Governor Bill Richardson has plenty of company as he considers raising the state cigarette tax which has become a popular method of revenue enhancement in many other states besides New Mexico.

The state legislature passed a 75 cent per pack increase on the cigarette tax slated to begin on July 1st. Governor Richardson will likely sign the bill which is expected to generate about $33 million a year in revenue for the state’s recession-shrunken bankroll.

New Mexico joins Utah, Kansas, South Carolina, and Georgia that have tobacco tax hikes on their agendas. And during the last year, 16 other states have raised cigarette taxes.

Tony Penate is a smoker who questions the tax’s effectiveness. “The number one cause of preventable deaths in this country is obesity now– not cigarette smoking– so I think I’d like to see a tax on soda before they put another tax on cigarettes.”

Currently, the highest tax imposed on cigarettes is in the state of Rhode Island at $3.46 a pack while South Carolina sets the lowest pack tax at seven cents.

New Mexico’s tax on a pack of cigarettes is 91 cents and would raise to $1.66 a pack under the new legislation.

A bill that would raise cigarette excise taxes in the state by $1 a pack to raise money for education was snuffed last week when a legislative committee voted unanimously against the idea, the Santa Fe New Mexican reported. However, two other bills remain that could raise the state’s cigarette tax.

The House Business and Industry Committee voted to table House Bill 35, sponsored by Democratic Rep. Brian Egolf, which killed it for this session. Egolf said the legislation would have raised $36 million, earmarked for the public schools.

Health advocates, including the American Cancer Society, supported the bill, along with several labor and religious organizations. Supporters saw the bill as a way to prevent further cuts to education and other state programs as the state faces a $600 million budget shortfall, the report stated.

Opposing the bill were tobacco lobbyists and representatives of several business groups, among them Mark Smith, of the Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co.,

“We pay a good wage,” he told the newspaper. “We’ve been in Santa Fe 27 years.” Smith claimed the cigarette tax increase would cause the loss of hundreds of jobs statewide in the retail industry.

Other opponents noted that the federal tax on cigarettes went up by 62 cents a pack only last year.

However, there are still two Senate bills that would raise cigarette taxes, but if one or both passed the Senate, they likely would have to go through the same committee that voted down this bill, the report stated.

Germany lost out on at least four billion euros worth of cigarette revenue in 2008 as smokers looked for ways to avoid hefty taxes, a study from the Hamburg World Economy Institute (HWWI) has found.

The number of cigarettes smoked in Germany without being taxed in the country has gone up from 16 percent three years ago to 20 percent, it said.

Smokers consumed a total of 23 billion such cigarettes, according to the figures, and the majority were purchased legitimately in other countries. But about seven billion cigarettes were obtained illegally, fueling fears that the trade may be boosting organized crime.

Signs of smuggling

The institute said price differences caused by high taxation allowed organized crime to thrive from trading in contraband. Signs of sophisticated smuggling operations similar to those in the United States, where different states have different tax rates, were now “recognizable” in Europe, according to the institute.

Cigarettes on the shelves in a shopBildunterschrift: Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: The price of cigarettes has gone up in recent years

The trend comes as smokers try to dodge higher cigarette taxes introduced as a public health measure. Since the latest tax increase in February last year, a packet of cigarettes has cost about 4.50 euros – of which around 3.75 euros is tax.

“The new EU member countries have much lower taxes on cigarettes than we have in Germany and there is always the possibility to smoke smuggled cigarettes. These are, of course, much cheaper,” said HWWI Director Michael Braeuninger.

The majority of illegal cigarettes come from Ukraine (3.2 billion) and Russia (2.4 billion), according to the market research organization Ipsos.

Regional differences

The study showed large variations by region of the average proportion of untaxed cigarettes smoked. In some western parts of Germany it was as low as 10 percent while in some eastern areas half of the cigarettes bought had no German duty paid on them. Most of those cigarettes originated in Poland.

The study was carried out on behalf of Germany’s cigarette industry association, the DZV, which is calling for increased activity against smuggling and counterfeit products.

The change in smoking habits is estimated to have cost the cigarette industry about 1.2 billion euros in 2008.

Dubai The UAE will make smoking more expensive as it plans to increase the price of tobacco and tobacco products, a senior health official said yesterday.

Dr Wedad Al Maidour, head of the tobacco control team, said it is coordinating with the ministry of finance to make the habit costlier for smokers. A pack of cigarettes on average currently costs Dh7 across the emirates.

She said it will be difficult to impose an additional levy on tobacco, but that the team hopes to make it more expensive for smokers at the check-out counters of shops. Studies have shown that whenever there is an increase in cigarette price there is a drop in smoking among teenagers.

Packaging messages

Another deterrent to smoking is that half of cigarette packets will be covered with graphic images to send home the message that smoking kills. Currently the packs only carry a warning that smoking is the leading cause of lung cancer and heart diseases.

Dr Al Maidour said countries such as Canada, Australia and Thailand have imposed a law that cigarette packs should have graphic images. She said Uruguay has made it mandatory that 80 per cent of the pack should be taken up by the images.

“In the UAE we plan for 50 per cent of the pack to carry the graphics,” she said, but noted they will not be pictures of decaying lungs. “[One] will show a snake and [one] a child with a face mask,’ she said (the snake is designed to show that smoking is deadly).

Senior Ministry of Health officials yesterday warned that a significant section of the adult population in the country are smokers and hoped that the new law will also cut down the rate of people affected by passive smoking. Detailing the new anti-tobacco law which went into effect last week, Dr Salem Al Dermaki, acting director-general of the Ministry of Health, said relevant departments will work in tandem to implement the laws, noting that legal experts are working on drafting the bylaws.

The director-general said the law which prohibits smoking in a car with a child is unique to the UAE.

He said coffee shops and shisha shops will be given a grace period of two years to move out of residential areas. “It will be taken on a case-to-case basis,” he said, as the ministry will check how a shisha shop is affecting people nearby.

He said that for those who do not take the message to stop smoking seriously there will be strong deterrents in place. “Smoke if you wish but you cannot harm others,” he said, adding that the laws will protect the most vulnerable in the society, the children. “This Federal law supports all local authorities,” he said. He also said the ministry will clamp down hard on advertisements that encourage smoking.

Five million die every year worldwide due to smoking

By 2030, the figure will go up to 8 million

Nearly a quarter of the deaths are due to passive smoking

By Mahmood Saberi
© Gulf News 2010

TOKYO – Starting next October, the Japanese will pay 4 cents (3.5 yen) more per cigarette, Bloomberg reports. That’s in addition to the 1.5 yen per cigarette tobacco companies will add. Japan is the world’s fourth-largest cigarette market.

The tax increase is the first in four years and is part of Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama’s plan to decrease smoking in an effort to lower health insurance costs. Japan also faces a tax revenue deficit. The 3.5 yen per cigarette raises a 20-pack of cigarettes 33 percent.

Japan Tobacco could increase prices by more than the tax gain to counter an anticipated fall in smoking rates, said President Hiroshi Kimura. “The government will probably keep increasing the tax and more people will stop smoking,” said Mitsuo Shimizu, a market analyst at Cosmo Securities Co.

