Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

State goes after smokers who buy cigs on Web (Backlash predicted)
Spokesman Review ^ | August 1, 2005 | Richard Roesler

Posted on 08/03/2005 3:32:02 PM PDT by elkfersupper

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-58 next last
I like this part the best.

"Smokers are always the easy, politically safe, no-backlash constituency to leech more money from," Kjono said.

1 posted on 08/03/2005 3:32:09 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper
"After you've smoked as long as I've smoked, quitting them is like quitting breathing."

Truer words than he realizes.

2 posted on 08/03/2005 3:37:14 PM PDT by BipolarBob (Yes I backed over the vampire, but I swear I didn't see it in my rearview mirror.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

so you can sell porn on Ebay, just not smokes.


3 posted on 08/03/2005 3:37:19 PM PDT by Rakkasan1 (If at first you don't succeed, failure may be your thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

They don't call it the "Evergreen State" for nothing.

Pay up all you nicotine fiends.


4 posted on 08/03/2005 3:37:42 PM PDT by Pompah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

Sounds to me like the man's privacy rights may have been violated. How did the state get his name and information from the company? Is that legal for the state to do?


5 posted on 08/03/2005 3:37:50 PM PDT by phoenix0468 (http://www.mylocalforum.com -- Go Speak Your Mind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

There is a better way. Buy the cigarettes from a Internet site in a foreign country. If the site is registered to a company incorporated in, say, India, the state probably has no right to assess or collect taxes. The sale was made in India, not the state of Washington. The Indian corporation could tell the state that it has no jurisiction and simply refuse to comply with information requests. Even if the state filed suit in federal court it is doubtful they could make a foreign corporation comply. At least that is the argument that would be made in court of law.


6 posted on 08/03/2005 3:40:05 PM PDT by ex-Texan (Mathew 7:1 through 6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: phoenix0468
Credit card companies and freight delivery services "volunteered" the information under threats of lawsuits by various states.

Oddly enough, they're only going after tobacco, not other goods.

7 posted on 08/03/2005 3:42:27 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

See #7


8 posted on 08/03/2005 3:42:58 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper
State attorneys general also have gotten several major credit card companies to stop letting people charge cigarette purchases online. And some shipping companies have agreed to stop carrying them, Gowrylow said.

US Constitution:

Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

9 posted on 08/03/2005 3:44:46 PM PDT by gitmo (Thanks, Mel. I needed that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

I understand that some Internet companies agree to directly charge your bank account for each order. Therefore, sidestepping the necessity of using credit cards. Easy for the buyer to control the amount of money kept in a certain account. Again, the state would be SOL.


10 posted on 08/03/2005 3:46:06 PM PDT by ex-Texan (Mathew 7:1 through 6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: gitmo
That's a stretch. However, the Jenkins Act, as unconstitutional as it may be, is pretty clear.

It may take a large and open revolt to straighten this out.

11 posted on 08/03/2005 3:49:56 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

Well the thought also occurred to me that they can't levy a tax against this citizen because they could in no way prove that he was selling the cigarettes. Unless he was buying more than the allowed limit for the state to import without tarrif.


12 posted on 08/03/2005 3:50:27 PM PDT by phoenix0468 (http://www.mylocalforum.com -- Go Speak Your Mind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: phoenix0468

That's an interesting thought.


13 posted on 08/03/2005 3:52:21 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan

"There is a better way. Buy the cigarettes from a Internet site in a foreign country"

Problem is bootleg cigarettes.


14 posted on 08/03/2005 3:52:42 PM PDT by international american (Tagline now flameproof....purchased from "Conspiracy Guy Custom Taglines"LLC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper
The following was from Kjono's web site forces.org:

The tax collectors vow to be relentless but deny that the primary motive is to collect the back taxes. The real purpose is to "educate people so they realize they're breaking the law."

Two words come to mind and it rhymes with bull shit.

15 posted on 08/03/2005 3:53:28 PM PDT by Horatio Gates (Fatiser Visus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sionnsar

WA cigarette tax ping


16 posted on 08/03/2005 3:56:17 PM PDT by Horatio Gates (Fatiser Visus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

"Anyone found in possession of cigarettes without a washington state or state authorized stribal stamp is subject to a fine". Do have have cigarette police in the state walking around asking to see your pack? If both states have sales tax, would the state selling the product be subject to the sales tax not the out of state ?


17 posted on 08/03/2005 4:06:23 PM PDT by newfrpr04
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Horatio Gates

Agreed, its all about money.


18 posted on 08/03/2005 4:09:25 PM PDT by Americanexpat (A strong democracy through citizen oversight.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Horatio Gates
The real purpose is to "educate people so they realize they're breaking the law."

The goobermint thinks we're stupid. Unfortunately, for the most part, they are correct.

19 posted on 08/03/2005 4:09:46 PM PDT by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Horatio Gates

I agree.

Washington is just one of many states with an out of control tax system. My wife and I live in Idaho. She works in Washington, which has no state income tax. Idaho does, so of course we pay Idaho state tax. However, many people who love in Washington work in Idaho. And yes, they, too pay Idaho state income tax.

Now, it seesm to me it ought to be one or the other-you pay tax to the state you live in, but not work in, or vice versa.

As an aside, I was amused to discover that the Boston Tea Party was held because the tariffs went up to a whopping 5%! That would be a steal these days...


20 posted on 08/03/2005 4:10:17 PM PDT by Biker Pat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-58 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson