[Just another Joe]

Further, in the case of a regional wide ban I cannot see how an owner could prove lost of income unless he is at the border of the regional ban.

If a business could show that before a ban they made X amount of money of which Y was the amount of profit - and AFTER the ban they made X-30%X and the profit was Y-Z, which was LESS than they made BEFORE the ban I think that would prove loss of income.
ESPECIALLY if they could then show that businesses outside the border of the ban made X before the ban and now they made X+30%X AFTER the ban.
Whether the business working under the ban was near the border, or not, seems to me would be irrelevant.

[VRWC_minion]

I would assume that a business in the middle of a state where there was a state wide ban would not lose smoking customers because they have no where else to go while at the same time they would have lower staffing costs, more efficient table turnovers and lower equipment and supplies costs.

A business on the border of a ban would lose customers to the competing restaurant accross the border.