The fifth in more than 20 years, the tax increase is the biggest, since the previous tax hikes stayed below 1 yen per cigarette. Cigarettes are fairly inexpensive in Japan, with the price of about a third of the cost in the United Kingdom.

Currently, the smoking rate for Japanese men is just over 36 percent last year, with the health ministry predicting that number to drop to around 27 percent with the tax increase.

Ireland’s policy of setting a minimum price on tobacco products distorts competition, a legal advisor to Europe’s highest court has said.

In the case of Commission of the European Communities versus Ireland, the Advocate General said binding prices restricted manufacturers’ freedom to set prices, thereby posing a risk to free competition.

The opinion of the Advocate General is not a final judgement, although the court generally follows it 80 per cent of the time.

The European Commission took Ireland to Europe’s highest court in 2008 over its policy of setting a minimum price on tobacco products to protect public health.

Under an agreement with the Irish Tobacco Manufacturers’ Advisory Committee, the Department of Health has a minimum price for 20 cigarettes of about €1.30. This was set using information on volume sales supplied by the tobacco companies for filtered and unfiltered cigarettes.

The Government says the agreement with the tobacco manufacturers was made for the primary purpose of preventing low-cost selling of tobacco products in Ireland.

By setting a minimum retail price for a packet of 20 cigarettes it undermines the ability of retailers to provide special cut- price offers on certain brands. Price control is also seen as a viable way to protect children from becoming addicted to cigarettes and to encourage existing smokers to quit, according to the Department of Health.

In his legal assessment of the arguments the Advocate General said “increases in excise duties are therefore a less intrusive measure than minimum prices, which are thus not necessary”.

A statement issued by cigarette company John Player & Sons today said “while we don’t oppose the Commission’s view that tobacco manufacturers should have the freedom to determine retail prices for their products, the fact remains that the real minimum price for 20 cigarettes in Ireland is the street price of €4 – €5 euro due to widespread illegal cigarette selling.

This greatly incentivises criminals by giving them huge margins while denying Government badly needed revenues. 1 in 4 cigarettes smoked in Ireland today is not even bought in an Irish shop”.

By PAMELA NEWENHAM, October 22, 2009

PRAGUE – Cash-strapped Central and Eastern European governments are turning to a time-tested strategy of raising taxes on cigarettes and alcohol as the recession takes its toll on the region’s public finances.

A few countries are seeking other ways to bolster such “sin taxes.” Slovakia has formulated a so-called bottle-cap amendment aimed at stemming tax evasion by bar owners who sell bootleg liquor; Hungary is considering a new tax on poker.

“All countries, not just [those in] Central and Eastern Europe, are forced to do something with widening fiscal gaps, and the first thing to think about is lifting excise taxes,” said Miroslav Plojhar, an economist at J.P. Morgan.

Poland is set to lift its excise tax on cigarettes by 2.6% to 228.80 zlotys ($81) per 1,000 units as of January. That compares to a planned 43% increase in Bulgaria’s excise tax on cigarettes, to €76 ($113) per 1,000 units as of 2010.

Bulgarian Finance Minister Simeon Djankov defends the proposed cigarette-tax increase on public-health grounds, and dismisses claims that the government is only interested in increasing tax revenue. Critics of the increase argue that it will lead to growth in the smuggling that has plagued Bulgaria for years.

In the Czech Republic — ranked among the top consumers of beer — planned new taxes on the brew are drawing controversy. Starting next year, the tax on beer, whether brewed locally or imported, will rise 33%, to 32 koruna ($1.85) per 100 liters. The government will raise its tax on spirits by 8% next year. It expects the two alcohol taxes together to boost state tax revenue by 1.7 billion koruna ($99 million) in 2010 alone, Finance Ministry spokesman Jakub Haas said.

Russia, meanwhile, aims to raise its tax on beer over the next three years. The bill, calling for a 200% increase next year, followed by rises of 11% and 20% in 2011 and 2012, still needs President Dmitry Medvedev’s signature.

Slovakia is grappling with a different situation: As much as 10% of liquor sold in Slovak bars and restaurants is believed to go untaxed because bar owners pour liquor produced by illegal distilleries into used bottles on which taxes have already been paid, selling it as the genuine article.

To reclaim that revenue, the Finance Ministry has proposed that all liquor sold in bars and restaurants be packaged in special, nonrefillable bottles with state-of-the-art caps.

Critics argue that the proposed change would reduce consumer choice and be difficult for companies to provide. The change could also be construed as tacit support for Slovak producers, prohibited under European Union competition law.

Meanwhile, in Hungary, where hundreds of clubs devoted to poker have sprung up without regulation, a proposal to regulate poker games and tax the winnings would bring the game in line with the country’s rules on other forms of gambling.

The Hungarian Poker Association argues that a tax on winnings will drive players toward online games. Instead, the government should introduce a fixed tax per table, similar to the one in neighboring Slovakia, association President Gergely Tatár said.

By SEAN CARNEY and LEOS ROUSEK Wsj

So there’s a proposal in the Wisconsin State Senate to raise the liquor tax 50 cents per liter.

Wow! That’s a drop in the shot glass compared to the tobacco tax that amounts to more than the product itself is worth. Of course, we’re well aware of all the problems tobacco causes. Just ask the police, especially the overnight shift, how many tobacco related calls they answer and how many vehicle crashes were due to someone smoking too many cigarettes.

It’s common knowledge, family violence and divorce are directly linked to tobacco misuse. There’s no question, nursing homes are full of 80- and 90-year-old smokers collecting Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Scientific evidence suggests that tobacco, not vehicle emissions and coal fired industrial plants, are causing severe environmental damage.

Destroyed friendships, impaired thinking, poor job performance and even termination – yup, not alcohol, that’s all on tobacco. Vandalism, burglary, rape and murder, in many cases, could be prevented if people weren’t messed up on tobacco. And how many tax dollars go to rehab centers treating tobacco addiction?

BUTT – Bureaucrats for Universal Tobacco Taxation – recommends taxing tobacco users to the point of cessation because they can no longer afford the product. That will cause the pool of tobacco users to shrink and, in turn, will cause a shortfall in tax revenue, which will have to be made up by increasing the tax on those remaining users.

Eventually, because of financial hardship, the pool of tobacco users will be reduced to a single smoker who will be responsible for all the revenue. Of course, with only one smoker left on earth, the egregious problems caused by tobacco will have been all but eliminated and the complaints will be a barely audible squawk in the night – ingenious!

By BILL McKEWIN / October 19, 2009 Lacrossetribune

PETALING JAYA: British American Tobacco Malaysia has revised its cigarette prices following the Government’s decision to increase excise on cigarettes by 1 sen per stick last week.

The following new cigarette prices take effect from today, October 5 2009, the company said in a statement:

Dunhill Fine Cut 20s range RM 10.00
Dunhill 20s range RM 9.30
Dunhill 14s range RM 6.90

Kent 20s range RM 9.30
Kent 14s range RM 6.90
Pall Mall Plain 20s RM 9.70
Pall Mall 20s range RM 7.80
Pall Mall 18s range RM 7.00
Pall Mall 14s range RM 5.80
Pall Mall 25s range RM 9.70
Benson & Hedges 20s RM 9.30
Benson & Hedges 14s RM 6.90

About a year ago, Reynolds American chief executive Susan Ivey figured federal cigarette taxes would take a big jump just as the economy was shriveling.

