Export translations
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Settings
Group
Coil
ENDS Cardiovascular System
ENDS EVALI VALI THCVALI
ENDS Flavors
ENDS Positive study collection
ENDS Respiratory System
ENDS Taxes
ENDS The Fight to Abolish an Industry
ENDS Toxicity / Carcinogenic
ENDS Youth & Young Adults
Main Page
Mythbusters
Nicotine / THR - Change the Conversation
Nicotine / THR - Guides for Policymakers & Advocates
Nicotine / THR - Statements from Organizations
Nicotine Replacement Therapy
Nicotine Studies
Nicotine therapeutic benefits
Ohms law
Safer Nicotine Wiki:About
Safer Nicotine Wiki:Copyrights
Safer Nicotine Wiki:General disclaimer
Tobacco Harm Reduction News
Language
aa - Afar
aae - Arbëresh
ab - Abkhazian
abs - Ambonese Malay
ace - Achinese
acm - Iraqi Arabic
ady - Adyghe
ady-cyrl - Adyghe (Cyrillic script)
aeb - Tunisian Arabic
aeb-arab - Tunisian Arabic (Arabic script)
aeb-latn - Tunisian Arabic (Latin script)
af - Afrikaans
aln - Gheg Albanian
alt - Southern Altai
am - Amharic
ami - Amis
an - Aragonese
ang - Old English
ann - Obolo
anp - Angika
ar - Arabic
arc - Aramaic
arn - Mapuche
arq - Algerian Arabic
ary - Moroccan Arabic
arz - Egyptian Arabic
as - Assamese
ase - American Sign Language
ast - Asturian
atj - Atikamekw
av - Avaric
avk - Kotava
awa - Awadhi
ay - Aymara
az - Azerbaijani
azb - South Azerbaijani
ba - Bashkir
ban - Balinese
ban-bali - Balinese (Balinese script)
bar - Bavarian
bbc - Batak Toba
bbc-latn - Batak Toba (Latin script)
bcc - Southern Balochi
bci - Baoulé
bcl - Central Bikol
bdr - West Coast Bajau
be - Belarusian
be-tarask - Belarusian (Taraškievica orthography)
bew - Betawi
bg - Bulgarian
bgn - Western Balochi
bh - Bhojpuri
bho - Bhojpuri
bi - Bislama
bjn - Banjar
blk - Pa'O
bm - Bambara
bn - Bangla
bo - Tibetan
bpy - Bishnupriya
bqi - Bakhtiari
br - Breton
brh - Brahui
bs - Bosnian
btm - Batak Mandailing
bto - Iriga Bicolano
bug - Buginese
bxr - Russia Buriat
ca - Catalan
cbk-zam - Chavacano
cdo - Mindong
ce - Chechen
ceb - Cebuano
ch - Chamorro
chn - Chinook Jargon
cho - Choctaw
chr - Cherokee
chy - Cheyenne
ckb - Central Kurdish
co - Corsican
cps - Capiznon
cpx - Pu–Xian Min
cpx-hans - Pu–Xian Min (Simplified Han script)
cpx-hant - Pu–Xian Min (Traditional Han script)
cpx-latn - Pu–Xian Min (Latin script)
cr - Cree
crh - Crimean Tatar
crh-cyrl - Crimean Tatar (Cyrillic script)
crh-latn - Crimean Tatar (Latin script)
crh-ro - Dobrujan Tatar
cs - Czech
csb - Kashubian
cu - Church Slavic
cv - Chuvash
cy - Welsh
da - Danish
dag - Dagbani
de - German
de-at - Austrian German
de-ch - Swiss High German
de-formal - German (formal address)
dga - Dagaare
din - Dinka
diq - Zazaki
dsb - Lower Sorbian
dtp - Central Dusun
dty - Doteli
dv - Divehi
dz - Dzongkha
ee - Ewe
efi - Efik
egl - Emilian
el - Greek
eml - Emiliano-Romagnolo
en - English
en-ca - Canadian English
en-gb - British English
eo - Esperanto
es - Spanish
es-419 - Latin American Spanish
es-formal - Spanish (formal address)
et - Estonian
eu - Basque
ext - Extremaduran
fa - Persian
fat - Fanti
ff - Fula
fi - Finnish
fit - Tornedalen Finnish
fj - Fijian
fo - Faroese
fon - Fon
fr - French
frc - Cajun French
frp - Arpitan
frr - Northern Frisian
fur - Friulian
fy - Western Frisian
ga - Irish
gaa - Ga
gag - Gagauz
gan - Gan
gan-hans - Gan (Simplified Han script)
gan-hant - Gan (Traditional Han script)
gcf - Guadeloupean Creole
gcr - Guianan Creole
gd - Scottish Gaelic
gl - Galician
gld - Nanai
glk - Gilaki
gn - Guarani
gom - Goan Konkani
gom-deva - Goan Konkani (Devanagari script)
gom-latn - Goan Konkani (Latin script)
gor - Gorontalo
got - Gothic
gpe - Ghanaian Pidgin
grc - Ancient Greek
gsw - Alemannic
gu - Gujarati
guc - Wayuu
gur - Frafra
guw - Gun
gv - Manx
ha - Hausa
hak - Hakka Chinese
haw - Hawaiian
he - Hebrew
hi - Hindi
hif - Fiji Hindi
hif-latn - Fiji Hindi (Latin script)
hil - Hiligaynon
hno - Northern Hindko
ho - Hiri Motu
hr - Croatian
hrx - Hunsrik
hsb - Upper Sorbian
hsn - Xiang
ht - Haitian Creole
hu - Hungarian
hu-formal - Hungarian (formal address)
hy - Armenian
hyw - Western Armenian
hz - Herero
ia - Interlingua
ibb - Ibibio
id - Indonesian
ie - Interlingue
ig - Igbo
igl - Igala
ii - Sichuan Yi
ik - Inupiaq
ike-cans - Eastern Canadian (Aboriginal syllabics)
ike-latn - Eastern Canadian (Latin script)
ilo - Iloko
inh - Ingush
io - Ido
is - Icelandic
it - Italian
iu - Inuktitut
ja - Japanese
jam - Jamaican Creole English
jbo - Lojban
jut - Jutish
jv - Javanese
ka - Georgian
kaa - Kara-Kalpak
kab - Kabyle
kai - Karekare
kbd - Kabardian
kbd-cyrl - Kabardian (Cyrillic script)
kbp - Kabiye
kcg - Tyap
kea - Kabuverdianu
kg - Kongo
kge - Komering
khw - Khowar
ki - Kikuyu
kiu - Kirmanjki
kj - Kuanyama
kjh - Khakas
kjp - Eastern Pwo
kk - Kazakh
kk-arab - Kazakh (Arabic script)
kk-cn - Kazakh (China)
kk-cyrl - Kazakh (Cyrillic script)
kk-kz - Kazakh (Kazakhstan)
kk-latn - Kazakh (Latin script)
kk-tr - Kazakh (Turkey)
kl - Kalaallisut
km - Khmer
kn - Kannada
ko - Korean
ko-kp - Korean (North Korea)
koi - Komi-Permyak
kr - Kanuri
krc - Karachay-Balkar
kri - Krio
krj - Kinaray-a
krl - Karelian
ks - Kashmiri
ks-arab - Kashmiri (Arabic script)
ks-deva - Kashmiri (Devanagari script)
ksh - Colognian
ksw - S'gaw Karen
ku - Kurdish
ku-arab - Kurdish (Arabic script)
ku-latn - Kurdish (Latin script)
kum - Kumyk
kus - Kʋsaal
kv - Komi
kw - Cornish
ky - Kyrgyz
la - Latin
lad - Ladino
lb - Luxembourgish
lbe - Lak
lez - Lezghian
lfn - Lingua Franca Nova
lg - Ganda
li - Limburgish
lij - Ligurian
liv - Livonian
lki - Laki
lld - Ladin
lmo - Lombard
ln - Lingala
lo - Lao
loz - Lozi
lrc - Northern Luri
lt - Lithuanian
ltg - Latgalian
lus - Mizo
luz - Southern Luri
lv - Latvian
lzh - Literary Chinese
lzz - Laz
mad - Madurese
mag - Magahi
mai - Maithili
map-bms - Basa Banyumasan
mdf - Moksha
mg - Malagasy
mh - Marshallese
mhr - Eastern Mari
mi - Māori
min - Minangkabau
mk - Macedonian
ml - Malayalam
mn - Mongolian
mnc - Manchu
mnc-latn - Manchu (Latin script)
mnc-mong - Manchu (Mongolian script)
mni - Manipuri
mnw - Mon
mo - Moldovan
mos - Mossi
mr - Marathi
mrh - Mara
mrj - Western Mari
ms - Malay
ms-arab - Malay (Jawi script)
mt - Maltese
mus - Muscogee
mwl - Mirandese
my - Burmese
myv - Erzya
mzn - Mazanderani
na - Nauru
nah - Nāhuatl
nan - Minnan
nap - Neapolitan
nb - Norwegian Bokmål
nds - Low German
nds-nl - Low Saxon
ne - Nepali
new - Newari
ng - Ndonga
nia - Nias
nit - కొలామి
niu - Niuean
nl - Dutch
nl-informal - Dutch (informal address)
nmz - Nawdm
nn - Norwegian Nynorsk
no - Norwegian
nod - Northern Thai
nog - Nogai
