Does the 62 cent per pack tobacco tax hike by the Obama administration violate his promise to not raise taxes on people making under $250,000.00 per year?

I’m pretty sure he was referring to income tax, not “sin” tax.

Also, I’ve decided to quit smoking as a result of the tax hike. So yay Obama!

Imposing a tax raise on income is not the same as imposing a tax raise on tobacco. Taxes were bound to go up somewhere, and this tax hike applies to everyone. If he raised taxes on anything else that was universal, it would be exactly the same. Sales taxes like that are not thought of to be targeted toward a specific income level because, arguably, it is someone’s choice to smoke or not, and therefore, to buy the cigarettes or not. If you’re below the poverty line and you need to cut expenses somewhere, cigarettes seem like a pretty good place to start. Maybe that money will also go to the healthcare your child needs for inhaling second hand smoke.

@lataylor, Admit it, you’re pissed. You found some rationale (his campaign promise) for making Obama wrong for what he’s already done. And you’re looking for validation from us.

Given your question, I’m guessing you’re not interested in that, and you resent having to pay more money – money you don’t really have – to pay some tax you don’t want to pay. You know, I can’t imagine how frickin hard it has to be to quit smoking. But just complaining and getting justified for your complaint – that’s old school. Good luck with that.

I’m making some assumptions, and I could be wrong. This is me shooting from the hip.

Though I am a smoker, and therefore would prefer not to pay more for my addiction, I don’t see this as a violation of his tax promises. Income tax is not the same as sales tax.

Isn’t this a good thing?

Focused taxation. You smoke so we tax you to pay the bills.

Tax gas for streets and interstates.

I don’t drive. Tax the shit out of gas to pay for roads. I don’t use them.

Not at all!

In California the “no new taxes” Republican Gov had no problem with a 10% tobacco tax increase that went into effect today. Look on it as a user fee instead of a tax if it makes you feel better. lol

Or could it be that you don’t even smoke and you have no other nits to pick<;P

Trustinglife , Thank you for giving me the benefit of doubt. Actually, I am a phyician and have never smoked, and I counsel patients to quit smoking everyday. There is a nice WSJ article that outlines the inverse relationship between income and smoking and this tax will definitely target poorer Americans over wealthier ones (just a fact).

I think politicians should not make promises that are disenguinuous. This won’t be the last tax hike on those making under $250,000.00. Heck, the WH has already convened a task force to create entirely new taxes to pay for a deficit 4 times the size of any deficit in history.

I do not agree with sin taxes because they are discriminatory in that supporters only want to create sin taxes on items they do not use. Why no huge alcohol tax, obesity tax, vegetable oil tax, cookie tax, soda tax, diabetes medication tax, SCUBA diving tax, fast car tax, fast food tax, downhill skiing tax, hang-gliding tax, high school sports tax?

@TitsMcGhee – thanks for your concern about my twins, but I do not smoke.

Smoking is a luxury. It’s not as if he’s raising taxes on food or clothing or education (as far as I know). I think raising taxes on smoking is a good idea. It either forces someone to stop smoking or for them to pay more. I think the same should be done for alcohol as well.

@lataylor: There are significant taxes on alcohol already, and sales taxes on things like vegetable oil, cookies, soda, cars, etc. The tax hike is on cigarettes because those who really want to smoke will pay. They aren’t a necessity, and anyone, regardless of income, can be effected. I hardly think Obama has been dishonest in saying that he won’t raise taxes for a certain income group because he has raised this specific tax across the board; he isn’t focusing on one group, like some income tax increases.

@TitsMcGhee But a tax on tobacco is focusing on “one group” – smokers. And alcohol taxes pale in comparsion. As for sales tax, those also apply to tobacco already. Do you know where the tobacco tax revenue goes? To children? Really?

here the tax is about 8$ per pack…..

Tobacco’s bad for you anyway…

I smoke and I still think it’s a fine and really a kind of good idea. Everyone that smokes is being taxed regardless of what their income is. If they don’t like it, they can quit. It’s an easily solved issue.

@adreamofautumn
Have you ever had to quit smoking? It’s not easy.

Well, sales tax does disproportionally effect lower income people. Those with a low income spend a larger percentage of their incomes on sales tax than those with a larger income.

@tinyfaery – great answer

@Vinifera7 I know it isn’t easy, but it’s do-able. That’s what I meant. It is possible to quit and therefore avoid the tax.

@lataylor I see now you meant your question exactly as written. I read into it something incorrect. My bad! I got 3 GA’s, so I’m guessing some other people inferred the same tone I did when reading your question. But in any case, I stand corrected, and I appreciate your graciousness in how you corrected me.

@lataylor: Well you could argue that any tax focuses on one group of people, therefore targeting that group. Income tax is focused on people who make an income, sales taxes on clothes are focused on non-nudists, inheritance tax is focused on those who have recently deceased relatives. Not all taxes will apply to all people. General taxes like a tobacco tax are meant to be as universal as possible, and I have trouble believing that the current administration sat around trying to pick a tax that will backwardly do what they can’t outright do (raise income tax for lower income individuals and families). By your logic, any tax that is raised that is not income tax for the rich above your income tax bracket is going against his promise. Leaving all other taxes as they exist now is pretty preposterous, imho.

@TitsMcGhee – exactly, and this was the argument that then-Senator Obama’s claim when he repeatedly said “If you make under $250,000.00, per year, you will not see you taxes go up, period” was disenguinuous, because dozens of taxes he had considered or mentioned would result in a greater tax burden on the middle class (another strong example includes capital gains).

@lataylor: Do you have a source for that quote? I’d like to read it in context.

Really?

Tax is Tax, no matter what you call it.

Obamanation has already spent more money than every president in history, combined.

@DrBill…do you have more than just your say so to back that up?

It was on MS-NBC, CNN and FOX news yesterday (3–31-09) and today (4–1-09)

I mean some actual numbers.

i have a bad habit of not believing everything i see or hear on television…even from the “straight” media

That’s a bad habit?