Democrat Congress proposes 20,000% increase on cigar tax
posted at 12:00 pm on July 18, 2007 by Bryan
If this doesn’t get El Rushbo fired up, nothing will.
Eric Newman punches the numbers on his calculator and gapes at the results one more time.
It’s no mathematical error: The federal government has proposed raising taxes on premium cigars, the kind Newman’s family has been rolling for decades in Ybor City, by as much as 20,000 percent.
As part of an increase in tobacco taxes designed to pay for children’s health insurance, the nickel-per-cigar tax that has ruled the industry could rise to as much as $10 per cigar.
As usual, it’s for The Children. And as usual, it’s idiotic.
Here’s the source of the controversy: The Democrat controlled Congress has sought an extra $35-billion to $50-billion for the state children’s health insurance program. The program distributes payments to the states to help buy coverage for kids not poor enough for Medicaid.
Cigarettes, which accounted for more than 95 percent of tobacco tax collections last year, are the main focus of the bill. Federal taxes on a pack would jump from 39 cents to $1.
But the legislation has dragged cigars along for the ride. The industry operates under a 4.8 cents-per-cigar tax cap.
Under the proposed bill, taxes on “large cigars,” a category that includes all but the tiny cigars sold in 20 packs like cigarettes, would rise to 53 percent.
A U.S. Senate version of the bill under consideration today in the Finance Committee sets the maximum tax per cigar at $10.
If the tax passed, it would destroy the cigar industry in the US. I suppose you could still buy online and get around the tax, but cigar stores would be gone. And the government wouldn’t get the nickel it’s getting on each cigar now. Jobs would be gone and the tax revenues would fall off, but I’m sure some Congressional aide would feel good knowing he snuck in the largest single tax increase in human history.
Fortunately, the president is planning on vetoing the bill. Not because it would tax cigars out of existence, but because it contains other provisisions that he opposes.
Update: Re buying online to get around the tax: Bad idea.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
For the children my ass, nothing they ever do for the children is ever really for the children, it’s just a damn guilt trip to extort money out of someone.
doriangrey on July 18, 2007 at 12:03 PM
Just like how state lotteries go to schools and roads, huh?
Mazztek on July 18, 2007 at 12:04 PM
“Up In Smoke” starring Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. Watch this hilarious remake of the famous Cheech and Chong movie. Featuring the most unpopular U.S. Senate and House ever. You’ll laugh till you cry.
Mojave Mark on July 18, 2007 at 12:05 PM
I could tell you all a funny story about me smoking a cigar. But I won’t. :lol:
Dang, 10 bucks for stogie?!??! Ouch! What will the mafia boys do now?
;)
Chuck in Detroit on July 18, 2007 at 12:06 PM
I’m starting to stock up now just in case. The do-nothing Democrat Congress once again prattles around the black hole of nothingness and meaningless legislation.
reppac122 on July 18, 2007 at 12:07 PM
It’s to pay for the health care of the children of illegal aliens.
Blake on July 18, 2007 at 12:07 PM
This doesn’t really surprise me, but that would put a SERIOUS crimp in my “occassional” cigar smoking fun. Ehh… I’d still buy them online, but it would definately put the local cigar shop out of business..
I’d have to get my Arturo Fuentes’ in bulk to save on shipping.
Nineball on July 18, 2007 at 12:08 PM
What’s Bill Clinton gonna do?
BacaDog on July 18, 2007 at 12:10 PM
Never mind El Rushbo. How about Bill Clinton? We all know how much he loves a good cigar.
RMR on July 18, 2007 at 12:11 PM
ACK! Cigars are my secret vice. Nothing better than sitting around on a late summer evening with a good merlot and talking with friends.
Should I go and stock up?
Rightwingsparkle on July 18, 2007 at 12:11 PM
Light up or leave me alone….um, maybe I should say shut up and leave me alone! M Fers….
soulsirkus on July 18, 2007 at 12:13 PM
The tax code is a sword, people. Wield it like a weapon and chop the heads off people whose positions differ from your own!
lorien1973 on July 18, 2007 at 12:13 PM
Did anybody tell Bill (the only sexual predator in the White House)Clinton that the price was going up.
And i wonder what Hillary thinks.He he he.
canopfor on July 18, 2007 at 12:14 PM
Thats the arugment they used in Texas to get the lottery. “For the children” is the new tax and spend mantra that pulls at the heart strings….How about the children whose fathers and mothers work in the admittedly small industry?
jimwesty on July 18, 2007 at 12:14 PM
but but but Minnesota has banned public smoking even in my VFW….. so places I can smoke my Partagas are getting slim the tax revenue will plummet ohhhhhhhhh hence the 20,000% I get it! typical Democractic logic…… God save us!
MNDavenotPC on July 18, 2007 at 12:15 PM
I thought the tobacco
settlementextortion money already saved the children.Sounds risky.
RushBaby on July 18, 2007 at 12:15 PM
We just had a new cigarette tax increase here in Texas and it is scheduled to increase by $1 again in September. If the feds add another 61 cents to it, more than a few people are going to flip out down here.
Harpoon on July 18, 2007 at 12:16 PM
This is going to bankrupt Billy Jeff.
Or will Fidel (ala Hugo Chavez) send low price cigars to the poor?
profitsbeard on July 18, 2007 at 12:19 PM
Only until the smugglers figure out they can abandon dope and go into the cigarette black market.
RushBaby on July 18, 2007 at 12:22 PM
While they’re at it, why not raise taxes on all of the bling the poor wear? What about spinners? Why not raise taxes on all of the fancy jerseys and caps I constantly see on the poor who are interviewed about how poor they are? And while they’re at it, why not raise taxes on toilet paper?
After all, everybody poops.
madmonkphotog on July 18, 2007 at 12:22 PM
Now, see, y’all? Cain’t have it both ways, no suh. You bitched when Nancy and Co. wanted ta roll back them Bush tax breaks on rich folks, so’s they gots ta come up with the money summers, rat? Well, duh. En ever’body knows ONLY RICH FOLKS SMOKE CEEGARS, rat, so they can pony up their fair share if’fn they wanna keep lighten’ em up. Don’t hurt no body but the Gotrocks.
tree hugging sister on July 18, 2007 at 12:24 PM
When cigars are outlawed, only the outlaws will have cigars.
mugged on July 18, 2007 at 12:25 PM
GODDAMMIT I’m so sick of nannystaters! No more nannies!
I swear to God people are doing their damnedest to suck every bit of joy out of people’s lives.
Bad Candy on July 18, 2007 at 12:28 PM
It’s getting to be where it’ll be too expensive to creatively violate my interns.
askheaves on July 18, 2007 at 12:29 PM
I wouldn’t suggest that – State sends a message, smoker gets $8,000 bill
rw on July 18, 2007 at 12:30 PM
What a tremendous opportunity this presents us!
Think outside the box: hotair.com sponsors a PSA, in which we bemoan those who don’t smoke as wanting children to be denied access to health care.
I’m thinking a sombre, ironic approach, rather than a sarcastic, comedic approach.
Show the futility of such a tax, as well as get the libs worked into a tizzy by putting pro-smoking commercials on TV!
How can we lose?
cadetwithchips2 on July 18, 2007 at 12:31 PM
The DC tobacco lobby has it’s work cut out for it. I just don’t see this happening…
Heck, if they cut out raising their own salaries, they can help pay for health care.
JetBoy on July 18, 2007 at 12:38 PM
This reminds me of the luxury tax on boats, passed by an earlier Democratic congress and signed into law by an earlier George Bush – who in doing so broke his “no new taxes” pledge. As a result of this tax, the rich boat-buyers bought fewer boats, there was less money to pay the workers who built the boats, and thus fewer jobs, and finally less tax revenue.
Bill Clinton, to his credit, abolished this tax as part of his budget deal. In doing so, he did what most of his party claims to be a tantamount to an atrocity – he gave a tax cut to the rich.
Bigfoot on July 18, 2007 at 12:42 PM
Taxation with representation isn’t much better than when our country was taxed without representation.
modnar on July 18, 2007 at 12:45 PM
Marching band drum sticks. Two in a bag and you can wash them off.
Hening on July 18, 2007 at 12:48 PM
“Congressional aide….snuck in largest tax…”
Can they do this? If so, who gave them the right?
jeanie on July 18, 2007 at 12:48 PM
Not here in Manhattan…
I remember the city cracking down on those who bought cigarettes online to avoid the high NYC tax, only a lot of people received “tax bills” for those purchases. Who’s to say the feds won’t implement the same thing?
JetBoy on July 18, 2007 at 12:48 PM
Curiously, cigars are healthier than cigarettes … and chew.
