Again We Are Facing to Tobacco Tax Increase

[PaulTheScandinavian]

Lately, each and every year we're seeing tax increases on tobacco products,this time around it was announced 2,5% raise starting from 2020 which means that a 1,75oz of Mc Barens standard offerings or Amphora would cost around $ 24-25 here, can't help wondering on how long they to dare to raise tobacco taxes further,are there any limits..

 

[alaskanpiper]

In Alaska the tobacco tax is currently 130%. Fortunately, this is not applied to online sales. B&M tin sales here run $25-30 per 1.75oz/2oz) Even the cheapest house blended bulks are $6 an oz, up to $20 an oz for likes of Esoterica.
Thank God for the internet.

 

[chilllucky]

You just need to travel! I've seen MacBarron's 100g tins in all the duty free shops in Scandanavian airports for 10euro. Only a handful of types, but it beats paying retail if you wanna go have lunch in Norway.

 

[husky]

Our last government (right-ish) lowered taxes on wages and raised them significantly on alcohol and tobacco to compensate for the loss of tax revenue. Our current government (left-ish) has realized that "protect the environment - leave the car and take the bus" is giving less tax revenue from fuel so need to find somewhere to compensate...

 

[sablebrush52]

In Alaska the tobacco tax is currently 130%. Fortunately, this is not applied to online sales.

Are you sure about that? State with excise taxes on tobacco do not discriminate between B&M sales and online sales. Given recent SCOTUS decisions, expect this to be more strictly enforced.

 

[lawdawg]

Stock up, fellers. It ain't gettin cheaper.

 

[alaskanpiper]

Are you sure about that? State with excise taxes on tobacco do not discriminate between B&M sales and online sales. Given recent SCOTUS decisions, expect this to be more strictly enforced.

Nope. But I've never been hit with it. The language on the state website seems to indicate the excise tax is not applied unless:
"The tax is levied when a person imports tobacco product into the state for sale, manufactures tobacco product in the state for sale or ships product in the state to a retailer. "
It also states they collect tobacco taxes......." primarily from licensed wholesalers, distributors and retailers." and that a license is not required if products are brought into the state for personal consumption.
Although the word primarily leaves it wide open I suppose. That's about all the language they have posted that applies, so that's as far as my knowledge extends.
The state is only responsible for 70% of the excise tax. The municipality of Anchorage tacks on the other 55% And good luck finding pipe tobacco other than Smoker's Pride anywhere outside of Anchorage.

 

[warren]

Fortunately, this is not applied to online sales.

The State of Alaska, at this time, is not interested in collecting tobacco taxes from consumers. And they, the State, really haven't gotten their act together so as to collect the taxes from e-tailers. E-tailers are required to collect and pay the taxes. The State hasn't, to my knowledge, developed any collection methods from e-tailers as of yet.
That'll change though as the taxes on oil producers, et al are quickly becoming insufficient for day to day operations.
So, Alaskans skate on such taxes until certain mechanisms for collection are put into place.

 

[alaskanpiper]

The State of Alaska, at this time, is not interested in collecting tobacco taxes from consumers. And they, the State, really haven't gotten their act together so as to collect the taxes from e-tailers. E-tailers are required to collect and pay the taxes. The State hasn't, to my knowledge, developed any collection methods from e-tailers as of yet.
That'll change though as the taxes on oil producers, et al are quickly becoming insufficient for day to day operations.
So, Alaskans skate on such taxes until certain mechanisms for collection are put into place.

There you go. I figured Warren might have more details than I do :wink:
And yes, they are certainly doing everything they can to try and get consumers to cop more cash with oil low and royalties finite (for now). The muni just narrowly avoided applying an additional tax on Alcoholic Beverages as well. So I wouldn't be surprised at all if things change soon.
Lucky thing we all get paid a PFD to live here, right Warren? Oh, wait....

 

[loadclear]

Lucky thing we all get paid a PFD to live here, right Warren? Oh, wait....

Yet one more reason to cellar wide and cellar deep.
Personally, with my experience with employees of the Great State of Alaska, there will be a few more years until their competence rises to the level of taxing our online purchases. But, there's no reason to tempt fate... we need to get what we can while we can.
FWIW, my pipe related purchases since the beginning of the Walker administration has exceeded the $$$ of my PFD checks...

