Louisiana House Bill HB792

Louisiana 2015 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/21/15
• Refer: 4/22/15

Caption

Levies an additional tax on cigarettes and tobacco products and levies a tax on certain vapor products and electronic cigarettes

Impact

The enactment of HB 792 would lead to a substantial increase in state revenue derived from tobacco taxes, which are earmarked to support the Ad Valorem Tax Offset Fund. This funding is intended to mitigate tax burdens on property owners through offsets, thereby affecting local taxation mechanisms positively. The increased rates may also deter smoking and the use of tobacco products, aligning with public health initiatives aimed at reducing the prevalence of smoking-related illnesses in Louisiana.

Summary

House Bill 792 proposes a significant increase in taxes on various tobacco products including cigars, cigarettes, smoking tobacco, and smokeless tobacco, alongside the introduction of taxes on vapor products and electronic cigarettes. The tax structure would see the rates for cigarettes raised from 36 cents to $1.08 per pack, while the tax on cigars invoiced at $120 per 1,000 or less would see an increase from 8% to 16% of the invoice price, and those over $120 from 20% to 40%. Furthermore, a tax of five cents per milliliter of liquid nicotine for vapor products would be implemented, reflecting a comprehensive approach to regulate tobacco and associated health products more stringently.

Sentiment

Public sentiment regarding HB 792 appears to be divided. Proponents argue that the tax increases are necessary to curb tobacco use, particularly among younger populations, and to ensure that the state has sufficient funding to manage the public health impacts associated with tobacco use. Conversely, critics express concerns over the potential for job losses in the tobacco industry and the burden that such increased costs could impose on consumers, particularly lower-income individuals who rely on affordable tobacco products.

Contention

Notable points of contention surrounding this bill include debates over the effectiveness of increased taxation as a deterrent for tobacco use and its potential regressive impact on low-income communities. Some lobbyists for the tobacco industry have raised concerns regarding the possibility of increased black-market sales of tobacco products in response to heightened taxation. Discussions have also highlighted how the proposed bill suggests a shift in funding priorities, where additional tax revenues would be tied to larger budgetary implications depending on the passage of subsequent constitutional amendments.