The higher cost would mean fewer sales, a squeeze on profits.

In advance of the 62 cent per-pack April 1 tax hike, the largest in history, Ivey led a stepped-up marketing campaign to promote Pall Mall cigarettes, one of Reynolds’ mid-priced offerings. Sales soared for the 110-year-old brand, and Pall Mall’s market share jumped an unprecedented 82 percent from the first quarter to the second quarter. Workers added overtime shifts to keep up with demand.

“That involves, from a leadership perspective, turning challenges into competitive opportunities,” Ivey said. “That requires an organization that isn’t deer-in-headlights freaked out by the changes.”

Tobacco has long faced bigger challenges than most industries because its products are responsible for a lot of illness and death. On top of the recession, it faces more smoking bans, advertising restrictions, growing regulation, higher taxes and fewer smokers.

Reynolds, based in Winston-Salem, announced 570 job cuts late last year, about 10 percent of its work force. No factory workers were among those laid off.

Ivey, with 28 years in the industry, has focused on building trust, encouraging flexibility and communication as she guides the company she joined after a merger five years ago. Last year, she began meeting more often with managers so they’d better understand what the company faces and its strategy and can share that with workers. Ivey said she has been very impressed by how receptive employees have been.

“Change is fear,” she said. But, “employees can deal with anything around which there is clarity. Whether you like it … doesn’t matter. If you know what it is, you can deal with it.”

Rewards are key to success, she said. All employees remain eligible for bonuses, and Ivey has not cut pay, as many companies have.

Reynolds has continued work on new products, such as its smokeless, no-spit Camel Snus, little tobacco pouches a user tucks inside the lip. Ivey smokes the company’s Eclipse cigarette, which heats tobacco rather than burning it.

To help keep herself on track, she exercises four times a week. She also derives satisfaction from seeing employees achieve their goals and grow.

“As a leader, your job is to leave the business better off than when you started, to leave people better than you are to run the business,” she said.

SANTA CRUZ, Calif. — Santa Cruz has a reputation as a pretty laid back place, but on Wednesday morning residents woke up to news that the city was not taking a laid back approach to smoking.

On Tuesday night, the city council voted unanimously to ban smoking in key areas of the city where people tend to congregate and recreate.

Ross Welch was taking a break from his job on Pacific Avenue Wednesday afternoon by smoking a cigarette. Soon that will be against the law.

Welch said if he gets a ticket, “I’ll quit for the fifth time.”

In addition to Pacific Avenue, smoking also will be banned on West Cliff Drive, where people like to walk and bike, along Beach Street which fronts the Santa Cruz beach boardwalk and on the wharf which has a number of restaurants. There also will be no smoking within 25 feet of public doors and windows.

Smoking already is banned on the beaches.

City Councilman Ryan Coonerty sponsored the legislation. He said the law takes effect October 20th. There will be a 30-day warning period, then violators will be issued $20 citations.

“The point of the ordinance is to give people the power to know where they can or can’t smoke. We don’t expect to have a smoking police out writing tickets 24 hours a day. This is meant so people who don’t smoke can inform people who are where they can or can’t do it, ” says Coonerty.

But smoker Alex Marks said if he gets a ticket he will fight it. When asked on what grounds, he replied “I guess I’ll figure that out when it comes.”

The price of tobacco in Malawi, Africa’s largest producer of the burley variety, trade 23 percent below the government-mandated price of $2.15 last week, said Auction Holdings Ltd., which manages the country’s auction floors.

The leaf sold at an average $1.66 per kilogram (2.2 pounds) during the week ended Sept. 4, Auction Holdings said in a weekly sales report published in the Daily Times newspaper today. Since the market opened on March 16, tobacco has sold for an average of $1.72, it said.

Malawi earned $9.05 million during the week, selling 5.2 million kilograms of the leaf, Auction Holdings added. The southern African nation started setting minimum prices for the various grades of tobacco two years ago after it accused merchants of putting farmers out of business. Buyers denied they underpaid farmers.

Malawi relies on sales of the leaf for 60 percent of its export earnings. The county has earned $365 million from 197.9 million kilograms of tobacco sold since the market opened. The tobacco marketing season closes on Sept. 18, according to a statement from TCC published today in the Daily Times.

Copyright © September 7, 2009 Bloomberg

MADISON (WKOW) — Wisconsin smokers will begin paying the fifth highest tax on cigarettes in the nation beginning Tuesday.

That’s the day the tax per pack will choot up 75-cents. No other neighboring state will have a tax rate as high, leading many to believe smokers here will hop the borders or looks for deals on the Internet to find cheaper options.

Representatives of Wisconsin’s grocery and convenience stores said they fear those businesses could see a dropoff of 25- to 40-percent in sales.

The increase in cigarette taxes takes place less than a year before a statewide smoking ban takes effect July 5, 2010.

Those who fought for the ban and the tax increase say it provides those looking to quit with more motivation to do so.

While many countries have banned terms like “light” and “low-tar” from cigarette packs, other aspects of the products’ packaging may also be misleading consumers, a new study suggests.

Studies have shown that long-used terms like “light,” “mild” and “low- tar” confuse many consumers into thinking that so-described cigarettes carry lower health risks. Dozens of countries have now banned tobacco companies from using the terms on cigarette packs.

But in the new study, Canadian researchers found that other packaging details — words like “smooth” and “silver,” and even the color of the pack — influence consumers’ perceptions of a brand’s health risks.

The findings suggest that current regulations are not going far enough to remove misleading elements from cigarette packs, the researchers report in the Journal of Public Health.

One remedy would be to require “plain packaging,” free of logos and other brand imagery, write David Hammond and Carla Parkinson of the University of Waterloo in Ontario.

A shopkeeper picks up a cigarette package in central Sydney May 11, 2009.[Agencies]

“Plain-packaging regulations came very close to being implemented in Canada in the early 1990s, and they are receiving serious consideration in several other countries at the moment,” Hammond noted in an email correspondence to Reuters Health.

The tobacco industry is opposed to such measures, which is not surprising, Hammond noted, since packaging is a key marketing tool, particularly in countries where other forms of tobacco advertising are restricted.

And a cigarette pack’s appearance does seem to influence many consumers’ perceptions, Hammond and Parkinson found.

For their study, the researchers had 312 smokers and 291 non-smokers look at cigarette packs that had been specifically designed for the study. Participants viewed the packs in pairs, with the two products differing in one element of package design.

Overall, the study found, 80 percent of participants thought that the product labeled “smooth” carried fewer health risks than the one labeled “regular.” Similarly, when they viewed products labeled as either “silver” or “full-flavored,” 73 percent thought the “silver” product was less hazardous.

Even numbers included as part of the brand-name influenced perceptions. Eighty-four percent of participants thought the product that included a “6″ in the name was less risky than another product labeled with a “10.”

