RHODE ISLAND SMOKERS' CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE STATE ECONOMY 2001

2 September 2002

[SheLion]

RHODE ISLAND SMOKERS' CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE STATE ECONOMY 2001  

Rhode Island smokers comprise only 23.5% of the adult population in the state. Here is what they already pay because they choose to buy a legal product:

• Smokers Pay Excise Taxes $ 67,580,560
• Smokers Pay Sales Taxes $ 21,455,280
• Smokers Pay Tobacco Settlement Payments $ 44,500,000

                                                                                              $133,535,840

Smokers’ Economic/Tax Profile

• Income
  • Rhode Island smokers’ median income 2000 $28,154
• Median Income Smoker Rhode Island State Tax Liability
  • Annual state income tax liability for a couple $589
  • Annual state income tax liability for a couple with two children $364

• Smoker Excise Tax/Sales Tax/Tobacco Settlement Payments Liability
  • Total average paid per Rhode Island smoker in excise and sales taxes $473
  • Price per Rhode Island smoker for settlement payments to Rhode Island $236

Total annual payment to Rhode Island per smoker $709

Rhode Island Smoker Facts

• Rhode Island smoker payments in 2001 were more than fourteen times as large as state excise taxes of $9.2 million on alcoholic beverages.
• Rhode Island smoker payments in 2001 were more than 58% larger than total corporate net income tax revenues paid by Rhode Island corporations ($84.3 million).
• In 2001, Rhode Island smoker payments were greater than Rhode Island motor fuels taxes of $118.9 million.
• Rhode Island smoker payments could have paid for FY2001 spending for:

• The Department of Health ($84 million)
• Disease Prevention and Control ($5 million)
• The State Police ($37.7 million)
• Environmental Management ($52.7 million)
• Veterans ($12.4 million)

• In 1997, smokers supported 1,484 jobs that paid an additional $1,824,905 in state and local personal income and corporate taxes.

CIGARETTES DON’T PAY TAXES – RHODE ISLAND SMOKERS DO!!

Rhode Island Data Sources

Total Packs sold = 799,464,000 (Orzechowski & Walker Tax Burden On Tobacco 2001 from Rhode Island Department of Revenue)

Excise Taxes Paid = Orzechowski & Walker Tax Burden On Tobacco 2001 from Rhode Island Department of Revenue packs sold

Sales Taxes Paid= packs sold multiplied by sales tax rate (7% or $.27 per pack)

Settlement payment amount (Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids)

Number of smokers (188,215)= Census Bureau 2000 Rhode Island 18+ population (1,046,319) multiplied by CDC’s 2000 percent of adults who are smokers (23.5)

Total paid per smoker excise & sales taxes = total excise and sales taxes paid (89,035,840) divided by number of smokers (188,215)

Total paid per smoker for settlement payments = settlement payments amount divided by number of smokers

Smokers’ median income per CDC’s Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System 2000, public use data

State annual income tax liability from PayBreeze software of General Programming, Inc., San Jose, California, which utilizes the Exact Calculation Method

Smoker facts from Rhode Island State Budget Office, FY 2002 Budget as Enacted, p. 17-18, Online at

http://www.budget.state.ri.us/

Jobs created and personal/corporate income tax paid from Economic Impact of Tobacco 1997

[Gabz]

I'm familiar with Ybor City, although I haven't been there in quite a few years.
I spent my summers in Sarasota for many years.

I understand from some other friends that Cigar Dave is going great guns on this. Unfortunately I am computer sound impaired at the moment and can not catch his program. I hope to remedy that soon!

[VRWC_minion]

But you do believe in banning smoking in restraunts correct?

No. Should be priavte decision. However, recently I'm questioning whether the chain and larger restaurants themselves are not behind some the push for the ban. The restaurant association was ok with NY city proposal.

It occurs to me that if a restaurant could get a statewide ban they would save staffing dollars, cleaning costs and other air filter costs by going smoke free. By banning statewide their revenue line will be protected. In short, lower costs same revenue, higher profit.

[Nuke'm Glowing]

I'm listening more and more to see what his plans are. I smell a huge rally in late October in Ybor.

[Gabz]

That's an interesting take about the chains and larger restaurants. I hadn't thought of it that way. Usually I associate "chain restaurants" with McDonald's and the like and not so much Lone star or Red Lobster.

But I am happy that you don't like the idea of the bans, that it should be a private decision.

I have no problems with non-smoking customers petitioning the owner to go non-smoking. If enough customers requested it no smart businessman would ignore the request.

Most of the smaller restaurants and sports bars in the southern part of Delaware do not belong to the Restaurant association which is part of the State Chamber and is geared primarily toward the northern part of the state which is very northeast liberal in its mindset. 200 members of the restaurant association account for only 400 of the 1700 restaurants in the state - and many of them are fast food outlets.

Guys like the owner of my favorite sports bar/restaurant got sold out by the big guys, because they aren't members they had difficulty getting the ear of legislators.

[Gabz]

That would be terrific.

I can imagine what will happen to the cigar bars if it goes through.

Are any of them starting the privatization paperwork anyway. Not so much in anticipation of failure, but in anticipation of keeping the anti-smoker riff raff out to begin with???

