you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

It’s not clear from the article whether this is a one time decrease from the noticeable tax increase, whether people adjusted to the higher price or it continues reducing smoking, or how much is credit to increased spending on smoking cessation

Most important, it’s not clear whether that info helps anyone else. As a resident of a small state, I imagine we’d just have people jump the border and buy elsewhere. Most parts of California are a much longer drive to a different state with lower vice taxes.

Maybe it’s just an argument for a significant increase in federal taxes, but I can’t imagine that actually happening in the era of corporate ownership of politicians and blatant class warfare. Actually it’s a dream come true for Republican outrage politics, where they can play on emotions, populist bombast and “muh freedumb” without actually doing anything useful

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    People could also be getting thier cigarettes by other means.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago*

    Well it was based on survey responders, which has well known accuracy limitations. So, possibly there could be a factor of smoking becoming less socially acceptable so people less likely to admit to it — doesn’t seem likely to happen in just one state.

    The legal ways of avoiding a vice tax are other states, native reservations, and military posts. Even if increased vice tax created large scale grey market, the evidence is the taxes or intervention did work.

  • source
  • parent