The highest federal marginal income tax rate in U.S. history was 94%, during World War II. It applied only to income over $200,000 (approximately $2.5 or $3 million in today’s money).
Cigarette taxes are typically calculated per pack, not as a percentage of the pre-tax price. In New York City, you will pay a federal tax of $1.01 per pack (which is included in the retail price), a state tax of $4.35, and a city tax of $1.50, for a total of $6.86 in taxes. That is almost certainly more than 100% of the pre-tax value of the cigarettes.
Fuel taxes are typically calculated per unit volume, not as a percentage of the pre-tax value of the fuel; nevertheless, in many countries today the tax is worth several times as much as the fuel itself. Even in the US, there have been rare occasions in some sates when the combined state and federal tax on motor fuels has been slightly higher than the pre-tax value of the fuel. The last time I remember that happening here in Maine was around 1999 or 2000.
This has been debunked every time it is argued. It does not matter how healthy the population is because no matter what, people get old, they get sick and then they have expensive end of life care before they die. Living longer means that many will be supported by taxpayers for a longer time
A guy that smokes 4 packs per day dies younger, pays into the system but collects little if any, and saves the taxpayers his 20 to 30 years of retirement and end of life care.
I wonder if Five-O will run stings with 94 years olds going into store to buy cigarettes while still underage. That seems an excellent use of law enforcement resources and some extra income for retirees.
My guess is that the legislator knows that the bill has no chance of passing and figured that he would get more media attention by setting the purchase age at 100 instead of banning smokes entirely.
IMHO, it is censurable. Legislation is not a joke. If you want to ban tobacco, then propose the ban. Don’t make a mockery of the law by proposing such an absurdity.
It’s a way of banning something without actually saying it. The early Federal drug control laws were framed as tax statutes for much the same reason, because at the time it was unclear that the government had the power to simply ban the drugs, or even limit them to prescribed therapeutic uses, as per the Harrison Narcotic Act.
Yes, but a state unquestionably has the power to ban tobacco products; whether it is wise or not is another issue. There is no need for Hawaii to engage in the subterfuge that the feds did in regard to drugs and still do with regards to machineguns and Obamacare.
Around here service-station robberies, mostly committed by broke guys in nicotine withdrawal (‘all the cash in till and a carton of Marlboro Red’) almost never involved shootings.