Plummeting cigarette sales cut California tax revenues

[The Straight Story]

Cigarette sales in California plunged to their lowest level in a decade last year as smokers were squeezed by new taxes and restrictions on where they could light up.

While tobacco use has been steadily declining, the 8.1 percent sales drop was the largest year-over-year decline since 2000, according to the state Board of Equalization.

...

But for the state, the decline in smoking also means $74 million in tax revenues have disappeared like a puff of smoke, leaving health programs that rely on cigarette taxes to look for other ways to pay for services.

...

While cigarette sales have declined, "there's still a lot of work to do" to vanquish cigarettes from the state, Phillips said.

Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2010/07/28/2919217/plummeting-cigarette-sales-cut.html#ixzz0v0fpvn6L

Never for a minute doubted that they wanted to vanquish them.

[SoCalDem]

1. buh byee...$74 million in tax revenues

This is what happens when states raise taxes to an obscene rate, in hopes of making MORE money...people find "other" ways to satisfy their habit...ways that cut the state out completely..Many do quit, but many also get creative...and save money in the process..

[LiberalEsto]

21. Think of the medical savings

Fewer cases of lung cancer

[Sgent]

26. So?

Cigarette smokers have lower lifetime medical bills than nonsmokers (they die sooner).

[roguevalley]

50. I hate that argument. I have lost half my family to cancer from

cigarettes and I can tell you the cost is beyond calculation.

[NeedleCast]

2. A perfect example of why sin taxes are a bad idea

The ban brigade(s) wont care, they'll just move on to push taxing of other "sins."

Its beautifully ironic that many programs supported by six taxes, specifically cigarettes, are health programs.

[Occulus]

9. Only six taxes?

:P

[NeedleCast]

20. Doh!

Thanks...sin taxes...obviouslly. Late in the afternoon and all...

[Dr.Phool]

27. Wait for the freeper howls when they put a tax on masturbation!

[FLAprogressive]

35. DUzy.

:rofl:

[movonne]

3. If they make pot legal they can make it up by taxing pot..

[wuushew]

4. Who the hell cares, legalize weed

dumbass nicotine junkies.

[eShirl]

5. if only there were something they could legalize and tax

[FourScore]

51. Like their number one cash crop perhaps?

Nah...They wouldn't do that...

:hippie:

[laughingliberal]

6. Decreased revenue is always the end result of overly burdensome sin taxes.

It's been shown often enough that there is a point with sin taxes where they will reach diminishing returns. Looks like CA found that point. Now, what will they tax to make up the shortfall?

Anything to avoid progressive taxation, I guess.

[Lance_Boyle]

10. Why don't they go after yachts with the same zeal?

They could make a cool million in state revenue off of just one of CarlyQueen's yachts. And for sure that's a habit that the stinkin' rich aren't going to give up over a petty issue like taxes...

[LooseWilly]

45. Schwarzenegger vetoed the yacht tax...

:applause: Brilliant!

[inna]

29. "Anything to avoid progressive taxation", exactly. nt

[Occulus]

7. "leaving health programs that rely on cigarette taxes to look for other ways"

See? This is what happens when you fund vital state programs on the back of a behavior you wish to eliminate. Why cigarette taxes are not wholly dedicated to smoking cessation programs (including nicotine dependency drugs/methods) is a mystery to me.

[joeybee12]

12. Yeah, you're eliminating the problem so you have to look elsewhere for funds...

...the funding makes no sense, the high tax does because it's causing a decline in smoking.

[NeedleCast]

23. It doesn't make sense under any circumstances

No matter what programs sin taxes are used to fund, they'll eventually reach the point of diminishing returns and then soemthing else has to be taxed to fill in the gap.

Of course, ban brigade doesn't care about this because their end game is to criminalize tobacco, not fund health programs.

It also leads to more black-marketing of cigarettes because addicts can't afford their drug anymore, forcing them to go underground to get it...and there's no taxes being collected there.

[SoCalDem]

14. It's a prime reason why education funding sucks now.. LOTTO was supposed to

revolutionize how schools here were funded.. we were supposed to be ROLLING in DOUGH...and they "promised" that the regular education funding would not be affected either..

It did not take long for people to realize that Lotto was a chump-game, and of course that money source dried up.. and they DID cut state funding..to the bone..