 

[verporchting]

+1 for what Lawdawg said.
Friends, it ain't getting any better. Cellar wide, cellar deep, cellar now. Or take you chances. The writing is on the wall.
PS: I just paid an outrageous amount for a blend that I always wanted to try and a (semi) local B&M had some. I bought it. And was happy about it. They are here, and need to be supported. I had the cash and didn't mind paying the going rate. Yes, it was expensive, but it was a luxury item and I bought it. Good on them for being there and supporting the community. Don't care if it was over-priced. It was a rate I was willing to pay. And it ain't gonna get cheaper in the future. Or if it does, meh.
Willing buyer and willing seller.

 

[PaulTheScandinavian]

@Husky, sounds just like the similar scenario we're having here

 

[smudgersmissingleg]

Lately, each and every year we're seeing tax increases on tobacco products

It's the same thing in the UK, every year another 25p or so goes on a 50g tin. It may not sound a great deal but we already pay quite a high price in the UK and these additions each year (as well as normal price increases from the manufacturer) start to add up.

can't help wondering on how long they to dare to raise tobacco taxes further,are there any limits..

I used to wonder the same thing but judging by Australia and Canada maybe we don't have it so bad, relatively speaking anyway. The dream place to live for choice and price would be Germany or America, although if these deeming regulations ever kick in then that might change things a bit, choice wise anyway.

I was surprised to hear of the huge variances between the different States in the US, I honestly had no idea it was that great and how some are starting to restrict internet sales etc. It seems no one is immune from the dreaded tax and restrictions being ramped up. Sadly this is the one area of policy (whichever country you live in) all the political partys are able to agree upon.
Chris

 

[olkofri]

Sadly this is the one area of policy (whichever country you live in) all the political partys are able to agree upon.

Because they're all playing to the WHO's FCTC tune. Except the US, which didn't sign that.

 

[brian64]

Because they're all playing to the WHO's FCTC tune. Except the US, which didn't sign that.

The US didn't sign because we like to maintain the facade of independence...but then we'll end up following it anyway.
Because we are owned and operated by the same globalists as the rest of the western world.

 

[smudgersmissingleg]

The US didn't sign because we like to maintain the facade of independence...but then we'll end up following it anyway.

I used to think the US was different to the UK Etal when it came to taxing and regulating pipe smoking but now I'm not so sure.

I still don't understand the need for these new deeming regulations, why blends introduced after a certain date are a problem I can't quite fathom but I'm obviously missing something (wouldn't be the first time).
Whenever I used to think of the US and tobacco policy ie tax and regulation etc I used to always imagine one single set of rules for the whole country like in the UK but from reading on here I've learnt that the different States can vary widely when it comes to this stuff.
Chris

 

[husky]

My guess is that the cigarette manufacturers put so much "stuff" in their tobacco so in the public interest the appropriate authorities said - what you have on the market is okay but from now on every new product you want to market, we want to know what is in it beforehand.

 

[smudgersmissingleg]

My guess is that the cigarette manufacturers put so much "stuff" in their tobacco so in the public interest the appropriate authorities said - what you have on the market is okay but from now on every new product you want to market, we want to know what is in it beforehand.

Well it certainly wouldn't be the first time pipe smokers got lumped in with cigarette smokers. I realise it takes some time and effort to legislate the two separately but I really wish the various governments would make the effort.
I guess that in this day and age the pipe community is just too small and therefore the powers that be aren't worried what we think.
Chris

 

[olkofri]

I guess that in this day and age the pipe community is just too small and therefore the powers that be aren't worried what we think.

You nailed it right there in more ways than one. From what I've heard, the deeming regulations have little to do with pipe tobacco or tobacco itself: they're an attempt to clamp down on the vaping/tobacco free smoking products. Hence (again, from what I've heard), Big Tobacco is either in favour or actively furthering these deeming regulations: they want to if not destroy, at least greatly curtail the competition they're getting from tobacco-free smoking products.
Pipe tobacco is a negligible demographic in the whole tobacco market, and thus is just lumped in along with the rest. We're a side casualty, not the target.
Of course, said regulations are just one more weapon in the WHO's war against smoking. Whatever helps them win it, and whatever helps them meet their deadline for the eradication of the 'tobacco disease' (yes, they actually call it that in official documents). In some countries the agenda is pursued through heavy taxation, in others through bans, elsewhere via regulations, &c., &c.

 

[chilllucky]

I just bought a bag of Amphora from what is probably Paul's "local" B&M (an hour and a half drive away) and paid 22 euro / 24.40 USD. It's pricey, but not absolutely outrageous. A tin at Iwan Ries in downtown Chicago, which has city, county, state, and federal tax on it approaches that.