nov - Novial
nqo - N’Ko
nrm - Norman
nso - Northern Sotho
nv - Navajo
ny - Nyanja
nyn - Nyankole
nyo - Nyoro
nys - Nyungar
oc - Occitan
ojb - Northwestern Ojibwa
olo - Livvi-Karelian
om - Oromo
or - Odia
os - Ossetic
pa - Punjabi
pag - Pangasinan
pam - Pampanga
pap - Papiamento
pcd - Picard
pcm - Nigerian Pidgin
pdc - Pennsylvania German
pdt - Plautdietsch
pfl - Palatine German
pi - Pali
pih - Norfuk / Pitkern
pl - Polish
pms - Piedmontese
pnb - Western Punjabi
pnt - Pontic
prg - Prussian
ps - Pashto
pt - Portuguese
pt-br - Brazilian Portuguese
pwn - Paiwan
qqq - Message documentation
qu - Quechua
qug - Chimborazo Highland Quichua
rgn - Romagnol
rif - Riffian
rki - Arakanese
rm - Romansh
rmc - Carpathian Romani
rmy - Vlax Romani
rn - Rundi
ro - Romanian
roa-tara - Tarantino
rsk - Pannonian Rusyn
ru - Russian
rue - Rusyn
rup - Aromanian
ruq - Megleno-Romanian
ruq-cyrl - Megleno-Romanian (Cyrillic script)
ruq-latn - Megleno-Romanian (Latin script)
rut - Rutul
rw - Kinyarwanda
ryu - Okinawan
sa - Sanskrit
sah - Yakut
sat - Santali
sc - Sardinian
scn - Sicilian
sco - Scots
sd - Sindhi
sdc - Sassarese Sardinian
sdh - Southern Kurdish
se - Northern Sami
se-fi - Northern Sami (Finland)
se-no - Northern Sami (Norway)
se-se - Northern Sami (Sweden)
sei - Seri
ses - Koyraboro Senni
sg - Sango
sgs - Samogitian
sh - Serbo-Croatian
sh-cyrl - Serbo-Croatian (Cyrillic script)
sh-latn - Serbo-Croatian (Latin script)
shi - Tachelhit
shi-latn - Tachelhit (Latin script)
shi-tfng - Tachelhit (Tifinagh script)
shn - Shan
shy - Shawiya
shy-latn - Shawiya (Latin script)
si - Sinhala
simple - Simple English
sjd - Kildin Sami
sje - Pite Sami
sk - Slovak
skr - Saraiki
skr-arab - Saraiki (Arabic script)
sl - Slovenian
sli - Lower Silesian
sm - Samoan
sma - Southern Sami
smn - Inari Sami
sms - Skolt Sami
sn - Shona
so - Somali
sq - Albanian
sr - Serbian
sr-ec - Serbian (Cyrillic script)
sr-el - Serbian (Latin script)
srn - Sranan Tongo
sro - Campidanese Sardinian
ss - Swati
st - Southern Sotho
stq - Saterland Frisian
sty - Siberian Tatar
su - Sundanese
sv - Swedish
sw - Swahili
syl - Sylheti
szl - Silesian
szy - Sakizaya
ta - Tamil
tay - Tayal
tcy - Tulu
tdd - Tai Nuea
te - Telugu
tet - Tetum
tg - Tajik
tg-cyrl - Tajik (Cyrillic script)
tg-latn - Tajik (Latin script)
th - Thai
ti - Tigrinya
tk - Turkmen
tl - Tagalog
tly - Talysh
tly-cyrl - Talysh (Cyrillic script)
tn - Tswana
to - Tongan
tok - Toki Pona
tpi - Tok Pisin
tr - Turkish
tru - Turoyo
trv - Taroko
ts - Tsonga
tt - Tatar
tt-cyrl - Tatar (Cyrillic script)
tt-latn - Tatar (Latin script)
ttj - Tooro
tum - Tumbuka
tw - Twi
ty - Tahitian
tyv - Tuvinian
tzm - Central Atlas Tamazight
udm - Udmurt
ug - Uyghur
ug-arab - Uyghur (Arabic script)
ug-latn - Uyghur (Latin script)
uk - Ukrainian
ur - Urdu
uz - Uzbek
uz-cyrl - Uzbek (Cyrillic script)
uz-latn - Uzbek (Latin script)
ve - Venda
vec - Venetian
vep - Veps
vi - Vietnamese
vls - West Flemish
vmf - Main-Franconian
vmw - Makhuwa
vo - Volapük
vot - Votic
vro - Võro
wa - Walloon
wal - Wolaytta
war - Waray
wls - Wallisian
wo - Wolof
wuu - Wu
wuu-hans - Wu (Simplified Han script)
wuu-hant - Wu (Traditional Han script)
xal - Kalmyk
xh - Xhosa
xmf - Mingrelian
xsy - Saisiyat
yi - Yiddish
yo - Yoruba
yrl - Nheengatu
yue - Cantonese
yue-hans - Cantonese (Simplified Han script)
yue-hant - Cantonese (Traditional Han script)
za - Zhuang
zea - Zeelandic
zgh - Standard Moroccan Tamazight
zh - Chinese
zh-cn - Chinese (China)
zh-hans - Simplified Chinese
zh-hant - Traditional Chinese
zh-hk - Chinese (Hong Kong)
zh-mo - Chinese (Macau)
zh-my - Chinese (Malaysia)
zh-sg - Chinese (Singapore)
zh-tw - Chinese (Taiwan)
zu - Zulu
Format
Export for off-line translation
Export in native format
Export in CSV format
Fetch
<languages/> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> [[File:DeathTaxesBenFranklin.jpg|frame|center]] <br> <br> '''This page will examine some of the issues of taxing vapor and other forms of safer nicotine. Because smoking has been around much longer, we'll also look at some of the issues surrounding taxation of traditional tobacco products to provide clues of what might happen as taxes increase on tobacco harm reduction products.''' </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ='''Studies'''= </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2021: [https://www.nber.org/papers/w29216 Intended and Unintended Effects of E-cigarette Taxes on Youth Tobacco Use]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *Currently, Congress is considering doubling the cigarette excise tax (to $2.01 per pack) and setting the ENDS tax to parity with the new cigarette tax (Durbin 2021). This tax, if adopted, would imply a roughly $2.01 tax per 0.7 fluid mL of nicotine, assuming a Juul pod is equivalent to a pack of cigarettes (Truth Initiative 2019), or $2.87 per fluid mL. Our MTF results suggest that this would reduce youth current ENDS use by 5.5 pp but raise current cigarette use by 3.7 pp, assuming that the cigarette tax portion of the bill has no effect as suggested by the small, statistically insignificant cigarette tax effects estimated in this paper, and other recent studies (Hansen, Sabia, and Rees 2017). The YRBSS results meanwhile suggest much larger reductions in youth current ENDS use, but a sizable increase in youth current cigarette use of 2.3 pp. If ENDS are substantially safer products as suggested by several major government-commissioned reviews (McNeill et al. 2018; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2018; UK Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment 2020), our results suggest that the proposed bill may harm youth health in the United States *[https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w29216/w29216.pdf PDF Version] *Citation: Intended and Unintended Effects of E-cigarette Taxes on Youth Tobacco Use, Rahi Abouk, Charles J. Courtemanche, Dhaval M. Dave, Bo Feng, Abigail S. Friedman, Johanna Catherine Maclean, Michael F. Pesko, Joseph J. Sabia, and Samuel Safford, NBER Working Paper No. 29216, September 2021, JEL No. H2,I1,I18 *Acknowledgement: Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health under award number R01DA045016 (PI: Michael Pesko), R01DA039968 (PI: Dhaval Dave), and an Evidence for Action grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (grant #74869; PI: Friedman). Dr. Sabia acknowledges support from San Diego State University’s Center for Health Economics & Policy Studies (CHEPS), Dr. Courtemanche acknowledges support from the University of Kentucky’s Institute for the Study of Free Enterprise, and Dr. Abouk acknowledges support from William Paterson University’s Cannabis Research Institute. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2021: [https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/15/7835/htm Estimating the Impact of Tobacco Parity and Harm Reduction Tax Proposals Using the Experimental Tobacco Marketplace]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> * These findings support tobacco taxation as a robust tool for suppressing purchasing and suggest that differential taxation in proportion to product risk would be an effective way to incentivize smokers to switch from smoked to unsmoked products. *Citation: Freitas-Lemos, R.; Keith, D.R.; Tegge, A.N.; Stein, J.S.; Cummings, K.M.; Bickel, W.K. Estimating the Impact of Tobacco Parity and Harm Reduction Tax Proposals Using the Experimental Tobacco Marketplace. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 7835. doi:10.3390/ijerph18157835 *Acknowledgement: This study was supported by the Fralin Biomedical Research Institute at Virginia Tech Carilion and the National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute grant (5P01CA200512). </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2021 (Revision): [https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w26724/w26724.pdf The Effects of E-Cigarette Taxes on E-Cigarette Prices and Tobacco Product Sales: Evidence from Retail Panel Data]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *Cigarettes continue to kill nearly 480,000 Americans each year, and several reviews support the conclusion that e-cigarettes contain fewer toxicants and are safer for non-pregnant adults than cigarettes. Our results suggest that e-cigarettes are elastic goods and their use substantially reduces cigarette sales. *Despite potentially detrimental unintended consequences of e-cigarette taxes, between the end of our study period (December 2017) and December 2020, 20 additional states enacted e-cigarette taxes, bringing the total to 28. *We find robust evidence that e-cigarette taxes are over-shifted to consumers. Our results here suggest that state-level e-cigarette taxes are passed through to prices at a higher level than e-cigarette taxes enacted at the sub-state level. *Here, a 1% increase in cigarette taxes reduces cigarette sales '''while a 1% increase in e-cigarette taxes increases cigarette sales'''. *In late February 2020, the U.S. House of Representatives approved a national e-cigarette tax proportional to the federal cigarette tax (House Bill 2339 2020). The bill specifies a tax rate of $50.33 per 1,810 milligrams of nicotine (or $0.028 per milligram). JUUL pods at the time of writing contain 59 milligrams/ml (at 5% nicotine volume). Assuming this conversion, we simulate that, if this bill were to become law, the tax could raise e-cigarette prices by $2.36 per ml ($0.0278 x 59 x 1.44 using Table 3), would reduce NRSD e-cigarette purchases by 1,784 ml per 100,000 adults , and would increase NRSD cigarette pack purchases by 26,736 packs per 100,000 adults. Our rate of substitution would be halved when compensating for the NRSD capturing roughly twice the share of cigarette sales than e-cigarette sales, which brings us to a substitution rate of one pod = 7.5 packs. *A limitation of our study is the reliance on e-cigarettes sold through retail stores, so we cannot capture e-cigarettes sold through specialty vape shops and online. However, e-cigarette taxes are collected for both online and vape shop purchases in the same way they are collected in retail stores, so we are unaware of any financial incentive to change shopping venue in response to an e-cigarette tax. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2020: [https://www.nber.org/papers/w26724 The Effects of E-Cigarette Taxes on E-Cigarette Prices and Tobacco Product Sales: Evidence from Retail Panel Data]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *We simulate that for every one standard e-cigarette pod (a device that contains liquid nicotine in e-cigarettes) of 0.7 ml no longer purchased as a result of an e-cigarette tax, the same tax increases traditional cigarettes purchased by 6.2 extra packs. *[https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w26724/w26724.pdf PDF Version] *Citation: Cotti, C., Courtemanche, C., Maclean, J. C., Nesson, E., Pesko, M., & Tefft, N. (2020). The Effects of E-Cigarette Taxes on E-Cigarette Prices and Tobacco Product Sales: Evidence from Retail Panel Data. doi:10.3386/w26724 *Acknowledgement: Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R01DA045016 (PI: Michael Pesko). </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2020: [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33002156/ The ethics of tobacco harm reduction: An analysis of e-cigarette availability from the perspectives of utilitarianism, bioethics, and public health ethics]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *Much evidence suggests e-cigarettes are substantially less harmful than combustible cigarettes. E-Cigarette Availability (ECA) involves making e-cigarettes available to allow smokers to switch to them, and informing smokers of the lower risks of e-cigarettes vis-à-vis smoking. *First, ECA is supported by a public health ethics framework. ECA is a population-level intervention consistent with respecting individual autonomy by using the least restrictive means to accomplish public health goals, and it supports equity and justice. Second, ECA is supported by four principles that form a biomedical ethics framework. By reducing smokers' health risks and not harming them, ECA fulfills principles of beneficence and non-maleficence. Because ECA allows smokers to make informed health decisions for themselves, it fulfills the principle requiring respect for persons and their autonomy. *'''E-cigarette availability (ECA) can also advance justice by providing a harm reduction alternative for disadvantaged groups that disproportionately bear the devastating consequences of smoking. Policies of differential taxation of cigarettes and e-cigarettes can facilitate adoption of less harmful alternatives by those economically disadvantaged.''' *We conclude that public health and biomedical ethics frameworks are mutually reinforcing and supportive of ECA as a tobacco harm reduction strategy. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2020: [https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/DAT-02-2020-0007/full/pdf Tobacco harm reduction in the 21st century]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *Toxicological testing, population studies, clinical trials and randomized controlled trials demonstrate the potential reductions in exposures for smokers. Many barriers impede the implementation of product substitution in tobacco harm reduction. These products have been subjected to regulatory bans and heavy taxation and are rejected by smokers and society based on misperceptions about nicotine, sensational media headlines and unsubstantiated fears of youth addiction. These barriers will need to be addressed if tobacco harm reduction is to make the maximum impact on the smoking endemic. *Increasing taxes on reduced-risk products could function to deter smokers from switching to them. *To reduce smoking and to save millions of lives, tobacco harm reduction in the form of cigarette substitution with low-risk products appears to be a promising path. These products, although not completely risk-free, offer an alternative to quit or die. In consideration of the available evidence, advice to tobacco smokers should include trying substitute products. The obvious fact so often overlooked is that smoking is rewarding and people like to do it. Giving smokers an alternative with efficient nicotine delivery means that they might prefer one of these products over cigarettes. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2019: [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3503054 2019: E-Cigarettes and Adult Smoking: Evidence from Minnesota]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *We provide some of the first evidence on how e-cigarette taxes impact adult smokers, exploiting the large tax increase in Minnesota. That state was the first to impose a tax on e-cigarettes by extending the definition of tobacco products to include e-cigarettes. This tax, which is 95% of the wholesale price, provides a plausibly exogenous deterrent to e-cigarette use. *Our results suggest that in the sample period about 32,400 additional adult smokers would have quit smoking in Minnesota in the absence of the tax. If this tax were imposed on a national level about 1.8 million smokers would be deterred from quitting in a ten year period. The taxation of e-cigarettes at the same rate as cigarettes could deter more than 2.75 million smokers nationally from quitting in the same period. *[https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID3503054_code35407.pdf?abstractid=3503054&mirid=1&type=2 PDF Version] *Citation: Saffer, Henry and Grossman, Michael and Dench, Daniel and Dave, Dhaval, E-Cigarettes and Adult Smoking: Evidence from Minnesota (December 12, 2019). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3503054 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3503054 *Acknowledgement: This project was funded by grant number R01-DA039968 entitled “The Economics of Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems: Advertising and Outcomes”, from the National Institute of Health to the National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. This study employs data from the A.C. Nielsen Company, which was purchased from the Kilts Center of the University of the Chicago Booth School of Business. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2019: [https://www.nber.org/papers/w26126 The Effect of E-Cigarette Taxes on Pre-pregnancy and Prenatal Smoking]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *We show that e-cigarette taxes increase pre-pregnancy smoking, increase prenatal smoking, and lower smoking cessation during pregnancy. These findings imply that e-cigarettes and traditional cigarettes are substitutes among pregnant women. * [https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w26126/revisions/w26126.rev0.pdf PDF Version] *Citation: The Effect of E-Cigarette Taxes on Pre-Pregnancy and Prenatal Smoking, and Birth Outcomes - Rahi Abouk, Scott Adams, Bo Feng, Johanna Catherine Maclean, and Michael F. Pesko, NBER Working Paper No. 26126, July 2019, JEL No. I12 *Acknowledgements: Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R01DA045016 (PI: Michael Pesko). </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2019: [https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w26017/w26017.pdf The Effects Of Traditional Cigarette And E-Cigarette Taxes On Adult Tobacco Product Use]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *We find evidence that adults are more likely to use e-cigarettes when traditional cigarette taxes rise. *Traditional cigarette taxes appear to be less effective – in terms of reducing smoking – when a locality has also adopted an e-cigarette tax. *This finding suggests that the combination of a traditional cigarette tax hike and e-cigarette tax prevents smokers for either quitting or switching to a less harmful product, both actions would improve smoker health by minimizing exposure to carcinogens and other toxins contained in traditional cigarettes. *Our research contributes further evidence from differences-in-differences methods that regulating e-cigarettes have the unintended consequence of raising traditional cigarette use; while neither product is harmless, the clinical literature strongly suggests that e-cigarettes are the less harmful product. These results suggest caution in regulating e-cigarettes because they may increase smoking of traditional cigarettes. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2019: [http://web.archive.org/web/20200804120404/https://vaportechnology.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Vapor-Industry-Economic-Impact-Study-by-Dunham-Associates-2019-Updated.pdf The Vapor industry Economic Impact Study]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *The vapor industry is a dynamic part of the U.S. economy, accounting for about $24.46 billion in output or about 0.14 percent of GDP. It employs approximately 166,007 Americans who earned wages and benefits of about $7.90 billion. *Members of the industry and their employees paid $3.31 billion in federal, state and local taxes. This does not include state and local sales taxes or excise taxes that may apply for specific retail purchases which are estimated to total $1.67 billion. *[https://vaportechnology.