Wall Street Journal on Cigar Tax

Mindflux

Lowland Gorilla
Taken from cigarpass

Emptying the Humidor
Congressmen push a cigar tax, proving they've learned nothing from history.



The Wall Street Journal
BY DAVID HOGBERG
Wednesday, July 25, 2007 12:01 a.m.

I've often wondered exactly how severe is Congress's case of historical amnesia. In late 2005 we found out that many members of Congress clearly couldn't remember anything previous to 1980, as witnessed by their call for 1970s-type price controls on oil. But last week we learned that Congress's historical amnesia is much worse than anyone feared. Clearly it extends back to as recently as the early 1990s.
Nineteen-ninety was the dreadful year in which President George H.W. Bush abandoned his "Read my lips, no new taxes" pledge to cut a deal with congressional Democrats to increase taxes. Among the new taxes created by that deal was an excise tax on "luxury items." This "luxury tax" was imposed on goods such as jewelry, furs and yachts. It was subsequently repealed in 1993 after proving to be nothing short of an economic and policy disaster.

Last week members of the Senate Finance Committee including chairman Max Baucus (D., Mont.), Jay Rockefeller (D., W.Va.), Chuck Grassley (R., Iowa), and Orrin Hatch (R., Utah) cut a deal to increase the funding for the State Children's Health Insurance Program to the tune of $35 billion over five years. To generate this money, the deal imposes a new luxury tax on cigars.
To understand why the luxury tax on cigars is a terrible idea, we need to revisit the history of the luxury tax of the early 1990s--a history that congressional members' severe amnesia is preventing them from remembering. Class-warfare thinking infected the luxury tax of 1990. Think of the multimillionaire whose wife was wearing a gold-and-diamond necklace and a fur coat. They were getting into their limousine to drive to their 100-foot yacht on which they would spend their weekend. How was it possibly fair that the rich spend so lavishly on such unnecessary items when Joe Six-Pack struggled just to put food on the table? Imposing a luxury tax on those items was a proper way to even things out, to make the rich pay their "fair share" to fund the government programs that helped Joe Six-Pack.
Unfortunately, Congress never bothered to consider that increasing the tax on these items, and thereby increasing the price of those items, might change the behavior of said rich people. (Indeed, many members of Congress stubbornly refuse ever to acknowledge that taxes ever affect behavior.) But said rich people had other ideas. If the price of jewelry, furs and yachts suddenly increased, then maybe purchasing a winter home in Florida seemed like a much better deal. Or maybe those rich people would take a shopping trip to other parts of the world, where the prices of jewelry, furs and yachts were now much more competitive thanks to the U.S. Congress.
And if members of Congress never considered that the luxury tax would discourage rich people from buying luxury items in the U.S., then they surely never considered that such an effect might not be so good for the Joe Six-Packs who worked in the industries producing luxury items. A Joint Economic Committee study later found that 330 jobs in the jewelry industry and 7,600 jobs in the yacht industry were lost thanks to the luxury tax. Perhaps the greatest irony was that in 1991 the federal government paid out over $7 million more in unemployment benefits to those workers than it collected in luxury tax revenues.

Fast forward to 2007. The current tax on cigars is a maximum 4.8 cents a cigar. The new proposed luxury tax on cigars is 53.13%, up to a maximum tax of $10 a cigar. Thus, if you like cigars worth $20, you'd be facing a staggering tax increase of 20,733%. By comparison, the luxury tax of 1990 was an increase of only 10%.
No doubt supporters of this tax will claim that it will have little impact on cigar purchases since cigars contain nicotine, which is addictive. But nicotine has minimal impact if the tobacco smoke isn't inhaled, and in my experience most cigar smokers do not inhale. Thus, many cigar smokers should have little trouble quitting if they find the luxury tax has increased the price of cigars beyond what they want to pay. Others will continue smoking cigars, but will reduce their costs by smoking fewer of them. And, of course, some cigar smokers will avoid the tax by buying cigars abroad, a purchase made all the easier by something that didn't exist in 1990, the Internet. Why, here's a page that lists 52 Web sites for buying cigars in Europe. In short, this new luxury tax will cause a precipitous decline in consumption of American-produced cigars.
Of course, about as many people are going to shed tears for the person buying a $20 cigar as did for the rich person buying a yacht. But they might feel a lot of sympathy for the Joe Six-Packs who work in the cigar industry. Exact numbers about how many people work in the cigar industry today are hard to come by since the federal government stopped collecting data on cigar producers a few years ago. In 1999, the Census Bureau reported that 3,845 people worked in the cigar industry. Norm Sharp, president of the Cigar Association of America, guesstimates that the industry now employs between 7,500 and 10,000 workers, a plausible number given the growth in the industry in recent years. Whatever the number, what is clear is thousands of cigar employees face a fate similar to workers in the yacht and jewelry industries in 1990.
That is what Congress's severe case of historical amnesia yields--an astronomical tax increase leading to workers losing their jobs. But try to look at the bright side. If those cigar workers lose their jobs, the resulting decline in their incomes will mean that their kids will have no trouble qualifying for the State Children's Health Insurance Program.
 
That is what Congress's severe case of historical amnesia yields--an astronomical tax increase leading to workers losing their jobs. But try to look at the bright side. If those cigar workers lose their jobs, the resulting decline in their incomes will mean that their kids will have no trouble qualifying for the State Children's Health Insurance Program.


While the article's author is obviously laying the sarcasm on a bit thick here, this is an extremely valid point.
This whole tax thing is really getting by boxers in a bunch (sorry for the image). How stupid does Washington think we are?

E
 
Best thing I have read in some time.

Being a Canadian I spend a reasonable amount of money buying cigars from US merchants. If this taxes goes through cuban cigars will appear to be on par price wise with most cigars I purchase through the US. As such 100 % of my cigar dollars will be spent on Cuban cigars (and we can assume to Cuba).

I wonder if this is what Bush wants?
 
If George vetos it’s not impossible that it will go thru again with a more liberal president, and get signed off on. Maybe someone who’s husband used one for a purpose other than smoking.

I don’t think it will happen, but if it does mine won’t come from the US anymore. Why would I spend the same amount of money on NC’s when I could get Cubans?
 
Firstly, my hat goes off to DAVID HOGBERG for writing this article.. I am glad it is in a prominent publication.

Bush has promised a veto. I don't think that this bill is getting a vote from most republicans.

Secondly, From what I have heard it is got a good share of Replublican votes.. Who wants to be known for denying healthcare for children.. :BS
 
Last edited:
The worst part about all this is we can do nothing to stop it or change it. It makes sense to us, but not to politicians who obviously don't care about anything but their political look. The more craziness that goes on the more I feel powerless as a citizen of my own country.
 
The worst part about all this is we can do nothing to stop it or change it. It makes sense to us, but not to politicians who obviously don't care about anything but their political look. The more craziness that goes on the more I feel powerless as a citizen of my own country.

You can write letters and emails to them and call them. Don't vote for them the next time they run for office, donate to the guy who runs against them, etc. It might not end up making a difference on this issue, but it's still a fight worth fighting. The only reason politicians keep getting away with the things they do is because too many citizens sit back and let themselves be victimized.
 
It does make sense,but as someone said earlier,who wants to be know for not backing child healthcare?I truly believe this will end up passing,cigar smokers are such a small percent compared to non-smokers with children who would benefit from this. Politicians want to be elected again,and will go with the majority to gain votes.
 
This issue even if vetoed will come up again we need to try to rationalize with them and encourage a tax that we CAN live with as cigar smokers. They expect whineing they wouldn't expect a large group of rational beings to come up with a better idea than themselves.
 
Back
Top