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

Skip to comments.

Missouri Tobacco tax gets key GOP support. 80-cent-a-pack increase sought.
Kansas City Star ^ | 10/14/5 | Tim Hoover

Posted on 10/14/2005 6:34:56 PM PDT by Crackingham

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-90 next last
To: gondramB
"I can make an argument that , if taxes need to be collected, it makes sense to target those products that cost society (and the government) money."

Yeah. Those are known as User Fees and, if carried to a logical outcome, these proposed tobacco taxes should go towards defraying the costs to Smokers arising from their consumption of the taxed commodity. Instead these greedy Pols will use it to buy more influence with their chosen recipients of Pork and other discretionary favors. A corrupt practice if you ask me but what else is new in the era of Big Gov't?

21 posted on 10/14/2005 7:45:16 PM PDT by drt1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s

Love your post - Right on the mark, especially the part about 'Sin' Taxes and the rate to be applied to Pols. :-)


22 posted on 10/14/2005 7:47:33 PM PDT by drt1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s

You're preaching to the choir there.
NY has some of the highest motor fuel taxes in the nation. These are supposed to go into a "locked box" to form the "dedicated highway fund." In reality, the legislature raids this fund every year to balance the budget. Our roads are crumbling, and our bridges (like the 90 foot tall highway ramp just blocks from the State Capitol) are literally falling down.
Legalized thievery.


23 posted on 10/14/2005 7:48:20 PM PDT by Ostlandr ("Billions down the drain, and we ain't plugged it yet." - Federal Government motto)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Hilltop
The last time they tried to up the tax on cigarettes I started up a newsletter called, "Smoke Signals", wrote, edited, copied, and distributed it myself.
Ended up costing me, probably, $1,500 altogether.

The tax failed 49% to 51%.
Did I make that one percent? I don't know but I consider it money well spent.

24 posted on 10/14/2005 7:48:34 PM PDT by Just another Joe (Warning: FReeping can be addictive and helpful to your mental health)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Ostlandr

Eventually, tobacco will be banned, and it will be the same colossal failure that Prohibition of alcohol was, and that the War on Drugs has been.

Tobacco shouldn't be banned. I don't think it will be.


25 posted on 10/14/2005 7:55:20 PM PDT by moog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: gondramB
I can make an argument that , if taxes need to be collected, it makes sense to target those products that cost society (and the government) money.

You can say it, but it is a hollow argument. And a slope so steep and slippery that there is literally no limit to the things you could apply that "reasoning" to.

The purpose of the guberment is to provide for the domestic security of the nation, and a limited, defined set of necessities. It is NOT the job, the duty, the prerogative, or the guberment's business to tax based on someone's idea of what is good for everyone one else. Taxes are to be assesed to fund the subjects I have mentioned. That's all.

26 posted on 10/14/2005 7:56:54 PM PDT by ChildOfThe60s (If you can remember the 60s......you weren't really there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: gondramB
I don't know the study but the costs to the Gov't are obviously biased. Funny how they continue to neglect alcohol in any similar study. My own personal observations are that it is much more costly than tobacco in terms of physical health, social damage and actual property losses. Plus, smokers defray much of any additional costs themselves in the form of higher life and health insurance premiums and probably are not any more of a consumer of Gov't services than any other groups. In fact, if they live less time they actually save the Gov't money both in lifetime Social Security, Medicare, Gov't employee pensions and the enormous costs relating to end of life institutionalization.

But, hey, since alcohol is socially acceptable relative to tobacco it's OK to tax a smoker to pay for the costs of alcohol consumption.

27 posted on 10/14/2005 8:02:16 PM PDT by drt1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

powder..patch..ball fire!

The last time they tried this we found out that the 100 million for treatment programs was going to go to the research hospitals here in Missouri...

Great way to gather their support... They couldn't get us to do it with a vote so they are going to try another way...

Bullsh*t

for the record: I am not a smoker. taxes for the sake of taxing make me smoke....


28 posted on 10/14/2005 8:03:21 PM PDT by BallandPowder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

'Robin Hood in reverse:' Retailers foresee problems with cigarette tax
Tuesday, September 27, 2005
By JONATHON DAWE, Statesman Staff Writer

Theft, a thriving black market and a crippling blow to the Missouri economy is what Ron Leone, executive director for the Missouri Petroleum Marketers and Convenience Store Association (MPCA) is anticipating if a newly proposed tax is passed by the voters next year.

A coalition of more than 100 nonprofit groups proposed a new tax of 80 cents per-pack increase on the purchase of cigarettes last week. And, while the proposal is being hailed by anti-smoking advocates, it is receiving unfavorable attention from Leone's organization.

Leone said he would first question the wisdom of the attempted tax increase being so high after Missouri voters defeated a proposed increase a couple years ago.

Leone claims that the MPCA was instrumental in defeating Proposition A, the 50-cent per-pack increase on cigarettes on the November 2002 ballot. Leone said the success was impressive because only 26 percent of the population at the time used tobacco products.

"The Prop A proponents spent in excess of $5.6 million, and MPCA spent only $41,000," Leone said. "That tells me how the voters of Missouri feel about an increased tax. The majority of Missourians don't smoke; but the majority of Missourians are very fair-minded."

Leone said he couldn't help but question the wisdom of proposing a more drastic tax after a smaller one failed.

Although the Committee for a Healthy Future is proposing the collected revenue from the tax go to pay for those who were cut from Missouri's Medicaid roles this year, Leone said he views the proposal as "Robin Hood in reverse."

"There are a lot of corporations involved who stand to benefit from this," Leone said. "They are just trying to use this proposal as a smoke-screen to line their own pockets. They're wanting to basically steal from the poor to give to the rich."

According to figures released by the Committee for a Healthy Future, the proposed tax would raise an estimated $351 million a year. But it would also put Missouri's cigarette sale tax higher than the national average. The Committee has reported that 54 percent of the tax revenue would be used for healthcare assessment and treatment for the uninsured. But Leone remains unconvinced as to the tax's proposed effects.

"If we truly have a state-wide problem, then we should have a state-wide solution," Leone remarked. "We shouldn't tax a minority to pay for other programs.

"What must be taken into consideration is what this tax would do to our economy. The majority of smokers will not stop smoking. They will just go elsewhere to buy cigarettes; and that could cause us to lose our competitive edge over the states that surround Missouri."

Leone predicted slumping sales in all manner of industry if the tax were to pass.

"I think this is just the beginning," Leone said. "This is an incestuous relationship between big businesses and anti-smoking zealots; and, if this passes they will target fast-food next."

Leone said his organization is not opposed to a compromise, though.

"If they would be willing to sit down and talk to us about a lower figure, then we might be O.K.," Leone remarked. "But they would have to come down quite a bit from what they are proposing."

Locally, Randall Swindle, owner of "On the Go" convenience store, is against the proposal.

"I'm dead against it," Swindle said. "I think it would be really bad for business. It isn't fair and it would hurt all convenience stores."

One of the reasons Swindle is against the tax is because he says cigarettes have been taxed enough.

"I think they ought to just leave (cigarettes) alone," Swindle said. "I think most of the smokers have gotten used to the higher prices. But, we just opened this convenience store and we don't want to have to deal with something that would hurt our sales. This tax would definitely hurt our sales."

Leone said he has no doubt the MPCA would defeat the proposed tax, no matter what amount of money may be spent is support of the tax.

"I want to give them one last opportunity to compromise before (the MPCA) goes on the attack," Leone remarked. "But, there's no doubt in my mind that we will defeat this proposal."

Jonathon Dawe can be reached via e-mail at jbdawe@dailystatesman.com


29 posted on 10/14/2005 8:05:27 PM PDT by BallandPowder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #30 Removed by Moderator

Comment #31 Removed by Moderator

To: microgood

>>>Government officials are similar to crack addicts in that they will do or say anything to get their fix. <<<

Damn, that is a good (and accurate) line.


32 posted on 10/14/2005 9:57:49 PM PDT by PhilipFreneau ("Resist the devil, and he will flee from you." -- James 4:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: everyone

I'm reminded of what Newt called Bob Dole once:
"Tax collector for the welfare state."


33 posted on 10/14/2005 11:31:44 PM PDT by California Patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
One need only look at what happened in New York to understand what will happen in Missouri. When New York went on its nanny-fascist-state jag with prohibitive taxes on tobacco, purchases went down. And when purchases went down, so did tax revenues...

...and their answer? Why, to tax other things at an even higher rate to make up for "lost tax revenue"!

So, once again, the average joe has been sold out by politicians on both sides of the aisle. What a shock.

34 posted on 10/15/2005 2:32:47 AM PDT by Prime Choice (E=mc^3. Don't drink and derive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JustAnotherOkie
What a bunch of idiots. Our ignorant Democrap pols tried that here and the Black Market took off.

I've been making that very point regarding sales taxes begetting rampant black market activity with respect to the misnamed "fair tax" NRST nonsense. Naturally, the Kool-Aid drinkers will not tolerate being confused by the facts.

35 posted on 10/15/2005 2:37:21 AM PDT by Prime Choice (E=mc^3. Don't drink and derive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe; Madame Dufarge; MeeknMing; steve50; Cantiloper; metesky; kattracks; ...
Maine just doubled the cigarette tax too. From one dollar a pack up to two dollars a pack.  Which makes ten dollars on a carton.................to balance a state BUDGET!!!!

If the lawmakers would have added one penny to each can of beer, this tax would have been un necessary!!!

 

36 posted on 10/15/2005 4:32:32 AM PDT by SheLion (Trying to make a life in the BLUE state of Maine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe; Madame Dufarge; MeeknMing; steve50; Cantiloper; metesky; kattracks; ...
Maine just doubled the cigarette tax too. From one dollar a pack up to two dollars a pack.  Which makes ten dollars on a carton.................to balance a state BUDGET!!!!

If the lawmakers would have added one penny to each can of beer, this tax would have been un necessary!!!

 

37 posted on 10/15/2005 4:32:32 AM PDT by SheLion (Trying to make a life in the BLUE state of Maine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

You know, i don't smoke and I really don't care for the habit but I find it so idiotic and absurd to raise the tax on cigarettes.


38 posted on 10/15/2005 4:40:20 AM PDT by rambo316 (America is a Republic and the U.S. Constitution guarantees a Republican form of Government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stingy Dog
Stuff your own cigarettes for between $1.00 and $1.20 per pack depending on the tobacco you'll use. Above per pack prices includes tubes, tobacco and shipping costs. I just started doing so about a month ago and love it. Muck the tax collectors!

Well, here is one alternative:

Can't stand the high taxes?

Afraid to order off of the Internet?

Then start rolling your own!!! I find everything but the machine downtown at the local Smoke Shop.  Also, Rite Aid and grocery stores also sell the bags of tobacco and the filtered tubes.

I roll out a beautiful carton for a little under $8 dollars.  Premiums in my state are now up to $45-$50 a carton.  Can you imagine the money I have saved over the past 4 years since I now roll my own?  It's mind boggling.

under $50.00

$5.75 a bag

$1.99 for 200 filtered tubes


and

Smokers United

Roll Your Own Tobacco Store

Roll Your Own Magazine

39 posted on 10/15/2005 4:42:36 AM PDT by SheLion (Trying to make a life in the BLUE state of Maine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: gondramB
I can make an argument that , if taxes need to be collected, it makes sense to target those products that cost society (and the government) money. Like entrance fees for federal parks that are expensive to maintain. And taxes on cigarettes that cost us a great deal of money for health insurance and lost productivity.

Thats the same BS they rammed down our throats when they sued the tobacco companies. None of the money went to my healthcare and no 'cessation' clinics were started. All of the money went to general revenue.

This is just another revenue grab and they will use people like you to do it.

40 posted on 10/15/2005 4:48:48 AM PDT by SCALEMAN (Pelosi is as empty as an Amish Phone Directory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-90 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