally be against the e-cigarette's success. It's a direct competitor. It's more than just Big Tobacco. Big Pharma has a big stake in this battle as well.[18]
We put people in jail for trafficking nacotics yet tobacco use kills more people each year than dangerous drugs, traffic accidents, murders, suicides combined.[11] According to reports, about 57,000 people die for using tobacco every year in Bangladesh, while 3.62 lakh become infected.[20]
In the past couple of months, taxes on tobacco have risen considerably, in some cases more than double the price. [3] Federal excise taxes collected from smokers in 2007 totaled $7,307,440,000 and state and local excise taxes contribute and additional $15,087,691,000.[21] They do not charge state taxes and cigarettes are considerably cheaper.[3]
Sales in Arkansas are expected to take a hit, state tax official Gary Williams said. "It's going to be a few months before we can tell any kind of trend, but there's no doubt our sales are going down some," he said.[7] You can look up act # 180 of 2009 in the Ar general assembly to get the details. Our politicans are being sneaky with this one if you read the money goes to the general fund and not a trama center fund specifically for that purpose. They have a blank check with all this tax revenue. That is the reason i am frustrated with this tax.[3]
Don't assume that the 1998 MSA was the final action by the government against the tobacco companies. [21] Side-stream smoke from a burning cigarette has higher concentration of poisonous substances than the main-stream smoke and is thus, more harmful for the passive smokers.[20] Currently a packet of cigarettes retails for NT $55 (less than U.S. $2) in Taiwan, making Taiwan one of the cheapest places to smoke in the world.[23]
SOURCES
1. Federal and state governments look to smokers for more tax revenue
2. WTEN: Albany, New York News, Weather, Sports - NE health officials to release tobacco report
3. Harrison Daily Times - Harrison, Arkansas - Neighbor Newspapers > News > They won'''t quit
4. Missoulian: Smokers who roll their own cigarettes see tobacco prices jump
5. Health surcharge on cigarettes in Taiwan to double starting June 1 - Taiwan News Online
6. AMNews: April 13, 2009. What editorial writers are saying about increasing tobacco taxes . American Medical News
7. Tobacco tax increase forces spending readjustments for some UA students - News
8. Tobacco tax affects mentally ill | Cincinnati Enquirer | Cincinnati.Com
9. Yelm Online > Archives > Local News > Impact of tobacco tax hike worries tribe
10. FDA Bill Will Save Young Virginians From Deadly Addiction | Richmond Times-Dispatch
11. Anti-smoking campaigner is decorated for 25-year Asian crusade : Health
12. Smokers warned that all tobacco is deadly | HEALTH
13. The Daily Beacon
14. Taipei Times - archives
15. Higher tobacco surcharge on June 1 - The China Post
16. India's first tobacco research lab by Dec - India - The Times of India
17. Local News: Guest column: Cancer stick, anyone? | one, nicotine, smokers : shelby onSet Site - WAP
18. Big Tobacco Beware, the Next Big Story Stock Could Involve E-Cigarettes -- Seeking Alpha
19. Too skint to light up -- roll ups make a comeback - Times Online
20. The New Nation - Internet Edition
21. Georgetown News-Graphic > Archives > Opinion > It's a big smoke and mirrors about smoking tax issue
22. Metro - Study: Tobacco funds not curbing smoking
23. Radio Taiwan International
24. :: TheSouthern.com - Southern Illinois' Homepage ::
25. Equal rights should also apply to smokers | DesMoinesRegister.com | The Des Moines Register
GENERATE A MULTI-SOURCE SUMMARY ON ANY SUBJECT
Enter your search query below. WAIT 10-20 sec for the new window to open.
Get more info on Smokers who roll their own cigarettes see tobacco prices jump by using the iResearch Reporter tool from Power Text Solutions.
 |
|  |
|