Color also mattered. More than three-quarters of the men and women thought that the light-blue pack they viewed carried fewer risks than its dark-blue counterpart.

While the tobacco industry opposes the notion of plain packaging, Hammond said he is “confident” it will be a reality in the next five years — likely with one country setting the precedent, and others quickly following suit.

Ultimately, Hammond said, the public may look back at today’s cigarette packaging in the same way they now view the practice of having smoking sections on airplanes.

“People will wonder how such a lethal product was ever allowed to be sold in packages with pictures of flowers and pretty coloring that appeal to young people and provide false reassurance to consumers about the risks of smoking,” he explained.


Source: August 24, 2009 China Daily/Agencies

Scaremongering about tobacco point of sale advertising ban rubbished

Labour is rubbishing claims that banning the advertising of tobacco products could lead to black-market sales, Labour Associate Health Spokesperson Iain Lees-Galloway says.

“I understand the British research quoted by the NZ Association of Convenience Stores was in fact funded and carried out by the tobacco companies,” Iain Lees-Galloway said.
Free: Scoop SwineFlu Alerts
3.60% p.a. On-Call: Apply Online
Powershop Pioneers – Join & Win!

“The attempt to scaremonger about a potential ban on cigarette displays in shops is similar to that tried by some retailers when the Labour Government moved to ban smoking in bars.

“The entire restaurant and bar industry didn’t crash when smoking in bars was banned and I am confident there will not be huge increases in black-market sales of tobacco products if there was a ban on point of sale advertising.

“Supermarkets don’t have large displays of tobacco products anymore and there hasn’t been a huge explosion in black-market products

“I urge the Government to stop listening to the scaremongering of those with a vested financial interest in point of sale tobacco advertising and put a ban in place.

“The reality is that smoking is one of the leading causes of death in this country and the banning of point of sale tobacco advertising could help to reduce smoking,” Iain Lees-Galloway said.


Copyright © 2009 Scoop

MURRAY, Ky. — The Housing Authority of Murray is having its own version of a smoke-out.

The agency has instituted a new smoke-free policy at all of its housing units, starting Sept. 1. The policy means residents will not be allowed to smoke inside their homes. Instead, they’ll have to light up in the yard.

WPSD-TV in Paducah reported that Housing Authority Executive Director Faye Dodd said the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has pushed smoke-free public housing across the country.

Walter Wyatt, a smoker for 62 years, said the government agency shouldn’t tell him where he can smoke, particularly not in his own home.

“To tell me what to do in my own place, I don’t think that’s right, and I don’t believe the people that’s putting them orders out would like for someone to tell them what to do in their house,” Wyatt said.

Allowing smoking in homes causes multiple problems, Dodd said. Among the issues is smoke drifting through central air units to the homes of nonsmokers.

Dodd also cited safety after a recent fire in Murray destroyed two units when a smoker fell asleep and dropped a lit cigarette.

Finally, Dodd said the authority just can’t afford the costs of cleaning a unit when a smoker moves.

“No one wants to feel limited in their own home,” Dodd said. “I understand where they’re coming from, but our main objective is the care and feeding of the agency, and we want to stay alive, and being fiscally sound is the best way to do that.”

The idea isn’t to force people to quit smoking, just to quit smoking indoors, Dodd said.

Smokers can get an exemption to allow them indoor smoking privileges until their lease is up, Dodd said. With a new lease, though, comes the smoke-free policy. Breaking the policy could result in a lease violation, three of which prompt an eviction.

Wyatt is aware that the landlord sets the rules for property, but he said he’s also tired of being told where he can and can’t smoke.

“I know smoking’s not good for me, but I been doing it so long, I’m going to still do it until the Old Man calls me,” Wyatt said.

A new European Union survey released today has revealed that consumer price levels in Ireland last year were found to be the second highest in Europe, with alcohol and tobacco prices here by far the most expensive in the 27-member bloc.

Drinkers and smokers faced prices a staggering 84% higher than the EU average, according to the survey by Eurostat, the Statistical Office of the European Communities.

Overall, Denmark was the most expensive across the EU 27, indexing at +41% above the EU average, followed by Ireland (+27% above EU average) and then Finland (+27%). Bulgaria was found to be the country with the lowest prices.

The figures are taken from a basket of goods including food, alcohol and tobacco, clothing, consumer electronics, personal transport equipment and hotels and dining out.

Food in Ireland was found to be the second most expensive in the EU (27% above the average), behind Denmark and just above Finland.

Copyright © 2009 Breakingnews

CIGARETTES would cost more than $20 for a packet of 30 and come in plain wrapping under a radical proposal being considered by the Federal Government to fund a massive preventive health program.

The cigarette tax hike and ban on all remaining forms of tobacco advertising have been included in the Federal Government’s yet-to-be-released Preventative Health Taskforce report.

The report, being examined by Health Minister Nicola Roxon, urges the Federal Government to slash smoking rates in the next decade to 9 per cent of the adult population, cutting the number of people 14 and older who smoke daily from 3 million to 2 million.

Under the changes cigarette packets would be generic with larger graphic health warnings taking up about 90 per cent of the front and 100 per cent of the back.

Tobacco companies also face a blanket ban on all sponsorship, internet sales, public relations activities and “corporate responsibility” donations.

The plan has been strongly backed by anti-smoking organisations such as the Public Health Association, the Cancer Council and the National Heart Foundation but has alarmed cigarette companies, which are claiming such changes could be unlawful.

A NSW Government submission endorsed the tax jump, involving an immediate price rise of 7.5 cents per cigarette, or 21 per cent per pack, to bring the cost of smoking into line with World Health Organisation standards.

“There is community support for increasing taxes on tobacco products,” the submission says.

The NSW Government also supports “in principle” a move to plain packaging.

Anti-smoking campaigner Dr Matthew Peters, who chairs Action on Smoking and Health Australia, said additional taxes would deter some smokers but changes to packaging rules would have a bigger impact on tobacco companies themselves.

“It’s [generic packaging] the one thing that terrifies the tobacco companies most,” he said. “Generic packaging would be the beginning of the end for them all.”

Stafford Sanders, of Protecting Children from Tobacco, said the price increase could be the final straw for the 85 per cent of smokers he believes want to quit but just haven’t had a compelling reason to do so.

“There’s a lot of mythology out there which suggests the people still smoking are a tough, diehard mob who are not going to be receptive to anything. That’s simply not true,” he said.

Victorian health authority VicHealth estimates each 10 per cent increase in the price of cigarettes leads to a corresponding 4 per cent drop in cigarette consumption.

An initial 7.5 cent excise hike would lift retail prices for a pack of 30 cigarettes from about $13.50 to $16.35. Prices would then rise to around $20.15, with the total federal tax take growing by 17.5 cents per cigarette to 42.95 cents.

A submission by the Cancer Council and the National Heart Foundation to the Federal Government’s review of the tax system being undertaken by Treasury Secretary Ken Henry concluded a 17.5 cent excise increase would raise an extra $1.97 billion worth of federal revenue each year, providing more than enough to fund preventative health programs.

