Entries Tagged 'General' ↓

NEW YORK: Seneca Nation Against Tax Collection On Their Cigarette Sales

 

Representatives of the Seneca Nation on August 14th urged the administration of New York Gov. David Paterson to veto a bill that would require tax collections on cigarettes currently sold tax-free by tribal retailers.  On August 8th, the New York Senate passed a bill aimed at ending tax-free cigarette sales on Indian reservations as a way to collect hundreds of millions of dollars in cigarette taxes that currently remain uncollected every year. The bill would ban manufacturers from selling tobacco products without a State tax stamp to any wholesaler that does not certify that the cigarettes will not be resold tax-free. Untaxed cigarettes can still be sold by tribal stores to Native Americans. Seneca leaders claim that the tax collections would harm the western New York economy. Gov. Paterson’s aides declined to say what he might do with the bill. Meanwhile, new legislation introduced on August 13th would make wholesalers pay cigarette excise taxes and allow Indian tribes to seek refunds for the taxes paid on any cigarettes that were sold to other Indians (AP 8/15). 

 

So what do you think? Should the State of NY collect the taxes or should the Seneca Nation continue to maintain their soveriegnty? Or is this just a by product of taxing tobacco? Let folks know what you think about this issue!

A Tobacco-Free County: Could It Ever Happen?

A Tobacco-Free County: Could It Ever Happen?

 

Regulation of the industry’s most popular in-store program will affect the convenience store channel in a profoundly negative way.

I remember it clearly. It was an overcast day in June 2002 in Lancaster County, Pa., when I attended a meeting that has always left me with a lasting impression. As the tobacco buyer for a major oil company, I quietly sat (not something I’m known for) and I listened to the discussion that one day would make Lancaster County tobacco free! Quite frightening was this agenda, as it would make it illegal to grow any tobacco, market tobacco or use any form of tobacco within the county boundaries. Could this ever happen?

Today, convenience stores are faced with a future that will be greatly affected by future FDA regulation. The bill imposes major regulatory obstacles in the marketing of any new tobacco products. It treats tobacco products like medical devices. However, most of the regulatory provisions make no sense for application to tobacco products. Product changes which fueled the recent unprecedented growth of the “other tobacco” portion of the convenience channel will now need to go through cumbersome review.

Approval or denial will be given based on whether the product or its changes are deemed “in the best interests of public health.” The standards are broadly defined in the bill with the goal of reducing overall tobacco consumption. This bill will not allow the FDA to ban the product or reduce nicotine to zero but its provisions will allow for the FDA to impose any requirements or prohibitions it sees fit.

It is clear from my understanding that the FDA would have broad authority to make tobacco products highly unattractive to adult smokers and highly inaccessible to the public. All of these factors will most definitely affect the convenience store channel in a negative way.

 

Know the “Risks”

Another area of the bill that will affect the convenience channel of trade is that the bill prevents the communication about significant differences among the levels of risk presented by different types of tobacco products. The convenience store channel needs to address this lack of good practice and realize that not all tobacco products are the same in the spectrum of risk, or in other words, some are riskier than others.

At a recent conference on “Harm Reduction” many attendees were extremely concerned that this message is being squashed by those who deny this truth and ultimately want to ban the use of all tobacco products.

If moist smokeless tobacco is safer than cigarettes why must it post the following: “Warning: This product is not a safe alternative to cigarettes”? If, like I proposed in an earlier article, “Who Said Tobacco Can’t Be Safer?” (CSD, May 2008) that one day in the future a brilliant mind cracks the code and finds a way to make tobacco safer would this legislation allow for this claim? I think not.

Would not the convenience channel of trade benefit the most from the sales of a tobacco product that truly was a safer or safe product? Wouldn’t you want to be able to communicate that message?

H.R. 1108 eliminates federal preemption of marketing and advertising which would allow states or local governments to set its own standards. They would be able to enact any restriction “that is in addition to, or more stringent than,” those in the bill. One can only imagine the nightmare this would present to national distributors and the convenience channel of trade.

A bill that one would assume would create uniformity in the industry most likely will lead to chaos. Is it not possible that a local government could one day decide to enact a much more stringent law that banned tobacco from being grown, marketed or used within its boundaries?

As I look to the past is there a glimpse of the future? The foundation of a movement was evidenced back in June 2002. If the movement succeeded and you operated a convenience store in Tobacco Free Lancaster County would your business survive? How would you replace the lost sales and profits from tobacco sales that are no longer allowed? H.R. 1108 as it is currently written puts your business at risk. H.R. 1108 needs to be opposed.

This article was recently published in the July 08 Convenience Store Decisions magazine. I’d be interested in hearing your opinions! Do you think that this could ever happen? What are you doing as a retailer today to oppose potential legislation like this that would seriously affect your business? If your a manufacturer or wholesaler what are your thoughts?

 

DOES MENTHOL INCREASE DANGER? SCIENTIFIC JUDGEMENT SAYS NO!

AMA Refuses To Challenge Menthol Exemption In FDA Bill

Some health experts in the US, including seven former Federal health secretaries, have challenged the proposed exemption for menthol from the FDA tobacco legislation’s list of cigarette flavors to be banned, but the American Medical Association (AMA) refused to oppose the exception by voting on June 17th to refer the decision to its board, with AMA President Dr. Ron Davis saying removing the menthol exemption could imperil the bill’s chances of passage. The AMA vote effectively silences members who wanted the organization to challenge the exemption, which reportedly is a compromise with Philip Morris USA, the only industry player backing the legislation and whose Marlboro Menthol is the second largest menthol brand in the country.

The past few weeks have been filled with speculation regarding the fate of H.R. 1108 especially in light of the exemption of menthol in the flavor ban. Philip Morris states, ” Based on our scientific judgment, menthol does not increase the inherent hazards of smoking”. What are your thoughts? Why does the menthol share continue to grow? Why do folks smoke menthol? What affect does this recent development have on the proposed FDA regulation? Do you think tobacco companies use flavors to attract children to smoke? Or is it to offer it’s adult users variety like other consumable industries? If your a retailer do you focus more on the menthol segment today compared to the past? Are you seeing growth in your menthol business?

THE NEW FRONTIER OF ASH - BANNING SMOKING IN THE HOME!

In a press release issued on Wednesday, Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) - a Washington, D.C.-based national anti-smoking group - called banning smoking in homes the next front in the war on smoking and cited a new survey showing that a majority of people in Ireland expressed support for a total ban on smoking in homes and cars.

According to the press release: “A clear majority wants smoking banned in all homes, even if children are not present, and even if the smoke is not drifting into an adjoining dwelling. This could expand the latest front in the war to protect nonsmokers, says the man who started the nonsmokers’ movement by getting smoking first restricted and then banned on airplanes and then in workplaces and public places, and who is racking up victories in the battle to ban smoking in private dwellings and cars.

What are your thoughts? Will this ever materialize? How will this affect the industry? 

CIGARETTES NOT SOLD HERE

In the future, it may be a harder to purchase cigarettes as more retailers drop them and as officials in a few states look to ban the sale of all tobacco products in drugstores. For instance, the city of San Francisco has a proposal being reviewed by the city board that many believe will be put in place that will ban the sale of all tobacco products in October 2008. There are also bills like this  pending in New Hampshire, Illinois, Tennessee and New York.

What do you think about this?

Is is the beginning of a new movement that will affect the industry?

Do you buy tobacco products at the drug store? Supermarket?

Or is this a good idea that’s time has been long overdue?

How will this affect you?