It’s hard to raise money off a vice you’re taxing into oblivion. Also, watch out for the insidious aspects of stupid legislation. One way to break down the society’s standards of Rule of Law is to make the laws absurd and onerous so normally law-abiding people begin to dodge and violate them. The people who before would never dream of breaking a law develop habits to ignore/break the stupid laws, then it’s a slippery slope when considering more serious laws. One of Left’s long marches through institutions, developing disrespect for law.
naliaka on July 18, 2007 at 12:49 PM
I stopped smoking cigars about two years ago, but I’ve never given up the dream of lighting up again. I hate Congress.
doufree on July 18, 2007 at 12:51 PM
Also, “health care for children” is a subversive U.N. sort of thing. “Children” as distinct critters from “families” and “parents.” Dividing up the family unit. It’s heavy throughout the UN system. Girl-child. Rights of the Child, etc.
“Children” are normally covered under “family” insurance coverages. Who would sign the 1 year-old’s insurance forms? Social workers? Robots?
naliaka on July 18, 2007 at 12:53 PM
I saw this yesterday.
Increased taxes on cigarettes are one thing. Everyone knows the dangers of smoking cigarettes and lung cancer. Nicotine, as well as other additives, in cigarettes is a known addictive chemical. No one has ever been addicted to cigars (insert BillyJeff joke here!).
I’m beginning to believe that the term “self-defeating purpose” is just not understood by anyone with a liberal mindset. We have the same here in Indiana. My father-in-law would drive from Michigan to get cheap smokes in Indiana because of lower taxes. This is no longer the case. We are told the increase in taxes is to discourage smoking, but also to pay for healthcare of uninsured Hoosiers. Again, a self-defeating purpose. The numbers of uninsured are so inflated……that’s how HillaryCare will be sold to the people (otherwise know to the libs as “the masses”). Most people that are uninsured are A) young and in good health not requiring medical coverage, B) illegals or C) actual citizens of the United States that are too stupid or lazy to improve their own quality of life so that they are labor for an employer that offers a BENEFIT of health coverage.
Again, I stress that health coverage is a BENEFIT and not a right. If you’re a liberal you probably think slowly so I’ll spell it out. “Nothing in life is a guarantee (except for death, by abortion or euthenasia, and (higher) taxes)”. Wow. I didn’t realize that it pretty much sums up the Democrat Party in that slogan. Health coverage is a B..E..N..E..F..I..T. I guess if you were educated in a government school you have no idea of what I’m talking about.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on July 18, 2007 at 12:56 PM
How you talk at home is your business, but I wish (request) that people would refrain from using God’s name in vain on these boards. Thanks
CharlestonCritic on July 18, 2007 at 12:56 PM
When the time comes to stand these vermin against the wall, we can tell them it is “for the children.”
cmdrsubfleet on July 18, 2007 at 1:00 PM
I’ll quit using God’s name in vain when people quit making or trying to make stupid arbitrary nannybans.
I hate nannystaters more than I hate hippies. That ought to be telling.
Bad Candy on July 18, 2007 at 1:06 PM
Our lawmakers can pick an easy target. Nalaika, you’re right, making these stupid (I say silly) laws do not help society. It just water down our legal system. People will look for ways to circumvent the payment of the taxes and it will just create another smugling opertunity. If they do not like people smoking then just outlaw it all together.
SIJ6141 on July 18, 2007 at 1:06 PM
How you talk at home is your business, but I wish (request) that people would refrain from telling me how to speak in public. Jesus…
askheaves on July 18, 2007 at 1:09 PM
Poor, poor, freddie boy. Now what’s he gonna do to look tough, when he wants to run away from a debate with a loony lefty? Maybe he can do a work out in a gym or sumpin’?
csdeven on July 18, 2007 at 1:10 PM
I hope Fred gets the chance to put one out on your forehead…
Bad Candy on July 18, 2007 at 1:12 PM
They tried doing just that in New Jersey a while back. That didn’t go over real well. That provision never passed.
lawhawk on July 18, 2007 at 1:13 PM
Tootsie Pop, cs. Made a fortune for Savalas and Fred’s already got the chrome dome.
BacaDog on July 18, 2007 at 1:16 PM
Bad Candy on July 18, 2007 at 1:12 PM
Heh heh I’d even pay to see that…
doriangrey on July 18, 2007 at 1:18 PM
Maybe we could get congress to do a study and see if there might possibly be any correlation between the government taking all of the parents money away and then… parents not having enough to support their children? Naaah….. I guess that wouldn’t pass the politically correct test… now would it?
