Louisiana House Bill HB487

Louisiana 2015 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/3/15
• Refer: 4/3/15
• Refer: 4/13/15

Caption

Levies an additional tax on cigarettes and dedicates the monies (OR +$175,000,000 SD RV See Note)

Impact

The additional tax imposed by HB 487 is expected to generate significant funding for the state, estimated to reach around $175 million. These funds will then be allocated to a variety of public health needs, including the Louisiana Medical Assistance Trust Fund and multiple LSU health initiatives. Significantly, this funding will enhance medical services and support for cancer-related programs, reflecting an emphasis on improving the health infrastructure within Louisiana.

Summary

House Bill 487 proposes to levy an additional tax on cigarettes, increasing the total tax from 36 cents to $1.08 per pack. This increase is aimed at generating revenues that will be allocated to various health-related programs and initiatives within the state of Louisiana. The bill establishes a special treasury fund, the 'Healthier Louisiana Fund', where the additional tax revenues will be deposited. This fund is designated for several important health programs, providing a framework for the state's investment in public health.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 487 appears largely supportive from public health advocates and various community organizations focused on better health outcomes. They commend the bill as a proactive step towards funding and improving healthcare services in the state. However, there may be concerns from retail tobacco sellers and smokers who view the tax increase as burdensome, potentially leading to decreased sales and consumption of cigarettes.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the implications of increased taxation and whether this may serve to push consumers towards less regulated alternatives or illicit markets. While public health advocates hail the benefits for funding healthcare, some stakeholders are concerned about the possible economic repercussions on businesses that rely on tobacco sales. The debate represents a broader discourse on balancing public health priorities with economic considerations in the state.