Loss Of Government Revenue From Tobacco Taxes

Specifically, they discuss the effects excise taxes, which is the tax paid by the seller. In this particular case, cigarette distributers are going to be affected by this Tabaco increase initiative. This article also contributes to a better understating of hidden taxes and the reasons behind tax changes. Joey corner also explains how the local or state government can be benefited through the collection of excise taxes.

This figure is up 1billion pounds when compared to the same figure last year, which was 1.7billion. And the only reason it is not higher is because so many smokers have given up in recent years – a fall from 12 million to 9 million. Also the government has made significant cuts to the healthcare budget (Around £800million between 2010 and 2012) (BBC News Channel, 2009). Therefore, the NHS should not pay for smoking related diseases. However, firstly, Smokers contributed to the UK economy by 10billion According to statistics from the Tobacco Manufacturers’ Association (TMA) in the 2006/07 financial year in revenue tax (Tma, 2017). According to lobby group forest argues that smokers pay over £9billion a year in tobacco tax. It has also been claimed that the government has made tobacco manufacturers not allowed to have any kind of trademarks on any of their smoking product its illegal. It has been stated tax revenue from tobacco in 2012/2013 amounted to £12.3billion - £9.7billion in excise duty plus 2.6billion in VAT. In addition, on a usual box of 20 cigarettes the total tax burden of £6.98 accounts for 82% of the recommended retail price (RRP) of £8.50. On some of the least expensive brands the total tax burden accounts for up to 90% of the RRP (Tma, 2017). Therefore, the NHS should pay for smoking related diseases as smokers have already contributed by paying taxes on tobacco and taxes that go to the NHS

Tobacco, a standout amongst the most essential trade yields out American cultivating, is local toward the North and South American landmasses. It first got to be known not rest of the world when European adventurers in the fifteenth and sixteenth hundreds of years saw it being utilized as a drug and as a stimulant by Native Americans. The wayfarers came back to Europe with the newly discovered plant and it rapidly was received by rich and poor alike as a medication of decision. Banned at first by rulers and popes, its financial impacts and expansive prominence constrained acknowledgment among all societies. It rapidly spread all through the acculturated world and turned into an establishment for the development of the American economy.

Recently, the company I work for had to renew its insurance policy. To our surprise, our premiums increased by 60%. And, when we began shopping around, we learned no other company would give us any better of a deal. Doing some research on the matter, I discovered our company wasn 't alone in this. Most other companies were also experiencing a drastic increase in their premiums. And, some were even dropping their insurance just so their employees could take the state sponsored insurance instead. At the pace this trend is continuing, most Americans will find themselves without adequate medical insurance and, since they probably won 't be able to pay the bills out of pocket, our health care industry will suffer. After much thought and study, I 've concluded the best solution to the problem is banning tobacco use in the United States. I 'm not just talking about banning smoking in public. I am referring to making it illegal to sell tobacco products in this country and treating those who sell cigarettes as criminals. I know this isn 't going to be popular among the estimated 26% of Americans who currently smoke cigarettes. But, that doesn 't mean it isn 't the right decision. Let 's look at the facts. According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Americans spend roughly $75.5 billion in health care costs directly related to people who smoke. That is in addition to nearly $100 billion in lost productivity due to smoking related illnesses and deaths. In 1997,

Tobacco use is one of the leading causes of death in the United States, killing more Americans than HIV, drug and alcohol abuse, suicides, murders and car accidents combined. There are numerous campaigns such as D.A.R.E. and “Swipe Left” to help persuade us out of using tobacco products. Sayings like “Not even once” have even become cliché. However, studies have shown that one cigarette is all it takes to get addicted. Despite popular belief, smokeless tobacco is addictive as well. Big tobacco companies are famous for telling lies. In 1996, the tobacco industry said it was riskier to drink two cups of milk a day than one cigarette. They also said cigarettes were just as addictive as salt, sugar and internet usage. Neither of these are true, as it is the most addictive of all legal drugs. That being said, cigarettes are only the tip of the iceberg to the major problems that tobacco causes. Tobacco products have an astonishing amount of cons, to accompany very few, petty pros like “it makes me feel better for a few minutes.” Not only do cigarettes hurt the smoker, but they hurt the ones closely surrounding the smoker, especially small children. There are also a great deal of unexpected environmental issues that come with tobacco products and its industry, such as deforestation, greenhouse gasses, and fires. Because of these destructive reasons, we propose that all tobacco products should be illegal.

For years, in states such as, New York and Minnesota, they have attached high taxes to cigarettes in an attempt to both deter smokers and raise money for government programs. Missouri, however, has the lowest taxes on cigarettes in the United States; lower even than tobacco producing states such as Virginia and South Carolina. With many important state programs going unfunded, including transportation, increasing the tobacco tax could aid in the state debt of Missouri. Even former opponents of raising the taxes have begun expressing their own plans to move Missouri more in-line with the rest of the nation. Raising taxes on tobacco for the state of the Missouri’s unfunded projects could drastically open doors for more jobs for residents in the state. The raising of the tax can also fund for children initiatives and reduce the bad habits of smoking for younger adults. In my opinion raising the state taxes on tobacco can help with countless causes for the state of Missouri and the cities. Raising the taxes on tobacco products can aid in the debt of not only the state of Missouri but for the entire country of the United States.