It says the price rise would also convince about 306,000 adults to quit and prevent 183,000 children from eventually taking up the habit.

“Increased tobacco excise would also generate substantial revenue for government — more than enough to provide effective tobacco control support services and offset declines in excise from relatively fewer people purchasing tobacco products,” the submission says.

Unlike most other developed nations, Australia has not increased tobacco excise and customs duty since 1999, except for the regular twice-yearly increase to cover inflation.

But a submission from tobacco giant Philip Morris claimed the proposed tax increases were excessive and any moves to introduce plain packaging and ban all remaining advertising were unnecessary and could be considered unlawful.

Last week the State Government introduced tough new laws that require cigarettes to be removed from public display in retail outlets and a ban on smoking in cars where there are children under 16 present.

Jodi McKay, NSW Minister assisting the Health Minister on cancer issues, said smoking was the biggest single cause of preventable deaths in the state. It is responsible for the deaths of 5000 people and costs taxpayers $10 billion every year, including $600,000 a day on hospital stays.
Copyright © 2009 Smh

Tobacco prices are still ruling high on the auction floors of Andhra Pradesh this season. So far 153.41 million kg of the crop has been sold in the State at an average price of Rs 108.59 a kg. It is expected that the auctions will conclude in the second fortnight of this month.

The actual production in the State may be more than 190 million kg and it could even touch the 200-million kg mark against the authorised quantity of 171 million kg. In spite of the substantial surplus, there is no depressing impact on the auction prices, as there is good demand in the international market.
Highest price

According to Mr V. Manmadha Rao, the regional manager of the Tobacco Board, the highest price of Rs 165 a kg was recorded on the northern light soils in West Godavari. “Prices have been ruling high on the five floors of West Godavari for the past one month or so, and so far roughly 40 million kg of the crop has been sold at an average price of Rs 134 a kg, which is the highest in the State, and even more than the Karnataka prices,” he said.
Shortfall in Zimbabwe

He attributed the rise in prices to the shortfall in the crop in Zimbabwe, due to the political crisis, and other favourable conditions in the international market. “However, China grows a huge quantity of tobacco and, as Tobacco Board Chairman, Mr J. Suresh Babu has been pointing out, if that country dumps it in the international market, we will run into trouble. We are trying to impress it upon the farmers and trying to reduce the crop size,” he said.
Difficult task

The task was becoming increasingly difficult, and even impossible, due to the high prices on the auction floors. The high prices of Virginia tobacco had a good impact on the prices of White burley tobacco as well. White burley is grown in the agency (mountainous) areas of East Godavari district, known as Yeleswaram burley in the international market. Burley prices have shot up to Rs 65 a kg. It is used for blends in cigarette manufacture.
Copyright © 2009 Thehindubusinessline

Over a period of two weeks in the months of January and May, the New Hampshire Liquor Commission conducted compliance checks on Nashua vendors and shops that have a license to sell tobacco products.

The purpose of the compliance checks was to see how well the age law is being followed and hopefully teach those who do sell tobacco products to underage customers.

The procedure found that 21 out of 99 shops visited by the Liquor Commission failed the compliance check. The administrative fine for these establishments is $250, and the clerks who sold were given a summons to appear in court.

While the majority of store clerks sold tobacco without even asking for identification, many did look at an ID. However, they did not take the time to actually figure out the ages of the buyers, assuming that if the customers showed them their identification, they must be old enough.

Such results were shocking not only to the members of the Liquor Commission, but also to residents of Nashua when this was first presented at the Nashua Tobacco-Free Coalition.
“Actually, I was surprised and disappointed that so many businesses failed the compliance checks. It shows that employees need better training in how to check the ages of their customers. It also appears that store owners need to take the issue of tobacco sales to minors more seriously,” says Bernadette Cameron, community health coordinator and also a member of the coalition.

An issue of such importance must be addressed. Tobacco should not be poisoning the youth of the city, and one of the ways to prevent this is by conducting more frequent compliance checks to make sure it is not sold to underage customers.
Copyright © 2009 Nashuatelegraph

Politicians have extraordinary shoulder joints that enable them to pat themselves on the back, and last week the president, a master of that calisthenic, performed it in the Rose Garden. His subject – aside from himself, as usual – was the bill by which Congress authorized the FDA to regulate tobacco. He called this “a bill that truly defines change in Washington” and “changes the way Washington works and who Washington works for.”

Our leaders are rarely so precisely wrong. The bill is a crystalline example of Washington business as usual – the protection of the strong. It was backed by America’s biggest tobacco company and by the Democrats’ fountain of funds, the trial bar.

Congress could ban cigarettes, therefore it could ban tobacco advertising. Instead, tobacco promotions will be even more severely curtailed. But Congress should not be allowed to effectively prohibit truthful communication about a legal product. Philip Morris, however, can live – indeed, can flourish – with the new restrictions. And lest courts rule that companies cannot be sued for behavior (selling cigarettes) governed, hence authorized, by a regulatory body, the bill stipulates that it shall not be construed to limit “the liability of any person under the product liability law of any state.”

Government policy regarding tobacco is contradictory. Nevertheless, it has been, on balance, a success: Americans are behaving much more sensibly.

But death and intelligence still cost tobacco companies 6,000 customers a day, so that many new smokers must be made daily.

Ironies abound. The expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program is supposed to be financed by increased tobacco taxes, so this health care depends on a renewable supply of smokers.

But governments cannot loot tobacco companies that do not flourish. In 1998, 46 states conspired to seize $206 billion from companies selling legal products made from a commodity subsidized by the governments that subsidize treatment of tobacco-related illnesses. The dubious premise was that smoking costs governments. Yet tobacco is the most heavily taxed consumer good (Massachusetts’ is $2.51 per pack), and pension plans assume that premature deaths of smokers will save billions in payments.

In the 1970s, public outrage killed the Ford Pinto, whose defects allegedly killed 59 Americans. Yet every year tobacco kills more than did World War II.

In the time it takes to read this column, three Americans will die of smoking-related illnesses. If you tarry to savor the lovely prose, four will die, so read fast.
Copyright © 2009 Bostonherald

SEIU hopes to reverse deep cuts aimed at the state’s 300,000 home-care health workers, many of them members of the union. Schwarzenegger and Republicans came away from last month’s special-election drubbing saying they were convinced that voters, who defeated a slate of budget-related ballot measures, had delivered a stout anti-tax message.

The union says that a poll it conducted after the election found that voters, though still smarting from a recent boost in the sales tax and other state fees, would support higher levies on some industries. The union would like to see a nearly 10% charge on oil pumped from California, saying it might generate around $1 billion from the oil industry, along with tax hikes on alcohol and cigarettes.

Those businesses contributed more than $2 million to the campaign in support of the ballot measures. In coming weeks, Medina said, the union will poll again to determine if public support for corporate tax hikes has grown.

Ultimately, he said, SEIU’s hope is to persuade enough Republicans in each house to join with the majority Democrats for the two-thirds legislative vote required for tax increases. Several of the half-dozen GOP lawmakers who voted for tax increases in February have been targeted with recall campaigns.

