« Previous · Tax Update Blog Home · Next »
A policy debate in Oregon has an eerie resemblance to the the Iowa Legislature's impending $1 hike in cigarette taxes. Like the Iowa scheme, the Oregon hike will be linked to new health insurance programs.
The Tax Policy Blog finds this unwise:
There really is no justification for raising the cigarette tax to pay for this children's health care program. If the program is worthwhile on its own, it should be funded by general revenue. Taxing cigarettes and funding a children's health insurance program are totally separate, and there is absolutely no legitimate reason for why one should fund the other beyond the fact that cigarette tax hikes are easier sells politically than raising taxes on everyone.
What's even stranger is the way that Iowa's tax hikers say the higher tax will reduce smoking. While it's nice that they admit that taxes affect behavior, it means that if the tax is successful in affecting behavior, the new programs will lose their funding as smokers quit. If you think they'll cut back the programs if the funding dries up, you're smoking something much stronger than Winstons.
Bookmark: del.icio.us • Digg • reddit
The items included in the Tax Update Blog are informational only and are not meant as tax advice. Consult with your tax advisor to determine how any item applies to your situation.
Joe Kristan writes the Tax Update items, and any opinions expressed or implied are not neccesarily shared by anyone else at Roth & Company, P.C. Address questions or comments on Tax Updates to