Maxx on July 18, 2007 at 1:32 PM
That would mean he would actually have to have some balls, which we all know, he does not.
csdeven on July 18, 2007 at 1:52 PM
Only csdeven could could find a way to Fred!-bash in a thread about a cigar tax…
Love the Fred, csd…love the Fred!
JetBoy on July 18, 2007 at 1:56 PM
Typical liberal gardyloo.
pilamaye on July 18, 2007 at 2:06 PM
I’m a huge cigar nut – and for the last three years or so, I’ve been watching the anti-tobacco actions closely … because I’m convinced that cigar smokers are the canary in the cave, warning the rest of you when your freedoms are about to be snuffed out.
Don’t laugh. Cigar smokers actually talk about this stuff. The letters to the editor of Cigar Aficionado magazine are pretty much all on this very topic. Cigar bans, smoking bans, tax increases … it’s all been happening, and with ever increasing speed.
In California, cigars are taxed at something like 43%. A Padron 1964 pyramid that I can get in Tennessee for $13.95 can’t be found for under $20 in California.
In Santa Monica, you can’t smoke outside. On the beach. On a windy day. When nobody is around.
Even if you don’t smoke – you ought to be paying attention. Us canaries aren’t singing much anymore, and nobodies noticing.
Professor Blather on July 18, 2007 at 2:08 PM
The only way government could help “the children” is to put birth control in the school water system. The democrats war on poverty has been a 40 year running joke that produced a mindset that figures the government should/will pay for everything. Why go to school and get a job? The government will take care of you. Can’t afford a kid or two or five? No worries, Uncle Sucker er I mean Sam, will take care of them. Instead of teaching people to fish, we continue to give them fish; and then have the nerve to act stunned when they come back with their hand out 10 minutes later. I lived in a town that had 60% of the population on some form of government assistance! These same people that couldn’t work or pay for their kids or get insurance all had really nice chrome rims on their cars. 46 million Americans are uninsured; Boo Hoo!!! I bet half of the 46 mill are college kids or under 30 that don’t buy it by choice. Of the other 23 mill, I bet a good amount of them have cell phones, cable, the affore mentioned 22 inch chrome rims, playstations, air jordans, and gold chains/teeth. But somehow no matter how hard they try, they just can’t seem to afford insurance, bless their hearts. I am just sick of all of this mess. One of the few pleasured I alow my self is a good cigar on Sunday afternoons. Nothing great, just a $5 stogey; I have a wife and 2 kids that I take care of. But since Lerleen and/or Shaniqua can’t pay for the kids they keep spewing out, I wont even be able to that anymore! Thank you democrats for 40 years of showing 1/2 the poplulation that I will take care of them.
clawjockey on July 18, 2007 at 2:09 PM
With a tax rate this high, it’s effectively prohibition. Is this a clandestine Democrat plan to reinvigorate the Mafia, or a scheme to provide mule work for illegals?
T J Green on July 18, 2007 at 2:15 PM
I wasn’t trying to tell you to do anything, it was simply a “request”. It has nothing to do with you as much as it has to do about Him.
Thanks
CharlestonCritic on July 18, 2007 at 2:27 PM
It’s nanny state nonsense.
It’s why almost all Democrats are ASSHOLES.
Just exactly who are the sponsors of this bill? They need to be outed and run out of office.
georgej on July 18, 2007 at 2:31 PM
By the way, I’m a lifetime non-smoker. My father was a big cigar smoker, who got cancer of the palate. He survived it after a full mouth extraction and radiation therapy. My cousin, also a big cigar smoker, got mouth cancer. He didn’t survive. And we miss him terribly.
While I personally do not smoke, and don’t really like being around smokers, I do *not* force my beliefs upon others. And I am also adamently against the repeated attacks on smokers and where they can light up.
If you wish to smoke, go ahead.
It’s your life. Live it as you choose. That what freedom is all about; being FREE TO CHOOSE.
georgej on July 18, 2007 at 2:38 PM
It’s funny to me that the same group (many Democrats) that press for not only legalization but federally funded marijuana programs (…since everybody has a right to get high for free, man…) is trying so hard to kill the tobacco industry.
