Pennsylvania House Democrats Push Smokeless Tax

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • rothenbj
    New Member
    • Feb 2010
    • 8

    #31
    Darn, I just tried it and ended up with a mouthful of loose los. Where's my mouthwash?

    Comment

    • kreigle
      Member
      • Sep 2009
      • 144

      #32
      Found on another forum I frequent:

      CRA Update: Victory In Pennsylvania!

      **CRA Announces Victory In Pennsylvania**

      30% Cigar Tax Proposal Defeated!

      BREAKING NEWS

      Just a short while ago, Pennsylvania senators voted against Governor Ed Rendell's 2010-11 budget proposal to levy a whopping 30% tax on cigars (Other Tobacco Products) in an effort to plug the Commonwealth's budget shortfall.

      This was Governor Ed Rendell's second attempt at proposing a first-ever tax on premium handmade cigars for the Keystone State.

      Pennsylvania is one of only two states that does not tax cigars, with Florida being the other.

      THANK YOU

      CRA would like to thank in large part Pennsylvania's senators and leadership and all the CRA members who took time to contact Governor Rendell and other members of the Commonwealth's leadership to express your opposition to levying any tax on cigars.

      This important victory comes within less than 24 hours after our victory in Springfield, Missouri where a proposed smoking ban was defeated due to the overwhelming response of local business owners and CRA members!

      http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/ind...agreement.html

      Rendell said he was disappointed that the Legislature opposed a plan to tax cigars and smokeless tobacco.

      Deborah Brown, acting CEO of the American Lung Association of the Mid-Atlantic, was astounded that Pennsylvania would remain the only state in the nation that doesn't tax smokeless tobacco and one of only two that don't tax cigars. She said if those products were taxed at the same rate as cigarettes, it could have produced $90 million to $100 million.

      “I can't believe they left this money on the table and they'd rather see people laid off from their jobs than to tax these products,” Brown said.

      Republicans opposed taxing these products out of fear that it could result in four of the nation's eight leading cigar retailers to leave Pennsylvania.

      “For anyone who grumbles about spending cuts, I grumble, too,” Rendell said. “The only way we could have avoided some of these cuts ... is if we passed a new revenues package” that included the tobacco taxes.

      Please continue you the fight!

      Comment

      • danielan
        Member
        • Apr 2010
        • 1514

        #33
        That's awesome news!

        Comment

        • Langdell
          Member
          • Jun 2010
          • 255

          #34
          Originally posted by kreigle View Post
          Found on another forum I frequent:

          "Deborah Brown, acting CEO of the American Lung Association of the Mid-Atlantic, was astounded that Pennsylvania would remain the only state in the nation that doesn't tax smokeless tobacco and one of only two that don't tax cigars."
          I'm astounded that somebody from the lung association is up in arms about smokeless tobacco, which has no effect on the lungs (or, for that matter, cigars, the smoke of which is, for the most part, not inhaled). Anyone really concerned about lungs should definitely be pushing snus as an alternative to cigarettes.

          Comment

          • LaZeR
            Member
            • Oct 2009
            • 3994

            #35
            Originally posted by kreigle View Post
            Found on another forum I frequent:

            CRA Update: Victory In Pennsylvania!
            Good stuff! I just hope these two-faced politicians don't decide to re-write the law to *cough* dEjAvU "Protect the cigars" but pass along the taxes to smokeless tobaccos after all.

            Comment

            • lxskllr
              Member
              • Sep 2007
              • 13435

              #36
              Originally posted by Langdell View Post
              I'm astounded that somebody from the lung association is up in arms about smokeless tobacco, which has no effect on the lungs (or, for that matter, cigars, the smoke of which is, for the most part, not inhaled). Anyone really concerned about lungs should definitely be pushing snus as an alternative to cigarettes.
              That's because successfully completing your job doesn't bring home a paycheck. With fewer and fewer cigarette smokers, the zealots need to expand their reach, or hit the unemployment office. Even non tobacco users should be worried, cause once tobacco's eliminated, the zealot's sights will be set on something else. Sugar, salt, and fat are likely targets....

              Comment

              Working...
              X