“We hope to coalesce enough public support to show these guys [Republican lawmakers] that they shouldn’t be afraid,” Medina said.

Copyright © 2009 Latimes

Government reported that it would ensure pictorial warnings like the skull and cross bones or a cancer-deformed face on the packets of cigarettes and other tobacco products starting with May 31st.
The government’s law officer said: “The Union of India undertakes to implement the Cigarette and Other Tobacco Products (Packing and Labeling) Rules, 2008, from May 31, 2009″.
The government’s undertaking came during the hearing of a lawsuit by NGO Health for Millions seeking implementation of the law on pictorial warnings on the packets of all tobacco products. The pictorial warning would occupy 40 percent of the space on the front of all packets.
The project came a day after the court queried the government on Jaisingh’s charge that despite a Group of Ministers at its meeting Feb 3 deciding that the pictorial warning should be carried on both sides of the packet, the government notification only provided for this on the front.
Jaisingh argued that this was due to the pressure of the tobacco lobby and was much against the wishes of former health minister A. Ramados, a solid supporter of the “No Smoking cause”.
On Feb 3rd Group of Ministers had a meeting in the court. At this meeting Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramaniam explained that while the agenda mentioned that the displays would be on both sides of packets, at the meeting did not specify this.
That’s why Group of Ministers had wanted to convene another meeting to correct the lacunae but this did not happen due to the insufficiency of the time in the run-up to the general elections.
According to a health ministry official, the pictorial warnings are a crucial step to protect the public from the hazards of tobacco and second-hand smoke, and to reduce the use of tobacco by the youth.

The Department of Health (DOH) urged Congress to pass immediately the bill mandating that picture-based health warnings be placed on half of the packaging of tobacco products, a health official said.

“We urge both chambers of Congress to discuss the bill in plenary and pass it because the Philippines ratified and signed the FCTC provisions on tobacco control,” Asuncion Anden of the DOH’s National Center for Health Promotion said in a forum Wednesday.

She was referring to the World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) in which the Philippines, as a signatory, should have passed a law supporting the mandate in September 2008.

“Why are images of health warning important? A picture of a health warning will convey a message that will bring out less confusion with words. Take for example the warning: ‘Smoking causes cancer.’ Not all people can read and not everyone who has read something has the same understanding of what they read. Ipakita ang totoo sa pakete (Show the truth of tobacco ills in picture warnings),” said Anden.

The packaging of tobacco products in our country only includes text warnings while those we export to Thailand, for example, include picture-based health messages, she added.

“We are glad to say that the Philippines is a tobacco exporter and follows regulations of other countries but in our country, bakit wala (why is there none)?” asked Anden.

When Senator Pia Cayetano chaired the committee on health, the reading for the bill went through smooth sailing but when the Senate leadership changed and the committee was handled by Senator Loren Legarda, it seemed Legarda was not anymore interested in pushing for the bill, said Anden.

The North bloc in the House of Representatives reportedly opposes the lobby for the bill’s passage because of the lack of “alternative livelihood” programs for the tobacco farmers or traders who have been benefiting from the P2-million industry, said Anden.

As a country in the Southeast Asian region, the Philippines is being eyed as an emerging market for tobacco use because it is already a sunset or mature industry in the West, said Anden.

“Worldwide, one person dies from exposure to tobacco smoke every six minutes and the tobacco industry is targeting the non-smoking youth to replace the consumers who die. The incidence of picking up the habit is increasing due to the perception that smoking is cool and they are enticed by glossy advertising from manufacturers,” said Anden.

Anden lamented that while 90 percent of Filipinos are aware of the ills of tobacco use, it has not been translated into behavior.

She said they plan to tap the youth to advocate tobacco control and possibly create another mascot, like “Yosi Kadiri,” which showed tobacco ills explicitly and had memory recall among the people.

In July 2002, the Philippines passed Republic Act 9211 to regulate the packaging, use, sale and distribution, and advertisements of tobacco products and for other purposes but “implementation is not yet full blown.”

“It is a very good law — that promoted smoke-free areas, informed the public on tobacco-related diseases, banned all tobacco advertisement and sponsorship and protected the youth from the smoking habit — but it had loopholes,” said Anden.

The local law mandated the removal of huge billboards advertising cigarette products except in point-of-sale (POS) or stores selling the products. However, manufacturers “found a way to go around the law” by distributing signs, posters or calendars featuring cigarette advertisement on the side, said Anden.

“For the tobacco industry, POS is the entire premise of the store—but the moment you advertise outside the store, that is against the law,” said Anden.

Anden cited that while billboards in Makati City, Silang town in Cavite province and Davao City don’t display tobacco products, “the battleground is so vast.”

As part of its campaign against cigarette smoking, the DoH is inviting the youth to attend a free concert featuring anti-smoking bands like Hale, SinoSikat and Itchy Worms at the Quirino Grandstand in Quezon City on May 31, with a walk-for-a-cause in the morning.

Copyright © 2009 Newsinfo.inquirer

City Hall is poised to join the growing debate over whether to ban smoking in bars, restaurants and other public buildings.

But legislation introduced Friday by Central West End Alderman Lyda Krewson comes with a catch: It would only take effect if St. Louis County passes a similar law, a proposition that appears increasingly unlikely.

The proposal has managed to irk both opponents of a smoking ban — who say the current economic climate is the wrong time to consider new restrictions on businesses — and anti-smoking advocates, who say the city’s conditional approach lacks punch.

Krewson’s bill does provide political cover for those, such as the mayor, who support limits on smoking in public places, but only if the ban goes beyond the city limit.

“Why do that? So that you don’t pit one business against another in St. Louis city and St. Louis County,” Krewson said. “Let’s address this regionally.”

Krewson points to her own ward, which includes the Delmar Loop. There, restaurants on either side of the city line could potentially face different smoking regulations, though their entrances are just yards apart.

The push in St. Louis comes as the smoking debate heats up locally and nationally. Illinois has had a statewide indoor smoking ban since January 2008. A proposal pending in Clayton — which, like the Loop and the Central West End, is a destination for diners — has generated heated reactions from both sides.

In St. Louis, the proposed smoking ban provides for few exemptions. Smoking would be banned at almost all eating and drinking establishments as well as offices, polling places and elevators. Casinos and sports arenas — including enclosed places in outdoor venues such as Busch Stadium — also are included in the ban. The legislation would allow smoking in up to 20 percent of hotel rooms. Certain private clubs and tobacco stores are also exempt.

Businesses would be required to post “no smoking” signs and remove ash trays.

Penalties include a fine of up to $50 for individuals smoking in a prohibited area, and up to $500 for businesses that repeatedly don’t comply.

Even before Krewson officially introduced her bill on Friday, she was already hearing from opponents — including restaurants in her own ward.

“It would be detrimental to businesses in the city,” said Yvonne Angieri, a manager at Herbie’s Vintage ‘72, which has moved into Balaban’s old location on Euclid Avenue. “We don’t want to be presented as another place you have to go to and follow the rules. That’s not what the hospitality business exists for.”

