New Hampshire House Bill HB290

New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/7/25
• Refer: 1/7/25
• Report DNP: 2/26/25
• Report Pass: 2/26/25

Caption

Increasing the taxes on cigarettes and electronic cigarettes and establishing a committee to study taxes on tobacco and other nicotine products.

Impact

The impact of HB290 on state laws is expected to generate a significant increase in revenue, particularly for the General Fund and the Education Trust Fund. The Department of Revenue Administration forecasts an indeterminable increase in revenues beginning in fiscal year 2026, largely dependent on consumer behavior following the tax hikes. However, the ability to project future sales figures remains uncertain due to variables such as market demand and the adaptability of consumers to changes in pricing.

Summary

House Bill 290 (HB290) aims to increase taxation on cigarettes and electronic cigarettes, raising the tax rate on each package of cigarettes from $1.78 to $2.78. Additionally, the bill proposes a significant rise in taxes on electronic cigarettes, adjusting the tax for closed cartridges and liquids from a fixed rate of $0.30 per milliliter to 65% of the wholesale price, with similar adjustments for other nicotine products. The legislation reflects a broader effort to enhance state revenue and potentially address public health concerns associated with tobacco and nicotine consumption.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB290 is mixed, with supporters emphasizing its potential to discourage tobacco use and generate funds for vital state services, particularly education. Advocates argue that increased taxes on tobacco products can lead to improved public health outcomes by making such products less financially accessible to consumers, especially youth. Conversely, critics express concern that the tax increases may disproportionately affect low-income populations who may rely on these products, thus intensifying economic inequalities.

Contention

Notable points of contention in the discussions around HB290 include debates over the effectiveness of higher taxes as a deterrent for tobacco usage and concerns regarding the potential enforcement challenges that may arise from such taxation changes. Additionally, the establishment of a committee to study taxes on tobacco and other nicotine products is seen by some as a positive step towards informed policy-making, while others view it as an opportunity for further delay in implementing necessary changes to tobacco taxation.