[LeftinOH]

8. Tip the scales too much - and black market cigs (stolen or produced) will start to become the norm;

does anyone really want to see that? Do we really want law enforcement bogged down with an additional pointless burden?

[joeybee12]

13. We won't see that...that's the typical GOP talking point...no proof it will or ever

has happened. Yeesh!

[MadHound]

16. Really? Looks like it is already happening

<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/10/higher-cigarette-taxes-lu_n_96094.html>

Millions upon millions of dollars worth of a black market:shrug:

[joeybee12]

11. People here seem to miss the obvious...the high taxes caused a decline in smoking...

...a good thing...a healthier population leads to lower healthcare costs...god forbid you should take that into consideration.

[madinmaryland]

17. My sentiments exactly. While there may be a lost of $74million this year,

there will probably be a much larger savings in the future, as the number of smoking related illnesses decrease.

[Kievan Rus]

49. Authoritarians like you are a black eye to the Democratic Party

If you don't like tobacco, fine -- don't smoke! Why do you think you should make that decision for other consenting adults?

In my honest opinion, health and safety nuts that want to ban consenting adults from doing something that doesn't deprive anyone else of their rights are just as bad as the anti-choicers that want to deprive women of the right to choose.

[NeedleCast]

24. What other things should we ban adutls from doing in order to bring about a healthier society?

You authoritarians make me sad.

If we banned driving it would help make the population healtheir and lower healthcare costs too...laws forbid that you should take things into consideration that are more than one step in front of your current ban brigade idiology.

[Newest Reality]

25. +100

Ah, do I have to ask those who want to decide what I should do if I might PLEASE continue because it is what I do? Or do we have to find something you like that WE don't think is good for YOU and tax, ban, prohibit or find some other way to force you to stop?

I harm no one by smoking and having lived with a nurse who did two thorough and exhaustive research papers on smoking and second hand smoke, (both recieved A's even though they came to conclusions contrary to popular opinions) you might be surprised at what you have been led to believe and why. I don't say smoking is good for you, but it is only a contributor, not a cause, etc.

Now, before I am told by the "authorities" that they have to pay for the costs to my health for my choices, I would like to consider the effects of all the harmful toxic chemicals and substances, (as well as that sea of electromagnetism that you are in) that you are exposing yourself to that are and will make you ill and how we are going to pay for that if you don't put yourself in a hermetically-sealed bubble right away. I mean really, depending on where you live and what is around you, we have lot of evidence to cite concerning how likely it is that you will be a medical burden due to these factors alone. It is a very long list and that does not include new additions to your toxic brew.

We may want to enact a personal, environmental hazards tax to solve that one rather than being so narrow and only affecting the accursed ones and their unacceptable vices.

A sex tax might be good for you to when you consider the effects and costs of those STD's you could be getting and spreading. Some consider sex a sin anyway. Condoms and sex toys, et al, should be taxed heavily.

[Trajan]

48. You failed to compare the losses due to STDs ...

to the obvious health benefits regular sexual activity can bring; to both body and mind ...

But, hey, you have an ax to grind ....

Signed,
Occasional Smoker who thinks tobacco taxation is a wise policy

[The Straight Story]

30. When smoking is not their #1 health concern, something else will be - nannies are like that

Worry and scare people "Terra Terra" and then tell them "Let us take this away from you for your own sake" And the mindless zombies follow, thinking it is making them somehow more free.

[Curmudgeoness]

41. You are missing the obvious. Smokers are going elsewhere to buy

cigarettes. This drop in tax revenue is not reflecting that much quitting. And as a smoker, I challenge nonsmokers to have fewer health problems (to date) than I have. I have missed 2 days of work for illness in 10 years. All the nonsmokers are sick and at doctors all the time. But I digress.

[SheilaT]

15. It is good that people

are smoking a lot less. And I agree that cigarettes should be highly taxed in part to discourage their use. And of course, if it succeeds, eventually no one will smoke. And of course tax revenue needs to be made up somewhere else. That's so obvious to the most casual observer that it becomes equally obvious that people in charge of setting taxes cannot look beyond the initial money raised and pay attention to long-term needs or policies.