[Nuke'm Glowing]

Unfortunately that's not always true, especially in a state like Florida. We have a large European tourist industry, as well as South American, in addition to the old fogies who still smoke and reside down here during the winter. It has to be an individual restraunt's decision, not the state's. Once that slippery slope is broached, as in Commiefornia or the PRD, you will see assaults on fast food, soda pop, SUV's, etc. It's already started out in Commiefornia, and that should worry everyone.

One reason the "associations" supported this ban in NYC, is that if the chains ban it alone, they will lose the smoker's business to those restraunts that are not banned. That is why they are playing the PC card and trying to ban it using the loaded gun of the state.

I am please to see that you agree that it is a private decision. I withdraw my earlier vitriole but hope you see the slope this is rolling down. Once you lose a freedom, you rarely, if ever, get it back.

[Nuke'm Glowing]

One of them, who has been in business for over 100 years, is considering just closing outright.....

[Great Dane]

NO running in the halls, NO chewing gum in class, and IF you're good, Barney will make a special appearance on this thread.

Speaking of a sense of humor AND IQ levels, hummmm. ?

[Great Dane]

The restaurant association was ok with NY city proposal.

Thats what our City Council claimed, until the restaurant association set them straight, as they say... No lie is too big.

[Gabz]

One reason the "associations" supported this ban in NYC, is that if the chains ban it alone, they will lose the smoker's business to those restraunts that are not banned. That is why they are playing the PC card and trying to ban it using the loaded gun of the state.

The PC card of "level playing field." I'm sorry there has never been a level playing field in the entertainment/hospitality industry if there was all bars/restaurants would serve the same food and provide the same entertainment. There would be no Blue Laws such as we have in Florida or PRD, etc........

Drives me absolutely nuts. These people know they will lose their smoking customers which is why none of them have gone no smoking on their own. They are afraid of losing customers so they insist everyone has to do the same thing they are doing.

The only reason the "association" opposed the ban in the first place was because the 3 race tracks were exempt. As soon as that exemption was deleted, the "association" dropped it's opposition.

[Gabz]

One of them, who has been in business for over 100 years, is considering just closing outright.....

That is so sad.

One thing the antis absolutely refuse to look at are the economic ramifications of these sort of things. they all bandy about the 'study" done that supposedly "proves" the smoking ban has been good for the restaurant industry in California.

However, what they fail to acknowledge is that study was not confined to bars and sit-down restaurants. It also included receipts from take-out, fast food, and catering. Omit those and htere would be a different picture painted.

And when it came to comparisons of liquor receipts in another area (sorry I forget where) they included receipts of all alcohol sales, including from off-sale locations.

Talk about mixing apples and oranges.

[SheLion]

And you think your a Conservative! To me, your nothing but a RINO!!!

[Rate_Determining_Step]

Never said that. All I said is that i am greatful that smokers are so addicted they will continue to pay the tax rather than modify their behavior or even confront the politico's when they raise taxes on them. Smokers are good little citizens and well controlled on account of their addiction.

I think you're just agitating for direct action. Sounds like you just might be a smoker. Granted, it is frustrating when some 25% of the population unfairly taxed doesn't exert their political pressure which would correct this injustice in record time.

Found you!

When people get as bent as quickly as many have at the standard "smokey stinky" and "addicted money" and distracted from the the action items, that's bad.

We should all just chill, take a thoughtful drag on a cig, and get busy! - RDS

[Nuke'm Glowing]

That is the problem with these surveys. They are not broken down by type of restruant and as with all envirocommie science, tilted or designed to produce certain results. If you or I walk into a McDonald's or Burger King, we expect it to be smoke free. When we walk into a Chili's or Applebee's we expect there to be a smoking and non-smoking section. The problem is that the holier-than-thou crowd wants to impose their way of life on others. This now is being applied to condos and even apartment complexes in Commiefornia. Now there even some neighborhood associations in the San Jose area claiming that second hand smoke outside from a smoker's back yard or porch is harmful and they are going to ban (!) smoking in your own back or front yard. It's like I said, once a freedom is lost, it's gone forever. Look for free speech, gun ownership, and the rest to follow.

[F16Fighter]

"To me, your nothing but a RINO!!!

Now them's fighting words! Meet me for a duel in front of the corporate office of Philip-Morris at high noon! Winner buys the other either a carton of Lucky's OR a $50 gift cert to the Vitamin Shoppe...

[I'm_With_Orwell]

This is worse than a 4th grade chat room.

>>And yet, you keep showing up.

Yet another example of how much fun we smokers are to be around?

[Gabz]

Yet another example of how much fun we smokers are to be around?

The evidence sure does keep piling up, doesn't it????

[SheLion]

Now them's fighting words! Meet me for a duel in front of the corporate office of Philip-Morris at high noon! Winner buys the other either a carton of Lucky's OR a $50 gift cert to the Vitamin Shoppe...

YOUR ON! But make it More Menthol. heh!

[Max McGarrity]

On roll-your-own tobacco, manufactured in or imported into the United States, there shall be imposed a tax of $1.0969 cents (95.67 cents on roll-your-own tobacco removed during 2000 or 2001) per pound (and a proportionate tax at the like rate on all fractional parts of a pound).

You're not going to live very large on 96 cents for every THREE cartons, dude, unless you have VERY simple tastes (to match your mind).