Lower taxes on cigarettes to fight contraband
Some days ago, I signed the commitment proposed by the Quebec section of the Canadian Convenience Stores Association to fight contraband. Convenience stores are losing a lot of revenues because of the illicit tobacco trade, which accounts for a large portion of total consumption in Canada. This association is asking for lower taxes on cigarettes, which constitute more than 75% of the retail price and have more than doubled since 2001.
I am in total agreement with this solution. As is well known, prohibition fuelled alcohol contraband and the rise of organized crime in the U. S. in the 1920s. Excessive taxes on a legal product have the same effect. Lower taxes would bring back some order in this sector and let convenience stores do their legitimate trade, while diminishing the tax burden that falls on smokers. From my perspective, any reduction in taxes is a good thing.
I wish to emphasize that I do not smoke and do not encourage anyone to smoke. But cigarettes are a legal product and as such, smoking is a personal choice. Excessive taxes are not helping to solve any of the problems associated with smoking, but on the contrary are creating many others. It is time to put an end to this failed policy.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
Some common sense at last!
Je suis d’accord avec vous M. Bernier. Fumer est un choix et il ne faut pas brimer un droit en la taxant.
How much of the contraband tobacco trade is influenced by activity on first nation’s reserves?
I still propose using the notwithstanding clause on the treaties, and when first nation members start to rebel, we stand our ground and say, “We are no longer pouring money like it was going out of style into the reserves. Plus, we end the double standard which communicates that you have to be looked after.”
We just can’t look at the problem only through the financial prism.
I buy my cigarettes and cigars on the reserve from legal vendors. The packs have the tax stamp on them, which means I’m paying tax on my smokes. Of course, at a price of $35 for a carton of kingsize, I’m paying a lot less provincial tax than people who can’t buy on the reserve. Hmmm… if I smoke more, I might save enough money to cover the increased cost of electricity here in Ontario!
I applaud your support of this initiative Mr. Bernier. I do not see this as an ‘anti-first nations’ position but rather as a pro small business action and in keeping with the belief that the preservation and protection of individual rights must be at the fore-front of every government action …
The government exists for the sole purpose of maintaining an individual’s freedom … anything else is an abuse of power …
Meanwhile, Harper is hard at work banning flavored cigarillos.
I wholeheartedly agree with this proposition. The dried up argument that the government must tax cigarettes to help pay for “smokers health care” is ridiculous and unsubstantiated. By that rationale, we ought to be taxing fatty foods, sugary snacks, stress inducing professions, skydivers, risk takers, our grandparents’ genes, etc. But why not go after the real cause of rising health care costs, long-living senior citizens? Despite all the “sin tax” rhetoric, the bottom line is that the government will always make a cash grab and flout its dominance over personal liberty at every turn.
@ Frank – the ‘cash grab’ will be necessary until programs, services and their respective administrative costs, are either scrapped or re-engineered to be more efficient.
As we’ve seen, even the hint of change brings ‘massive media hysteria’ … so any small step that actually brings us closer to putting the individual’s rights over those of the organised opposition … is a good thing … and about all we an hope for … small, consistent, common sense, change …
I would like to see a two pronged approach:
1. Natives selling tobacco to non-natives should be required to collect and remit appropriate sales taxes to provincial/state governments. (Does this already happen? If controls are effective, then why the concern about natives selling tobacco?)
2. Provincial and state governments have a common interest to set taxes at a level that discourages smoking and raises revenue while minimizing tax avoidence activities such as smuggling.
@jasperpants : I agree with your first point – that sales to non-natives should either not even be allowed or at least taxed the way they would be off of the reserve.
Your 2nd point is the ideal … but sadly I don’t think it’s realistic. ‘Taxes’ will never discourage smoking and as long as the addicted require tobacco, smuggling and countreband will be there to serve the needs of those who can’t afford to buy the ‘legal’ product. It’s just a question of ‘supply and demand’.