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Vapor-Industry-Economic-Impact-Study-by-Dunham-Associates-2019-Updated.pdf Original link to the study] </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2004: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1448232/ Poor Smokers, Poor Quitters, and Cigarette Tax Regressivity]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *The fact that the poor smoke more than the rich means that they either will be paying more in taxes or will be “forced” to cut back more. Higher cigarette taxes cause hardship among some poor individuals who find it difficult to quit. In the drive for better public health, we should acknowledge the price paid. Standard principles for assessing the equity of taxes should not be forgotten. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ='''Resources'''= </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ==Policy Analysis== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===[https://www.protectingtaxpayers.org/harm-reduction/tobacco-vaping-101-50-state-analysis/?fbclid=IwAR2C0JCX2z_m1nQtk06qNn7wdx8SFhlzxgv8IW5zvVHPV9Nv1UdsZ8MXNQQ Tobacco & Vaping 101: United States]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *50 state and Washington DC analysis of smoking, vaping, taxes, MSA funds, and prevention / cessesation funding. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2021: [https://www.cdhowe.org/sites/default/files/attachments/research_papers/mixed/Commentary_600.pdf The Taxation of Nicotine in Canada: A Harm-Reduction Approach to the Profusion of New Products]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *A critical feature of tobacco use is that morbidity and mortality spring primarily from the combustion process associated with traditional cigarettes. Nicotine, a chemical found in tobacco, is addictive and may not be safe in extreme doses but it, by itself, is not the source of harm from tobacco/smoking. As a result, policymakers must take this into account when considering tax rates for nicotine/tobacco-based products. The harm-reduction approach taken in this Commentary recognizes that cigarettes kill and that if alternative nicotine systems are known with certainty to contain a small fraction of the toxins in cigarettes, this is sufficient to attempt to divert users away from the killer products toward the lower-risk ones, even with uncertainty surrounding the lifecycle health impacts of the latter. *Several identifiable social groups experience high rates of tobacco use: individuals with poor mental health, First Nations and Indigenous Communities (FNICs), the homeless and individuals who identify as LGBTQ+. For many in these communities, tobacco is both a comfort and a burden: nicotine provides the comfort while the toxins debilitate the body and the mind. The objective of reducing smoking must become more keenly focused upon who is still smoking and why. If nicotine alone provides minimal health damage and at the same time provides satisfaction to users, then the “war on tobacco” needs to separate out combustion-related tobacco toxins from nicotine. These high nicotine-use social groups also have lower average incomes than the population at large and, therefore, should not be denied access to less-expensive nicotine by limiting access to lowerpriced ANDS (Alternative Nicotine Delivery Systems). </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ==Slide Presentation== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===[https://drive.google.com/file/d/1y56XDXLzxggycyaZrlkOAjc6EBzpJu3M/view Economics of E-Cigarettes: Background, Theory, and Evidence]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *Nice presentation that gives a lot of historical information on vapor technology, links to several studies, and a broad view of policy implications </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ==Tax Information== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===[https://www.protectingtaxpayers.org/harm-reduction/low-income-smoking-50-state-analysis/ Low-Income & Smoking: 50 State Analysis ]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *Covers smoking and vaping. Clickable map for state by state analysis </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===[https://igentax.com/vape-tax-state/?fbclid=IwAR3Okz4Tm2bFup_TTKDVpkPCa25gwk8jn1_C1Txk5ILOlB6DwfcEkJb3muk USA table of vapor taxes by state]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *Stats on vape taxes in the USA </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===[http://www.natocentral.org/tobacco-tax-maps USA Maps of Vapor and Tobacco Taxes]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *Page contains several maps of taxes on several kinds of tobacco and vapor products. <br> <br> </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ='''Articles / OP-Eds'''= </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2021: [https://filtermag.org/vape-taxes-increase-smoking/?fbclid=IwAR1-XO6IuZI2l4ydWqGZc99smyG8xX4DuP3X29PWBTSoEWBfw_BB0r1zlcc To Increase Smoking Rates Among Young Adults, Keep Hiking Vape Taxes]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> * Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) youth surveys indicate that vaping rates among high school students increased between 2017-2019, after vape taxes were imposed in several jurisdictions. *Of eight states that had e-cigarette taxes prior to 2019, seven saw an increase in proportions of young adult smokers after their state e-cigarette tax went into effect. **California had a 34 percent increase in people aged 18-24 who smoked after the passage of an e-cigarette tax. Deleware's increase was 48.6 percent. Pennsylvania passed a 40% wholesale tax on vapor products, which closed 1/3 of the vape shops in that state and increased smoking in the 18-24 year old age group by 19 percent. Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota and West Virginia also say increases in smoking in young adults after passing taxes on vapor products. *Peer-reviewed studies have found that high taxation rates on e-cigarettes increase smoking and/or prevent adult smokers from transitioning to less harmful alternatives. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2020: [https://filtermag.org/native-american-reservations-new-york-vape-shops/ Native American Reservations a Haven for New York Vape Shops]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *New York State’s 20 percent excise tax on vapor products and nearly 9 percent sales tax also do not apply to the Shinnecock and other tribes. Essentially, Silva said, patrons can spend almost 30 percent less than they normally spend, and nobody has to worry about breaking the law. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2020: [https://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2020/02/10/new-study-suggests-raising-taxes-on-e-cigarettes-could-encourage-traditional-smoking/?sh=4a99623757bf New Study Suggests Raising Taxes On E-Cigarettes Could Encourage Traditional Smoking]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *Using data from 35,000 national retailers from 2011 to 2017, researchers found that for every 10% increase in e-cigarette prices, e-cigarette sales dropped 26%. But the same 10% increase in e-cigarette prices caused traditional cigarette sales to jump by 11%. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2019: [https://taxfoundation.org/vaping-taxes-carefully-designed/ Vaping Taxes Should Be Carefully Designed]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *With all good intentions to reduce the underage use of a product designed for adults, the question remains: Is increasing excise taxes to punitive levels the best way to achieve this honorable target? Punitive excise levels not only impact minors but also limit the availability of vapor products to adults, who are trying to quit smoking. *It is a principle of good taxation policy that taxes remain as neutral as possible. That means taxes should neither encourage nor discourage personal or business decisions. Legislators should pass regulations rather than adopt taxes to achieve regulatory goals. Furthermore, they should make sure that current regulations are enforced. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2018: [https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/reports/2018/07/19/are-sin-taxes-healthy-for-state-budgets Are Sin Taxes Healthy for State Budgets?]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *Taxes on vices are tempting but unreliable source of revenue. *This is the paradox of sin taxes, the class of taxes that includes tobacco. These extra dollars and cents levied on products and activities considered detrimental to consumers—traditionally tobacco, alcohol, and gambling—are intended to accomplish two contradictory goals: Like all taxes, they generate revenue for the taxing entity, but they also aim to deter the behavior being taxed—which can ultimately negate the first goal. *Research by The Pew Charitable Trusts and the Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government found that overall, tobacco tax revenue declined in over half the states. *In recent years, states have increasingly viewed sin taxes as budget fixes. *Tobacco taxes also tend to affect particular segments of the population more. Although just 14 percent of those at or above the poverty line smoke, roughly 1 in 4 adults living below the poverty line does. *With the growing appeal of e-cigarettes and legalized recreational marijuana, lawmakers are looking to both as a source of revenue to ease long-term budget challenges. Although both products offer fresh sources of funds, lawmakers would benefit from taking a cautious approach to them. Uncertainties, including long-term consumption trends and shifts in the black market, make returns difficult to forecast. As with tobacco, alcohol, and gambling taxes, new levies on marijuana and e-cigarettes may provide short-term revenue gains. Their ability to be sustainable long-term revenue sources capable of funding ongoing expenditures, however, is unclear. *State regulations have already had significant effects on suppliers. In Pennsylvania, for example, more than 100 shops have closed since a tax—40 percent of wholesale value—went into effect in October 2016. Wide disparities in state tax rates probably incentivize smuggling and tax evasion; high tax rates could fuel a black market. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2016:[https://itep.org/cigarette-taxes-issues-and-options-1/ Cigarette Taxes: Issues and Options]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *Since 2002, nearly every state has enacted a cigarette tax in-crease to fund health care, discourage smoking, or to help balance state budgets. *Cigarette taxes are regressive: that is, low- and middle-income taxpayers pay more of their income in these taxes, on average, than do upper-income families. *If a state is relying on the revenue from the tax to fund programs or supplement a state budget, however, it is important to note that the revenues raised by cigarette taxes are unlikely to be sustainable in the long-run, and that their impact will fall disproportionately on lower-income individuals. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ='''Videos'''= </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2019: CBS News: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Idx0bnoTq3g E-cigarette tax could deter smokers from quitting, study says]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *Economists say that imposing a federal tax on vaping could discourage millions of smokers from kicking the habit. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ='''Blogs'''= </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2019: [https://www.ecigarettedirect.co.uk/ashtray-blog/2019/05/vaping-lost-tobacco-revenue.html Are vapers like you paying for lost tobacco revenue?]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *[https://www.ecigarettedirect.co.uk/james-dunworth-bio By James Dunworth] *Could billions of dollars in tobacco taxes be one of the factors behind the attack on a disruptive industry? </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===[https://www.thr101.org/search-results/q-Taxes/qc-blogs Several Posts ABout Taxes on THR101]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *Several posts on vaping and taxes </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ='''Unintended Consequences of Taxes and Bans - Law Enforcement'''= </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2014: [https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/eric-garner-dies-nypd-chokehold Eric Garner dies in NYPD chokehold]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *Accused of selling "loosies" </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ='''Taxpayer Dollars'''= </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2018: [https://regulatorwatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Michelle_Minton_-_Fear_Profiteers-3-1.pdf Fear Profiteers]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *For most non-profits, private