A cigarettes main ingredient is tobacco. Tobacco was found in Mayan Indian’s carvings showing tobacco use. The drawings were found somewhere between 600 to 900 A.D. Tobacco was smoked out of pipes or rolled up into leaves. “Two main types of tobacco are involved in early history. The tobacco used by North American natives that the English first smoked was a somewhat dreadful variety nicknamed “shoestring” by colonists. Tobacco is a very adaptable plant that can be grown anywhere and morphs into something different in just a few generations based on weather and soil. Bad conditions = bad tobacco that is commercially worthless.” (Elliot). Tobacco has been around for centuries in many regional varieties. Native Americans introduced smoking tobacco to the English colonists in the early 17th century. Tobacco was very known in the past, there were different types. Some types smoked out of pipes, some rolled into leaves, and some rolled into cigar paper. There are many different types of tobacco, it depends on were it is grown. Tobacco was mainly used by Native Americans, Spaniards, the Dutch, and the Portuguese.

That is the only reason why cigarettes are legal. The government makes billions of dollars a year from selling cigarettes. About 25% of the cost of a pack of cigarettes goes to federal and local revenue. They

Tobacco companies have been in a battle with anti-smokers for a while about regulating tobacco, and there has been a war between tobacco companies and anti tobacco crusaders, because of regulating tobacco and some lawsuits. For one viewpoint regulating tobacco would be a good thing to do, anti tobacco crusaders are saying that regulation of tobacco is necessary to protect public health; on the other hand the other viewpoint is say that the tobacco companies are saying “regulation of tobacco will do more harm than good.”

The impact of the tax is an increase in the cost of every pack of cigarette a consumer buys. Since smokers view cigarettes as necessities as their addiction to nicotine worsens, the demand curve is relatively steep. When demand curves are steep, the consumer is burdened with paying most of the tax. Therefore, the price of cigarettes will rise greatly if the excise tax is passed. The party that cannot respond to the change are the ones that pay the tax. There are no substitutes for cigarettes, especially considering that this tax includes all forms tobacco and electronic cigarettes. Part of the reason this tax is on the ballot is to increase revenue, and the increase in revenue will be used “to replace old revenue lost due to lower tobacco consumption

There are many cities who have implemented bans on cigarettes, but China overall is still the leading consumer of cigarettes in the world. A countrywide tax on cigarettes has been proposed to their Ministry of Finance, and Ministry of Economics and Trade, but a decision has yet to be made. Tobacco production provides substantial revenue to the government and a tax increase will have a significant effect on the central government and reduction of consumption of cigarettes. According to a study done by the group proposing the tax, “a 25% tax increase will have an overall monetary benefit that far exceeds the negative impact on the cigarette industry and tobacco farmers. In financial terms alone, not counting the number of lives saved and medical care cost savings, the gain of the central government tax revenue (24.58 billion Yuan) twice exceeds the loss of tobacco farmers’ earnings, tobacco industry workers’ earning and loss of industry and local government revenue (11.74 billion Yuan)” (Hu TW 107). There many components to this calculation, but some factors included the reduction of cigarette consumption, the number of lives saved, savings in medical care costs, gains in productivity due to avoidance of premature death, industry revenue lost, lost jobs in cigarette industry, loss of tobacco income, and loss of local government

In the article, “Global Effects of Smoking, of Quitting, and of Taxing Tobacco” that was published in January 2014 by Global Health, Prabhat Jha and Richard Peto talked about the effects of smoking, of quitting, and of taxing tobacco. The information that is presented is useful information for my research paper for many reasons. Prabhat Jha and Richard Peto provide a lot of good and useful information backing up their arguments with data, tables, and charts of information. The goal of this argument and article is to provide the information on the effects of long time smoking, and the prices everybody else is having to pay on the taxing of tobacco.

Many individuals struggle with the effects of tobacco and the ramifications that comes with "being a smoker". For decades, tobacco has caused various forms of cancer and health related issues.

On the other hand, banning cigarette smoking would have an impact on economic or business. In 2013 the government collected $43.9 billion in tobacco tax revenue, and

In 4000 known chemical contents of tobacco smoke; more than 250 are harmful and over 50 of them are known to cause cancer in humans. (1). Worldwide, the use of tobacco kills over 7 million people every year and it costs households and governments more than $ 1.4 trillion through healthcare expenses and lost productivity. (2) Research conducted by the CDC in 2015 has shown that “tobacco use is the leading cause of preventable disease and death in the United States, and cigarettes are the most commonly used tobacco product among U.S. adults” (3). For the sake of saving life, some universities have banned tobacco use on campus. The University of Nebraska-Lincoln currently allows smoking provided that the smoker is not within the prohibited areas-10 feet away from some buildings and 25 feet from other buildings (4). “The university is the only institution in the University of Nebraska system that does not have a tobacco-free policy. Other Nebraska institutions of higher education -- including Creighton University, Bellevue University, Clarkson College, College of Saint Mary, York College and the Nebraska Methodist College -- have adopted smoke-free campus policies” (5). However, the university has as well adopted a new tobacco-free policy that is going to save life of many college students. “Effective January 1, 2018, the University of Nebraska (NU) Central Administration and University of Nebraska–Lincoln will become tobacco-free and smoke-free campuses” (6).