Maybe they’re just upset that so many of the “good ‘ole boy” Southern Democrat tobacco farmers no longer have anything in common with that abomination of a party.
Or maybe they’re trying to convert all the tobacco smokers to potheads, get them on the “government weed,” thereby generating some more Democrat votes–I’ve never heard a pothead say that he/she would vote Republican.
mojojojo on July 18, 2007 at 2:40 PM
Forget about Bill! What’s Monica gonna do????
Dread Pirate Roberts VI on July 18, 2007 at 2:53 PM
Pffft. With all the things that get said in the lively, generally intelligent, free wheeling debate here, for you to pipe up with your ‘request’ is disingenuous censorship. And it bugs the crap out of me. Perhaps you could have been honest and just said, “It bugs the crap out of me”.
tree hugging sister on July 18, 2007 at 2:56 PM
Dear Cigar:
When they came for the Camel, you should’ve been a Camel.
Sincerely,
Joe
km on July 18, 2007 at 3:05 PM
For my child, my child doesn’t smoke cigars.
How about a 5 cent tax on every word that a congressman speaks?
right2bright on July 18, 2007 at 3:09 PM
Heh. I’ve never heard of a pothead remembering to vote.
Tennman on July 18, 2007 at 3:19 PM
Good thing.
I just saw my five year old daughter sitting in a Barcalounger, sipping a glass of bordeaux, and lighting up a Montecristo No. 1. She chided me for my disgust. I felt such pressure as a parent.
I need Harbinger Reid to stop this madness.
MadisonConservative on July 18, 2007 at 3:20 PM
Yep… its about time for another tea party.
Maxx on July 18, 2007 at 3:29 PM
Women smoking cigars = hawt.
Hollowpoint on July 18, 2007 at 4:07 PM
Time to fight back. 20,000% Luxury tax and energy consumption. Let’s see, any family with five and under members in one household should be charged a premium of premiums over a certain set allotment of square footage, electrical and heating for the overspace. Surely it could could be written to target the most egrecious users and consumers of valuable resources – Al “I-served-an-endangered-species-at-my-daughter’s-wedding Gore, John “Where’s the walkie-talkie-to-contact-the-kids-in-the-other-side-of-the-house” Edwards and so forth.
Vote it – like American Idol. Make it American Tax! Taxpayers vote to redistribute taxes to lard-mouths who tell everyone else to cut back. Super rich ocean-front property owners who try to restrict public access, etc. etc.
naliaka on July 18, 2007 at 4:08 PM
In the bay area, Los Gatos has banned smoking outside. The last cigar shop in that town charges $5 to smoke in their lounge. Talk about adding insult to injury….
liquidflorian on July 18, 2007 at 4:32 PM
We did… by not demanding honest people be put up for electon.
Catseye on July 18, 2007 at 4:58 PM
Frist takes away online poker. Now the Dems want to take away my not very strong cigar habit. I guess I will have to smoke a pipe while I play poker with my friends.
Their all Nanny Staters who want to curb my pursuit of happiness. Term limits, term limits, term limits.
Bill C on July 18, 2007 at 5:06 PM
Well, well, well… democraps being, well, democraps. Raising taxes once again.
Like the dark days when Komrade Klinton (lady’s man) was on his anti-gun binge (and we had to “load” up on high capacity Ramline magazines for the handguns), I guess now we have to buy a few more humidors and load up on the Fuente 858′s before it’s too late… I mean really? How low can these d#%n democraps go??
Zorro on July 18, 2007 at 6:07 PM
THANK YOU
boomer on July 18, 2007 at 8:03 PM
They would make you do an enviromental impact statment first. LOL
boomer on July 18, 2007 at 8:05 PM
For the children, my ass. When will lefties stop hiding behind children.
Besides, if I buy enough nicotine offsets, I can still smoke all the cigars I want.
petefrt on July 18, 2007 at 10:36 PM
What a tragedy. Mohammad would close up shop and go back to pakistan.
The way I see it, cigars are not exactly a common item for the masses so it is not a burden on the People. If someone wants to light up a stogie, let them pay through the nose. Besides, any cigar worth anything, like a monte cristo, is well worth the $10 premium. If adding $10 to the price of a cigar, makes it out of your reach, you are not smoking real cigars and have no business pretending to be an afficionado.
jihadwatcher on July 18, 2007 at 10:39 PM
I doubt that karl Marx could have said it better.
Maxx on July 19, 2007 at 9:37 AM