donations are their only means of funding. But, by making the case that they provide a public service, some health advocacy groups have succeeded in securing a steady supply of taxpayer funds." *Anti-tobacco advocates have also convinced state governments to hand millions of dollars over to them. For example, in 1988 Californians voted on Proposition 99, a ballot measure to triple the state’s tax on cigarettes and extract a $1.4 billion windfall from smokers over three years. Of that money, 25 percent was earmarked for tobacco control research and health education programs. Because the anti-smoking groups in California expected to receive some of that $350 million, the measure triggered a lobbying bonanza, with groups like the American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, and American Lung Association throwing their considerableweight and cash behind Prop 99"... (More on this on page 21 [22/100]) **"The ACS (American Cancer Society) invested more than $200,000 in cash, loans, and staff to convince Californians to vote for Prop 99. It was the largest policy advocacy project ACS had undertaken up to that point. Prop 99 won. In its 1990 annual report, the ACS California division claimed the tax “will help us fund health care services and education” and that “wheels are in motion to ensure that the funds are allocated and managed wisely." **"After the cigarette tax was approved, the health advocacy groups took to squabbling over how much money each organization should get from the revenue it would generate. In a news conference, the American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, and American Lung Association accused the California Medical Association (CMA) of “playing into the hands of tobacco interests by pushing lawmakers to shift $100 million from the antismoking program to health care programs for the poor.” What riled the health groups was a letter sent by the CMA to legislators, in which it noted that “antismoking crusaders are not always motivated by public interest or high ideals,” and that they were “fighting for this money like jackals over a carcass.” *"Public health advocates also gain access to public funds by working as subcontractors for local health departments. For example, a 1993 CDC grant to the Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, part of its “Initiatives to Mobilize for the Prevention and Control of Tobacco Use” program, noted that the funds would be used to deploy a “Tobacco Free Florida Coalition.” The purpose of this effort, among other things, was to provide advocacy for tobacco control legislation, like increased taxes, indoorsmoking bans, and restrictions on advertising and sales of tobacco. The funds created the role of Coalition Coordinator, a position “located at the American Cancer Society (ACS) in Tampa, Florida.” Of the 10 paid personnel listed for the Tobacco Free Florida, half came from either the American Heart Association, American Lung Association, or American Cancer Society. Unsurprisingly, in 2018, when the Florida legislature considered a proposal to divert some funds from the Tobacco Free Florida program to cancer research, these groups mobilized to lobby against that proposal." *Since 1996, RWJF has given more than $22 million to Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights and its educational arm, American Nonsmokers’ Rights Foundation. In addition to RWJF, American Nonsmokers’Rights received nearly $5 million between 1995 and 1999 from the California Department of Health Services raised from California’s Prop 99 cigarette tax increase—to compile what several media outlets, including The Los Angeles Times, described as an “enemies list.” This involved monitoring and distributing information about people who spoke out against tobacco control policies at city council meetings, and even investigating a judge who had ruled unfavorably in a secondhand smoking case." *The "growing market for alternative tobacco products created new competitors for traditional tobacco companies and manufacturers of pharmaceutical nicotine. Declining cigarette sales, and declining cigarette tax revenues, also threaten to tighten the spigot of money flowing to anti-tobacco activists. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2018: [https://www.pulmonologyadvisor.com/home/topics/smoking/the-unintended-consequences-of-cigarette-taxation/ The Unintended Consequences of Cigarette Taxation]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *Cigarette taxes are regressive. Poor New Yorkers spend close to a quarter of their income (23.6%) on tobacco. *Only about half of the families that qualify are enrolled in SNAP, but when cigarette taxes go up, people sign up in droves, so much so that, after a tax hike, an eligible but unenrolled household is almost 10 times as likely to sign up for food stamps than to have a member quit smoking. (SNAP, formerly known as the Food Stamp program, is a federal benefit program that helps low-income households buy food.) </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ='''Unintended Consequences - From Black Markets to Deals With Big Tobacco'''= </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2021: Article: [https://coloradosun.com/2021/01/05/proposition-ee-jared-polis-colorado-negotiations/ Emails show negotiations involving Colorado governor, cigarette giant that led to tobacco tax hike]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *The emails obtained by The Sun about the 2020 legislation, including one labeled as a “draft term sheet” and marked “highly confidential,” show Altria was negotiating the measure with Polis and health groups. *While Proposition EE raises taxes on most tobacco and nicotine products in Colorado, it actually slashes them for so-called modified-risk tobacco products. Altria sees those products, which are part its IQOS system, as its future. Vaping shops objected to the MRTP discount, saying they lack the resources to seek an MRTP designation for their merchandise from federal regulators and that Altria would be given another market advantage. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2021: Article: [https://www.smh.com.au/national/western-australia/black-market-cigarettes-a-growing-boom-trade-in-wa-warns-ex-top-border-cop-20210121-p56vzf.html?fbclid=IwAR2sQ8gZjcuLHXznvCq5_xxXKKly6h74bDrHyOtQ9iYEhCJtj-xly-znrys Black market cigarettes a growing boom trade in Western Australia, warns ex-top border cop]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *The founder of Border Force's illegal tobacco squad says one in five cigarettes smoked in Australia is illegal and demand has spawned a smuggling trade worth hundreds of millions of dollars each year, with a recent record-breaking case in Western Australia. * the black market for illegal tobacco – imported mainly from Asia and the Middle East – has grown, with the ATO estimating about $650 million in potential tobacco excise revenue was lost in 2017-18. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2021: Article: [https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/man-receives-100k-fine-after-aglc-seized-nearly-6-700-pounds-of-contraband-tobacco-1.5364849 Man receives $100k fine after AGLC seized nearly 6,700 pounds of contraband tobacco]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *The potential lost tax revenue of the products was estimated by Alberta Gaming, Liquor and Cannabis (AGLC) to be more than $972,000. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2017: Article: [https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/second-illinois-man-charged-with-using-fake-business-to-buy/article_70009b80-513d-52bb-ba1d-5685d2b2070c.html Second Illinois man charged with using fake business to buy and sell $3M in tax-exempt cigarettes]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *Most of the cigarettes Khatib bought were allegedly sold in Chicago, where the state excise tax is $1.98 per pack compared to 17 cents per pack in Missouri. Khatib and Qaddoumi allegedly kept the inflated profits. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2017: Article: [https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/women-allegedly-bought-up-cigarettes-in-low-tax-missouri-to/article_54dd41be-8d5a-599e-990b-1770d43c148a.html?fbclid=IwAR2tsMmIMMwIX4GbWHQFWoJkSPP4gmbtzN5oQ28C5M_lPUV5s8U0f0MGM2o Women allegedly bought up cigarettes in low-tax Missouri to sell in high-tax New York]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *The women admitted they had driven around the St. Louis area in a rented car buying them up [160 cartons of cigarettes], with plans to sell them back in New York. In addition to the recovered cigarette cartons, police found about two dozen fake credit cards that the women apparently used to buy them. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2015: Report: [https://www.nap.edu/catalog/19016/understanding-the-us-illicit-tobacco-market-characteristics-policy-context-and Understanding the U.S. Illicit Tobacco Market]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *Tobacco use has declined because of measures such as high taxes on tobacco products and bans on advertising, but worldwide there are still more than one billion people who regularly use tobacco, including many who purchase products illicitly. By contrast to many other commodities, taxes comprise a substantial portion of the retail price of cigarettes in the United States and most other nations. Large tax differentials between jurisdictions increase incentives for participation in existing illicit tobacco markets. In the United States, the illicit tobacco market consists mostly of bootlegging from low-tax states to high-tax states and is less affected by large-scale smuggling or illegal production as in other countries. *This report estimates the portion of the total U.S. tobacco market represented by illicit sales has grown in recent years and is now between 8.5 percent and 21 percent. This represents between 1.24 to 2.91 billion packs of cigarettes annually and between $2.95 billion and $6.92 billion in lost gross state and local tax revenues. *[https://www.nap.edu/login.php?record_id=19016&page=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nap.edu%2Fdownload%2F19016 PDF version] *Citation: National Research Council. 2015. Understanding the U.S. Illicit Tobacco Market: Characteristics, Policy Context, and Lessons from International Experiences. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/19016. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2013: Article: [https://www.seattlebusinessmag.com/blog/cigarette-smuggling-makes-wa-tax-revenue-go-smoke Cigarette smuggling makes WA tax revenue go up in smoke]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *Washington’s Department of Revenue estimates the state lost about $376 million in tax revenue in 2012 to cigarette tax evasion. An estimated 35 percent of the cigarettes in Washington are contraband. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ='''See Also:'''= </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===[https://safernicotine.wiki/mediawiki/index.php/Nicotine_-_Black,_Gray,_%26_Alternative_Markets Nicotine - Black, Gray, & Alternative Markets]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *Taxes and bans often raise the concern over the creation of black markets </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===[https://safernicotine.wiki/mediawiki/index.php/Nicotine_-_Banning_Flavors_-_Opposition Nicotine - Banning Flavors - Opposition]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> *Tax increases often have some of the same reasons for opposition, including the increase in a black market, safety of illecit products, tax evasion, and more law enforcement involvement due to black markets. </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===[https://safernicotine.wiki/mediawiki/index.php/ENDS_Adults_Who_Smoke ENDS Adults Who Smoke]=== </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> =Suggested Information to Add to This Page= </div> <div lang="en-GB" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> ===2021: Article: [https://news.gsu.edu/2021/08/30/taxing-tobacco-and-e-cigarettes-at-same-rate-will-harm-young-users-new-study-finds/ Taxing Tobacco and E-Cigarettes at Same Rate Will Harm Young Users, New Study Finds]=== </div>
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.
More information
OK
Navigation menu
Personal tools
British English
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Translate
British English
Views
Language statistics
Message group statistics
Export
More
Refresh
Search
Navigation
Main page
All Pages
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Main Categories
Latest News
Latest news on THR, Vaping and Safer Nicotine
Get involved
How To Edit safernicotine.wiki
Create an account
Translate pages
Translator Signup
Upload Multiple Files (Upload Wizard)
Tools
Special pages
Printable version