[kelly1mm]

33. Actually there is a large and growing group of people growing and

curing their own tobacco. It is really very interesting. I do still buy tubes so my cigarettes cost $.23 per pack. Marlboro costs $6.10 per pack. I don't think that smoking will be eliminated for a very long time.

[SheilaT]

34. Didn't know that.

But they're off the cigarette taxes if they're doing that, which is (as far as tax revenue is concerned) the same as no longer smoking.

Oh, and I do agree that smoking won't be eliminated for a very long time.

[kelly1mm]

38. Yes, no taxes if you do not sell to others. Same with beer and wine

although I think there is a limit to how much beer and wine you are allowed to produce without a licence - I want to say 200 gallons per year of each for each person over 21 in the household. I have made my own beer and wine in the past - nowhere near the limits though! If I was a big beer and wine drinker I would probably make it more often.

[AnArmyVeteran]

18. But that also means California's health costs should go down.

[seattleblue]

28. No it doesn't mean that

Smoking is replaced by eating and former smokers always gain weight leading to more health problems. It is no coincidence that in this country as smoking rates have gone down weight has gone up. Not a dime will be saved.

[laughingliberal]

31. Well, not to mention that those who quit after 20-30 years will still face a lot of health problems.

that will still cost money in the future.

[nadinbrzezinski]

37. And poverty, High Fructose Corn Syrup, and other

elements had NOTHING to do with this...

Okay.

[seattleblue]

42. The biology of our cells has a lot to do with this. So what. What is your point?

I said health costs will not go down. That is true. I said weight will go up as smoking goes down. That is true. I wasn't commenting on underlying causes. BTW weight gains in the U.S. have been across all income levels.

[nadinbrzezinski]

43. Which should be a free clue as to not completely related

to lower smoking rates.

But rather our cheap food policy... but that's ok.

Scientists are now looking at Corn Syrup and other elements and looking for actual connections. Suffice to say... HFCS seems to be more of a culprit than we thought... so using REGULAR sugar, albeit more expensive, would be better from public health. Oh and so is less smoking of crack tobacco. You'd be surprised how it's changed to make it that much more addictive.

[seattleblue]

44. Are you to opposed to "cheap food"?!

I am unaware of any country in the world that has an expensive food policy. And weight problems are not nearly as bad in most countries as in the U.S.

[nadinbrzezinski]

46. Countries subsidy usually

what are known as essential food baskets.

Those are the kinds of price supports that the IMF, and WORLD Bank, for example, always want taken away as a first step in austerity plans.

Ours in the present form go back to Nixon and have led to monoculture in the Midwest... and it is highly dependent on things like industrial agriculture and a few other things.

Don't worry, the side effects when it inevitably proves to be unsustainable... it will be painful.

[depakid]

47. LOL- now there's a creative rationalization

utterly devoid of evidence or common sense- but creative nonetheless.

[RagAss]

19. And that money went where???... The underground cigarette market....another azzhole law !

[Liberal In Texas]

32. BINGO. A lot of people, including me, have been buying through the mail

from Native American outlets. The stated reason for law just passed to restrict cigarettes being mailed because of "the children" was bull. It was because states were losing tax revenue. When taxes get too high, it'll make it cost effective to cross the Mexican border and probably the Canadian and bootleg them in.

And when people who don't have jobs or have low paying jobs figure out they can make money this way, they will (if they haven't already.)

[FooshIt]

22. so when you tax something people do it less

wow brilliant

[political_Dem]

36. Why are the anti-smoking denziens mad? They should be celebrating.

After all, they pushed for these draconian laws from town to town. And now that the revenues have dropped there are tears in their beer. So it's time for these folks to openly go out and pick another group to tax.

How about municipal governments ( like the one in Bell, Ca.) whose council members get higher salaries than the POTUS? They need to be rallied against. Maybe we can tax cow killers. Or, Meg Whitman everytime her odious commercials take a few precious minutes out the lives of left coast viewers who have to be subjected to them.

Just a few suggestions.

[Bluenorthwest]

40. Los Angeles City Council members are the nation's highest paid

15 of them, each get $171,648 plus perks that make your head spin, cars, assistants, assistants for the assistants, free gasoline, and on and on and on.
The City is also going under water at the rate of about 400,000 dollars a day. A day.

[AsahinaKimi]

39. T'Pol (Vulcans) hates CIGGIES..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odgE4QCSQCA