Reducing the demand is key but again, I don’t think ‘punishing’ the ‘addicted’ will decrease demand.
Bravo M. Bernier pour dire tout haut ce que la plupart n’osent pas par crainte d’être mal vus. La consommation du tabac ne sera jamais éliminée et même si on réussit à contrôler les cigarettes non taxées des réserves, chose que je doute, tant que la taxe sur le tabac continuera à être aux niveaux qu’elle l’est présentement, la contrebande d’une autre sorte remplacera les cigarettes des réserves et il sera vrai que celle-ci sera dans les mains du crime organisé. Soyons réalistes et arrêtons d’étouffer autant les fumeurs que les détaillants du tabac et ramenons les taxes à un niveau raisonnable pour faire compétition avec les cigarettes de piètre qualité qui sont les indiennes. Arrêtons aussi la démonisation systématique des fumeurs, une autre raison qui fait que ceux-ci ne veulent plus investir dans une société que d’une part les taxent outrageusement, et d’autre part se sert de cet argent pour mieux leur taper sur la tête et les discriminer autant à l’emploi qu’à l’hébergement et même les soins de santé. Assez c’est assez. Rendons-nous à l’évidence que nous n’enraierons jamais le tabagisme, d’autres sociétés l’ont essayé avant nous sans succès!
Votre propos et les commentaires font plus état des problèmes que le gouvernement entretient avec les amérindiens.
Au prix actuel, il est très difficile pour les jeunes d’acheter des cigarettes et la contrebande ne peut suffire seule à alimenter un marché pour créer un véritable engouement : ce sont ceux qui fument déjà qui se tournent vers la contrebande.
Je n’ai aucun problème à ce que les dépanneurs ne puissent faire d’argent avec les cigarettes, ruiner la santé d’autrui ne saurait être une source de revenus, surtout si c’est par l’objet d’une dépendance.
Votre gouvernement est celui de la loi et l’ordre, à vous de voir à ce qu’il soit respecté.
Pourquoi ne pas obolir la cigarette? Fumer est un choix mais les maladies que sa entrainent sont payées par l’ensemble des travailleurs. Alors tu fumes oui mais si tu es malade tu payes.
@ Jean V. Pelletier
«Pourquoi ne pas obolir [sic] la cigarette?»
La prohibition de l’alcool a encouragé la contrebande et le crime organisé aux États-Unis dans les années 1920. Al Capone, vous connaissez? Vous n’apprenez pas des erreurs du passé?
«Fumer est un choix mais les maladies que sa entrainent [sic] sont payées par l’ensemble des travailleurs. Alors tu fumes oui mais si tu es malade tu payes.»
Le problème, c’est le système de santé soviétique qui déresponsabilise l’individu.
Encore une fois dans l’exactitude M. Bernier. L’état de la cigarette prouve une fois de plus que le gouvernement est une partie du problème, et non de la solution…
I disagree with lowering taxes on tobacco, the problem with countraband cigarrettes is due mostly to natives selling cigarrettes off reserve. We need to pass laws strictly limiting the capacity to produce cigarrettes on reserves, not lower taxes. Increasing the costs of cigarrettes is an effective way to decrease demand because if you don’t start smoking before you’re 18, chances are you will never start. Teenagers generally don’t have a ton of disposible income; in fact smoking rates had been going down before the exposion of native cigarrettes made it so affordable.
The reason I think it makes more sense to tax cigarrettes more than alcohol, candy or fatty food is that it is almost impossible to smoke responsibly. Most people who smoke at all are addicted and smoke everyday. The chances of ending up with a costly illness for the healthcare system are great. Candy, alcohol and fatty foods on the other hand are things that people can and often do enjoy sparingly and responsibly.
If we made our cigarrettes cheap enough to compete with native cigarrettes we’d be looking at charging $10-20 per carton. Does anyone not believe that would not cause a spike in smoking?