Tom Woolever, who runs Mamacita’s across town on Gravois Avenue, said it should be left up to the business owner.

“You put a big sign in the window. ‘You can smoke here’ or ‘You can’t smoke here’” Woolever said. “If you lose business because you are letting people smoke in there, fine.”

Diana L. Benanti, director of the Smoke-Free St. Louis City coalition, credited Krewson with taking a step toward enacting a smoking ban, though criticized the effort as too tentative.

“People we’ve talked to just don’t understand why we need to wait on the county,” Benanti said. “When we’re all sitting, waiting around for the other guy to do something, that doesn’t really spell progress.”

Indeed, the county appears no closer to passing a smoking ban than it did three years ago, when legislation died after an intense fight on the council. County Executive Charlie A. Dooley does not support a local indoor smoking ban.

At City Hall, Mayor Francis Slay, who has many family members in the restaurant business, has signaled his support for a bill that, like Krewson’s, lessens the risk that city businesses will lose customers that smoke.

However, whether the bill, likely headed for a committee hearing, even makes it to the mayor’s desk is questionable. The Board of Aldermen includes two members who operate bars, including Joe Vollmer, who runs Milo’s on Wilson Avenue.

Vollmer made clear Friday he will not support the smoking measure.

“Until it goes statewide, to me it’s a dead issue,” Vollmer said. “It’s hard enough in this economy.”

The graphic warnings which were placed on cigarettes packs are working but not in all countries, said anti-smoking researchers. They explained that packs which have shocking pictures are deterring youngsters from taking up the smoking habit.
But unfortunately in other states even graphic warnings can’t make smokers to quit. For example in Malaysia smoking epidemic cannot be decreased so easy.
In Malaysia more than 50% of adult males smoke cigarettes. About 50 Malaysian children below the age of 18 take up smoking every day. And also kill 10,000 Malaysians every year.
It is needed for more stringent measures for to make smokers to quit and the Government must come out definitely on its stand against the tobacco danger.
Health Minister from Malaysia started to work very hard for to make it harder for youngsters to buy cigarettes.
Health Minister said that graphic health warnings need to cover almost the entire surface of cigarette packages if they are to become more effective in convincing smokers to kick the deadly habit, new Health Canada research found.

“Findings suggest that increasing the current size of warnings of cigarette packages is not very effective to negatively affect image of smokers or perception of cigarette product attributes, unless health warning messages occupy the entire front panel,” the study showed.
The ban on packs smaller than 20 sticks was already targeted for July 2005. It was then deferred till mid-2006. The stay on the ban of 14-stick packs was then extended till 2010.

Source: Cigs4us.com

Outside a convenience store in Rehoboth, Warren resident Karen Sampson enjoys her Marlboro Light while hoping to strike it big on a scratch ticket.

She came up short.

Many cigarette smokers across Rhode Island say that’s just how they feel with the state increasing the cigarette excise tax by a $1, bringing it to the highest in the country at $3.46 a pack.

The state tax goes into effect at midnight Thursday. The price of a pack of cigarettes will be nearly $9.

“I think of going across border to New Hampshire and buying cartons for now… that’s a possibility,“ Sampson said.

Gov. Don Carcieri proposed the increase to help offset a $357 million deficit in this year’s budget.

The General Assembly also approved an increase in the tax on smokeless tobacco, snuff and pipe tobacco from 40 percent of the wholesale price to 80 percent.

Dan Luti lives in Seekonk but usually buys his cigarettes at a convenience store in Pawtucket. He’s not crazy about the Rhode Island tax hike.

“It used to be they were cheaper in Massachusetts and now they’re more expensive in Massachusetts and now with Rhode Island catching up with Massachusetts, it’s all the same. It’s horrible,“ he said.

The increase in the state excise tax follows a federal tax increase to $1.01, up from 39 cents that took affect on April 1.

Dr. Alfred Buxton is the director of cardiology at Rhode Island and The Miriam hospitals.

He’s also a spokesman for the American Heart Association of Rhode Island. He supports the hike in cigarette tax.

“I think it’s appropriate. Cigarette smoking is responsible for probably more deaths and more illness in this state and other states than any other social factor we can control,“ Buxton said.

Sampson and other smokers said the increase will likely force them to kick the habit.

“I’m not too happy about it,“ she said. “I would like to cut down and then quit.“

Said Luti: “I can’t afford to pay $9 or $10 for a pack of cigarettes.“

Source: Turnto10

In response to the April 1 increase in federal excise taxes, Sheetz Convenience Stores in Ohio are guaranteeing the lowest allowed price on cigarettes in the state.

“Ohio sets a state minimum on cigarette prices,” said Louie Sheetz, executive vice president, marketing, Sheetz, Inc., “and if we sold them for less than the state minimum, I’d end up in jail. However, I can promise you that Sheetz customers in Ohio won’t pay a penny more than the state minimum.”

Sheetz, Inc. also has been alerting its customers that the tobacco companies raised prices more than three weeks earlier than the April 1 scheduled increase in the federal excise tax. The tax is increasing as part of President Obama’s funding plan for State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP.) This program helps states provide health care to more than 5 million of the nation’s uninsured children through a matching funds program.

“The cigarette manufacturers think they’re pulling an April Fools trick on their customers,” said Mr. Sheetz. “Consumers were expecting an increase April 1, but the tobacco companies actually raised the prices as early as March 11, which forced us to raise our retail prices. Now, they’re just pocketing that extra money. Add to that the fact that in the past few weeks, they’ve also raised their own prices, and so now they’re taking in an extra seven bucks per carton. In my book, that’s more than an April Fool’s trick. That’s just wrong.”

Sheetz held off on passing on the increases as long as possible because it wanted to protect consumers. Stores posted notices at the counter explaining that manufacturers took the increases early. Mr. Sheetz sympathizes with customers who express grief and anger when confronted with the higher prices.

“I’m angry too,” said Mr. Sheetz. “It was unnecessary for the cigarette manufacturers to raise prices early, and I’m calling them out on it. At least we’re able to guarantee our customers the lowest price on cigarettes in Ohio. That will help.”

The sting of a new higher federal cigarette tax is burning a little early at most local convenience stores, and the pain to the pocketbook probably is only going to get worse.

Ask Daryl Johnson, who has seen his favorite Newport brand jump more than a dollar to $5.02 – and it’s still more than a week until the 62-cent per-pack federal increase kicks in on April 1.

“I think I might have to stop smoking,” Johnson said while standing inside the BP service station on York Street.

For a one-pack-a-day smoker, that 62 cents adds up to about $4.34 week or about $226 a year.

“It’s going to cause people to pick up another habit or basically start buying them by the carton,” said Johnson, who has been a smoker since he was 16.

Right now, the federal cigarette tax is 39 cents per pack, making the new federal tax $1.01. The additional funds will go to the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, a federal/state insurance program which aims to expand health coverage to children whose families make too much to qualify for Medicaid but too little to purchase private insurance. But that’s likely to be just the first of it for South Carolina smokers.

The state General Assembly is considering a 50 cent per pack increase to 57 cents, and this year it looks like the increase has a good chance of passing. That brings that same pack of cigarettes up to $5.52.

