Levies an additional state excise tax on vapor products and electronic cigarettes (OR +$1,200,000 GF RV See Note)
The impact of HB 271 on state laws primarily concerns the regulation of tobacco and vapor products. With the increasing popularity of vaping, lawmakers are looking to impose higher taxes on these products as part of broader strategies to influence public health outcomes and to mitigate the use among younger populations. By instituting a higher excise tax, the bill also aims to align more closely with existing tobacco tax frameworks, thereby reinforcing the regulatory context surrounding nicotine products in Louisiana.
House Bill 271, introduced by Representative Hoffmann, aims to increase the state excise tax on vapor products and electronic cigarettes. The bill proposes raising the tax rate from $0.05 to $0.13 per milliliter of consumable nicotine liquid solution used in these products. This change is positioned as a measure to generate additional revenue for the state, with estimated increases in state funds projected to be around $1,200,000 from this tax adjustment. The effective date for this new tax rate is set for July 1, 2017, with specific rules governing its application to wholesale and retail sales.
The sentiment surrounding HB 271 appears to be mixed among legislators and public health advocates. Proponents generally support the bill as a necessary step for generating revenue and combating potential public health issues associated with increased vaping. They argue that higher taxes could discourage usage, particularly among teenagers. However, opponents express concerns that the tax increase could disproportionately impact low-income individuals who use these products, as well as potentially stifling a market that is still developing.
Notable points of contention regarding HB 271 center around the balance between public health considerations and economic implications for businesses selling vapor products. Critics worry about the potential for increased taxation to drive consumers to unregulated markets or increase illegal sales, while supporters argue that this tax is vital for public health initiatives. Furthermore, the need for retailers to file an inventory with the Department of Revenue raises concerns about administrative burden and compliance for businesses in the vapor market.