state call to actioN
Spread the word!
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
NEBRASKA – Stop a Tax Hike on Vaping!
current status
Bill
Introduced
Passed
Senate
Passed
House
Signed by
Governor
Week of 08.12.24 – Amended to remove tobacco tax language / nicotine
07.30.24 – Hearing: Revenue Committee (09:30:00 7/30/2024 Room 1524)
07.29.24 – Notice of Hearing, Revenue Committee, July 30, 9:30 AM
LB 34, which started out as LB 1 and contained a proposal to tax all vapor products at 30% of wholesale, has been amended to remove all tobacco tax language. Thank you to everyone who participated in this Call to Action!
The special session isn’t over, so we’re keeping an eye out for any new proposals, but we are concluding this call to action as successful.
Raising taxes on safer alternatives to smoking is unjustifiable as it takes away a clear advantage that vaping or other smoke-free alternatives have over combustible cigarettes. Making safer nicotine products less affordable has a direct effect on the number of people choosing to switch away from smoking.
- State that you are opposed to LB 1, Sec. 61 and any legislation that would make safer alternatives to smoking less affordable.
- Share your experience with switching to vapor products. If affordability compared to continuing to smoke was a motivating factor for trying vaping or other smoke-free products, be sure to include that in your comments. Conversely, if the already high initial cost of these products delayed your first purchase, highlight this instead. Be sure to include any changes in your health that you’ve experienced as a result of switching to safer nicotine or tobacco products.
- Taxes on traditional cigarettes are intended to discourage use. But, e-cigarettes and other smoke-free tobacco products are estimated to be 98 – 99% less harmful than smoking, discouraging use is counter to the goals of reducing smoking rates.
- Research shows that increasing taxes on smoke-free alternatives (like vaping) reduces quit attempts and quitting. Economists at the University of Georgia recently published an analysis of a proposed federal tax on vaping and concluded that “the unintended effects of ENDS taxation may considerably undercut or even outweigh any public health gains.”
- Other governments are taking exactly the opposite approach. Public Health England (the government public health agency) explicitly endorses a policy of encouraging people who smoke to switch to e-cigarettes and vapor products.
- Sin taxes are regressive. People who smoke and those who switch to vaping and other smoke-free alternatives are disproportionately poor and low income people. Sin taxes place unnecessary burdens on an already financially challenged group. To make matters worse, people in the low-income bracket are less likely to be insured and lack access to health care providers. The affordable resources available to these people have low success rates.
- Sin taxes on safer nicotine products sends a confusing and inaccurate message to would-be adopters that combustible and smoke-free products present similar risks. The result of this message is that more people, those who otherwise would have switched to a smoke-free product, will be encouraged to continue smoking.
- Be brief, be kind, and say thank you 🙂
Bill Text