The push to raise the state’s cigarette tax, now the lowest in the country by 10 cents per pack, has been hard-fought over several years. Last year, Gov. Mark Sanford vetoed the increase and promises to do so again if the increase doesn’t have a corresponding tax decrease. Because the House was divided on how to spend the additional money, it couldn’t muster enough votes to override the veto.

Now, both sides of the House think they have a compromise bill that they can agree on, said House Speaker Bobby Harrell.

Harrell, a Republican from Charleston, has modeled the plan after an Oklahoma program that uses the cigarette tax revenue to get matching federal funds. That federal money would be used to give tax credits to small businesses to help provide insurance for low-income people.

The plan proposed last year was objectionable because it expanded Medicare, he said.

The new plan is driven by the private sector and gives tax credits for small businesses to provide health insurance. The business would receive a tax credit, which would cover about 75 percent of its cost of buying the insurance. Employees also could get the credit if their employer opts not to buy health insurance, he said.

The additional 50-cent tax would generate about $150 million a year. That would be matched 2-to-1 by the federal government, which means the benefit to the state is about $450 million a year. The insurance program would apply to people earning 200 percent of the federal poverty level, Harrell said. That’s $21,660 for an individual or $44,100 for a family of four. Those scales could be adjusted.

Harrell said Oklahoma was able to take advantage of the matching funds by applying for a specific waiver. Since the South Carolina plan follows that plan, he is confident the state could get those same funds.

The new plan also provides about $5 million for smoking cessation efforts. The state currently puts no money toward that.

Harrell expects the bill to be approved by the House and the Senate. He doesn’t know if the governor will veto it, but he’s confident there would be the votes to override it.

But whatever happens, smokers will pay the price.

Doris Hightower, the assistant manager of the Circle K convenience store on East Pine Log Road, has been alerting customers who purchase cigarettes in her store for weeks that prices will soon go up. Customer reactions have been mixed, she said.

“It’s kind of crazy; I don’t really understand it,” Circle K customer Jonathan Whiten said of the increase. He said the tax increase probably won’t make him stop smoking, but rather he’ll switch to a cheaper brand.

“Smokers are always the easy targets,” said Darnell Peterson, who said he has smoked for about 10 years. “When it’s time to take away rights or raise taxes, we are always picked on.”

Though Peterson said the increase will make his habit more expensive, he doesn’t plan to quit anytime soon.

“I refuse to let the government run my life,” he said.

Smoking by the Numbers

$4 – a typical price for a pack of cigarettes around Aiken **

$4.90 – average cost with the additional 62 cent federal tax **

$5.40 – average cost if SC adds additional 50 cent state tax

Increased costs for a one-pack-a-day smoker with new federal and proposed 50 cent state tax increase

$1.12 per day

$7.84 per week

$407.68 per year

7 cents – the lowest per-pack state cigarette tax – South Carolina

17 cents – the 2nd lowest per-pack cigarette tax – Missouri

$2.75 – the highest per-pack state cigarette tax – New York

$4.25 – what New York City smokers pay in state and city per pack taxes

$1.21 average state cigarette tax

$32.1 million – amount SC collected in cigarette tax in 2006, the 5th lowest in the country

Rick Roberts is a regular buyer of cigarettes at convenience stores in Missouri, but that could change April 1.

A resident of McClure, Ill., Roberts makes the weekly drive across the Bill Emerson Memorial Bridge into the Show Me State to purchase tobacco.

But he is contemplating quitting and blames it primarily on a cigarette tax increase set to go into effect next month.

The new federal tax increase will mean Roberts and smokers throughout the United States will pay 159 percent more tax on a pack of cigarettes. The current tax is 39 cents per pack, but after March 31 that increases to $1.01. Money generated from the additional revenue will fund health care for low-income children.

“People have the right to not breathe the secondhand smoke, but I think it’s ridiculous that they assume that I also have no rights when it comes to smoking,” said Roberts, who already switched to a cheaper brand of cigarettes to offset the cost. “I think with the excessive taxes on cigarettes, smokers are paying more than their fair share.”

Local convenience store managers said they’ve already raised their prices because their suppliers began applying the increase earlier in the month. And while they’ve heard numerous complaints from their customers, the managers agreed that kicking the habit will be hard on smokers.

“The customers complain, but they will still buy,” said Dana Abel, manager of D Mart convenience store in Jackson. “Some of them have come in to purchase a cheaper brand, but most won’t switch. If those people decide to quit, it won’t be because of a tax increase.”

Michael Marston, manager of Winks convenience store in Cape Girardeau, said he has noticed more customers purchasing the cheaper brands.

“I don’t like to see a big increase in taxes on anything, whether it’s cigarettes or alcohol,” Marston said. “I don’t think it’s right to target one specific item that people buy.

“Though it’s an addictive habit, it will be difficult for the tax to stop people from quitting,” he said. “I think if the government really wanted to make people stop they’ll have to raise the prices much higher.”

Bill Phelps, spokesman for Altria, parent company of Phillip Morris USA, said his corporation opposes the tax increase and encourages displeased consumers to contact their legislator about the issue. Of Missouri’s five members of the U.S. House of Representatives who voted for the State Children’s Health Insurance Program bill that authorized the tax, Jo Ann Emerson was the only Republican from the state to vote for the legislation, which passed in January. Twelve of Illinois’ 18 representatives voted for the bill’s passage.

“We’re not the ones who set the price for retailers, and that surprises a lot of people,” Phelps said. “We sell to the wholesaler, who then sells to retailers, who then set the price for the consumer.”

Bruce Domazlicky, director of the Center for Economic and Business Research at Southeast Missouri State University, doubts the tax increase will have a significant effect on the economy, though he said illegal bootlegging of cigarettes could eventually happen. For bootlegging to occur, he said, the increase would have to have a fairly significant effect on individual smokers’ budgets.

He said that because Missouri is ranked 49th among state tax rates, he said the sharp increase could affect more smokers’ budgets and cause them to quit. Missouri’s state tax is 17 cents per pack while Illinois’ 98-cent state tax is 28th highest. Ill. Gov. Pat Quinn is proposing raising the state’s tax on cigarettes by $1 per pack to help generate additional revenue in efforts to decrease the state’s $11.5 billion budget deficit.

“Government seems to like to tax cigarettes, especially since much less than a majority of people actually smoke them anymore,” Domazlicky said. “I would assume that if the tax rate gets high enough that even more people will decide to quit, which will cut into the anticipated revenue from the tax increase. I would hope some of the increased tax revenue is put into smoking cessation programs to help those smokers who would like to quit.”

Ronald Williams, an assistant professor in the Department of Health, Human Performance and Recreation at Southeast, said that while he understands smokers’ frustration, he believes the tax increase is a small price to pay to save the state money on smoking-related illnesses and deaths.

“Smoking-related illness, not to mention those associated with secondhand smoke, cause a tremendous burden on the public health and health-care systems in the U.S.,” Williams said. “This method of taxation is simply a method to help reduce a percentage of that burden. The overall outcome is, hopefully, a better quality of life and lessened health care costs for all of us.”