Seeking Alpha

The tobacco industry faces a crucial vote in California where Proposition 29 could slap a...

The tobacco industry faces a crucial vote in California where Proposition 29 could slap a $1-a-pack tax on cigarettes and other tobacco products, with proceeds going to fund cancer research. Industry players Altria Group (MO), Reynolds American (RAI), and others have spent close to $50M in an attempt to prevent a yes vote in the state from spurring additional anti-smoking tax measures to crop up around the U.S. Poll watchers say the vote set for June 5 in the Golden State is too close to call.
Comments (18)
  • SoCal.Sooner
    , contributor
    Comments (91) | Send Message
     
    I'm in California, and it does not stand a chance. I won't pass.
    2 Jun 2012, 10:47 AM Reply Like
  • deercreekvols
    , contributor
    Comments (5758) | Send Message
     
    This "crucial" vote already took place in NY. Cigarettes are about $8/pack in The Empire State. Local Native American smoke shops have made a killing on the tax increase, of which they are exempt. (no pun intended with the word "killing")

     

    It is amazing that $1 (or more in NY) extra doesn't seem to curb the nicotine addiction. Maybe CA could propose Prop 30 that taxes large softdrinks?
    2 Jun 2012, 10:47 AM Reply Like
  • Poor Texan
    , contributor
    Comments (3531) | Send Message
     
    Since the smuggling infrastructure is already in place, the cartel can add cigarettes to their offerings for those who wish to avoid the tax increase.
    2 Jun 2012, 10:53 AM Reply Like
  • sr1977
    , contributor
    Comments (336) | Send Message
     
    Down here in Florida 2 packs of Marlboro Mediums (which are perpetually on "special pricing") cost $9.42. Regular Marlboro's are $5-6.50.

     

    I think it's a good idea to tax cigarettes out of existence, I wish they had done it in the 70's before I started smoking.

     

    Personal responsibility is one thing, but when something is addictive and dangerous to ones health (not to mention easily accessible by persons under the legal age) I think it should be made illegal like any other dangerous drug.
    2 Jun 2012, 11:23 AM Reply Like
  • deercreekvols
    , contributor
    Comments (5758) | Send Message
     
    My family and I visit the Sunshine State quite regulary and I am always amazed at the price of tobacco products when comparing them to the price in NY. The state taxes in NY certainly have pushed the price at a level to discourage new smokers, in my opinion.

     

    Tobacco companies that have seen sales in the US drop have discovered a whole new world out there where smoking is not frowned upon, but rather, the norm. Many European countries, China, India, Africa, the list goes on and on where smoking is simply accepted.
    2 Jun 2012, 07:59 PM Reply Like
  • hwood007
    , contributor
    Comments (1207) | Send Message
     
    I quit 16 years ago, you can too.
    2 Jun 2012, 09:02 PM Reply Like
  • Bobco23
    , contributor
    Comments (182) | Send Message
     
    sr1977; You are responsible for your own actions. We are not.
    2 Jun 2012, 11:53 AM Reply Like
  • sr1977
    , contributor
    Comments (336) | Send Message
     
    Who's "we"? I never said you or anyone else was responsible for my actions. Dangerous drugs should be outlawed, just like herion, crack or super-sized sugary drinks :-).
    2 Jun 2012, 12:21 PM Reply Like
  • arthur_bishop1972
    , contributor
    Comments (2421) | Send Message
     
    At what point does freedom of choice get outlawed???
    3 Jun 2012, 06:02 AM Reply Like
  • Bobco23
    , contributor
    Comments (182) | Send Message
     
    You obviously missed the context of a larger issue.

     

    "We" are the ones who pay for the actions "you" chose to be what is legal and what is not because "you" and/or other "yous" can' control yourselves. The experience of the drug laws should be instructional for considering tobacco and sugar laws.

     

    It costs $30k a year to incarcerate someone for drugs. Innocent bystanders are murdered around the world. "We" get to pay the tab because "you" are too weak to control yourself. Mexico and half of American cities are fiefdoms of drug lords because "you" make it illegal for people to do what they want to and will continue to do. The social costs of making drugs illegal and punishable by incarceration are staggering. And "you" want to expand this concept of making individual freedom of choice decisions to cigarettes and sugar drinks (your dangerous drugs)? Untaxed cigarettes from the drug cartels are beginning to appear. Outlawing cigarettes will make them more profitable than hard drugs. You will create another compelling market opportunity for the ruthless.This opportunity will be a result of illegality (scarcity) and "we" will get to pay the social cost for "your" proposals.

     

    You need to expand your thinking to include the consequences of your ideas. "We" are tired of paying for them.
    3 Jun 2012, 06:14 PM Reply Like
  • sr1977
    , contributor
    Comments (336) | Send Message
     
    Because the consequences of your idea's carry a larger price to society than our present system of outlawing things that are considered a detriment to society.

     

    If you don't like the way we do things in America, perhaps you "we's" should move to Mexico or Columbia where their lack of regard for the consequences of a "wild west" society are plainly evident.
    4 Jun 2012, 09:12 AM Reply Like
  • Mad_Max_A_Million
    , contributor
    Comments (1175) | Send Message
     
    Kind of suspect that the tax money will lose its way to the cancer research fund and end up in some California Teachers Union pension fund. Just an educated guess based on the fate of the 911 victims fund. Who saw that coming?
    2 Jun 2012, 11:54 AM Reply Like
  • apberusdisvet
    , contributor
    Comments (2899) | Send Message
     
    In its rush to maintain the status quo of corruption and incompetency, California will tax anything and everything, with the majority of the funds going to support the various voting bases of the incumbents in power. Taxing sex by the "stroke" will come eventually.
    2 Jun 2012, 12:09 PM Reply Like
  • Paul Price
    , contributor
    Comments (1508) | Send Message
     
    Before doing away with super-sized sodas all tobacco products should be outlawed.

     

    Too much tax money to lose, though, so it won't happen anytime soon.
    2 Jun 2012, 01:54 PM Reply Like
  • iFrank
    , contributor
    Comments (36) | Send Message
     
    How high can you tax a product? CA will tax anything, just so the politicians can keep spending. Solution -- leave CA like many are doing.
    2 Jun 2012, 03:02 PM Reply Like
  • billandhenri
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    I am 73 years old, grew up on "tobacco road", and was a smoker until I went 'cold turkey" on 3 packs per day. In the 50's and the 60's our nicknames for cigarettes included "cancer sticks" and "coffin nails" and we paid $2.00 per carton of 10 packs.
    2 Jun 2012, 03:04 PM Reply Like
  • donvander2
    , contributor
    Comments (3) | Send Message
     
    hmmmm, is it time to sell my MO stock ?
    2 Jun 2012, 03:06 PM Reply Like
  • hwood007
    , contributor
    Comments (1207) | Send Message
     
    A tobacco tax to collect for medical research is a hoax for this state, they have raided several other funds setup as special projects and now those funds are gone. If it were a capital offense to misuse this money, then it might go for the stated purpose, but I doubt it.
    2 Jun 2012, 08:59 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector