Master settlement and Taxation

From Safer nicotine wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Lots of detailed explanations exist. Some very highly technical, we shall try to include the most readily understood to commence this entry

General Commentary and Background

Up in Smoke

  • "In November 1998, forty-six US states, along with the District of Columbia and five US territories, and the major tobacco companies entered into a contract of an extraordinary nature. (The other four states, Florida, Minnesota, Mississippi, and Texas, had entered similar agreements on their own beginning the year before.) The agreement, known as the Master Settlement Agreement (MSA), represented the culmination of a decades-long argument between the tobacco companies and state governments"


  • "The new nicotine products have been disruptive to the tobacco industry which has had to adapt or get left behind in a burgeoning market. The development of SNP has also been hugely disruptive to the deeply embedded narrative of anti-smoking campaigners. The growing use of SNP and the re-evaluation of the relative benefits of smokeless tobacco has split the global public health community. It has generated a new era of uncertainty and confusion around nicotine consumption. The long-standing ‘heroes and villains’ narrative has been disrupted to the extent that – regarding THR – some major ‘heroes’ of the tobacco wars are now public health ‘villains’ who are putting smokers’ lives at risk."

Where Did It All Go

  • "The issue then comes to this question – where is all of this money going? Tobacco prevention programs state to state? Well – no. According to the web site Public Health Law Center, the states have been collecting record amounts of money from tobacco companies – but over the past 20 years, only one state – North Dakota, even funds a tobacco prevention program at have the level that the CDC recommends."

Lost Tobacco Revenue

  • "In interviews I’m often asked why, if vaping is 95% safer than smoking, there are so many negative stories around vaping."
  • "My answer is that vaping is a disruptive industry which threatens more than US$700 billion in tobacco revenues and US$250 billion in tax revenues. It’s inevitable there’s going to be opposition to vaping."
  • "But I’m always uneasy this may be interpreted as a conspiracy theory. So to illustrate the scale of the problem, we decided to put some data behind the assertion."