Posted on 04/13/2013 12:09:35 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
The Obama budget is finally out and there are, to no surprise, a potpourri of new tax hikes proposed, many of which are aimed at the "wealthy" among us.
Deep within the bowels of the colossal budget, however, lies a proposed tax that targets the poor among us and it is perhaps a precursor of other health-related taxes to come.
President Obama proposes raising the tax on cigarettes from $1.01 to $1.95 per pack--a whopping 93% increase in taxes. The White House estimates that the tax would raise $78.1 billion, of which around $66 billion would be used to fund pre-k education and around $11 billion used for expanded home visits and care for infants and toddlers.
Consider the impact of the tax on the taxpayer. The 93% tax hike per pack of cigarettes affects lower income Americans far more than anyone else, making it a regressive tax.
You see back in 2009, President Obama signed into law another cigarette tax increase and according to a Gallup study done near that time, some 84% of cigarette smokers earn less than $60,000 per year, with 62% of smokers earning less than $36,000/yr.
So, let's do a little math. Suppose someone earns $30,000/year and smokes a pack of cigarettes per day for 365 days a year. The federal taxes he pays in total for the year will jump to $712 from $369--leaving him paying $343 in additional taxes just to smoke. That equates to shaving 1.15% of his income per year, a percentage of which could loom large for someone living paycheck to paycheck, as many are during Obama's presidency.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Nanny State PING!
Not to mention that smokers “pay” society in avoided costs due to shorter life expectancy.
Diabetes is very expensive to treat.
Fatal heart attacks, stroke and lung cancer; not so much.
The number, as I recall was $0.40 per pack in social services expense saved.
I still remember during panel debate on ‘special report’, Dr. Kraut said Obama/Pelosi should encourage everyone to smoke cigarettes (to cut down Obamacare cost).
And esp. Obama budget should not raise the cigarette tax.
Bummer.
While I am not in favor of social engineering via taxation, I am all in favor of low income earners paying their “fair share”. Or at least putting some skin in the game. If it is via cig taxes, so be it.
Gun owners are next in line to become the new “smokers” in Barack the Kenyan’s ObamaNation. The communists have just about milked the smokers for all they can get. Time to find a new group of suckers to be their hen that lays the golden eggs. Welcome to Amerika! Communism is a very expensive way to live. It requires the government to steal a lot of money from other people.
It’s a user tax too, which has an element of fairness built in. Don’t want to pay it? Don’t smoke.
What if it was alcohol?
I don’t way to pay for low income smokers emphysema treatment or low income alcoholics live transplants. Both groups will receive highly subsidized medical care.
What if it was food?
It will be and no one seems to realize it. They will care when it gets to them.
It’s amazing
Even in his budget
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2014/assets/budget.pdf
On page 184
It shows an anticipated tax windfall from expected purchases.
Tobacco tax financing
2014 8 Billion increase
2015 10 Billion increase
2016 9 B
2017 9 B
It goes on and on.
And conveniently goes hand in hand with the next line up on that page with the cost of early childhood investments.
From 2014-2023 they are expecting:
$77 Billion increase in cost of early childhood
$78 Billion increase in tobacco tax
(That’s tidy /sarc)
Buy a pack of cigarettes a day - it’s for the Children
Tobacco tax is the Governments preferred tax delivery method of today. What will be the next preferred way?
Homosexuals should pay a homo tax. They will be an additional burden on the healthcare system because of their lifestyle.
HIV/AIDS treatment will increase more as more of them come out and engage in sodomity
Not only are you a statist, but you are a one-note-johnny.
How did your fuse get lit on tobacco?
I understand your point, however, cigarette smokers have always had "skin in the game." Even back in the mid 90s the price of a pack of cigarettes was more than 50% tax. That percentage is by far much higher now. The so-called Master Settlement Agreement added 45cents to a pack and that was in 1998. States have been raising taxes on them willy nilly since hen. And his heinous nearly tripled the fed tax on them within a month after being inaugurated.
Cigarette smokers have had MORE "skin in the game" than non-smokers for quite a long time. It's time to attack a different minority.
and just who is going to be stupid enough to reveal that they are a smoker????
I understand your point, however, cigarette smokers have always had "skin in the game." Even back in the mid 90s the price of a pack of cigarettes was more than 50% tax. That percentage is by far much higher now. The so-called Master Settlement Agreement added 45cents to a pack and that was in 1998. States have been raising taxes on them willy nilly since hen. And his heinous nearly tripled the fed tax on them within a month after being inaugurated.
Cigarette smokers have had MORE "skin in the game" than non-smokers for quite a long time. It's time to attack a different minority.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.