US Federal taxation news


Recommended Posts

Quote

to a weight-based system of $49.56 per pound and no less than 10.066 cents per cigar.

I know it is the thin end of the wedge but how I would love to have that tax rate in the UK. But then I am grateful not to have the AUS rate...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canada’s brutal rates top them all
Nope.
Look into what OZ is getting bent over for. We are only half way to what they are. A pack of darts up here only costs like $15, but in OZ they are around $40. Taxation without representation, baby.

Sent from my SM-G973W using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Zedman05 said:

Look into what OZ is getting bent over for.

We're marginally worse on cigars. 50 cab of Lusitanias is sub $3,000 in Australia but over $3,000 in Canada. But it's pretty close.

We're better on very cheap cigars since we're by value though and they're by weight.

Edit: We do have the stores operating on native land selling without provincial taxes though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wookie said:

What is the USD equivalent price for a Lusitania in Canada now? Or a cab of RASS?

“If you have to ask, you can’t afford it.”

-Anonymous Snob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kaptain Karl said:

House and senate buddy 

Dunno. The R’s have managed to split themselves in two, but this borders on the beginnings of a forbidden topic, so we will leave it here...

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Wookie said:

What is the USD equivalent price for a Lusitania in Canada now? Or a cab of RASS?

Until recently take standard international price and multiply by about 3.3 (depends on the province). The native stores would be about a multiple of 1.8 to 2. I think it might have gone up recently but I haven't seen the new numbers.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Next politician that asks me for a contribution, I'm gonna shove a cigar so far up their azz they're going to have to set fire to their nose to smoke it. Then tell them, "There's your contribution."

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's brutal for pipe tobacco. $49 a pound is almost a 100% tax on most bulk blends. Really a shame

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, who could say "no" to keeping new mothers from dying during childbirth?

"Sin tax" is always promoted as some sort of financial solution but it never works.  As "sin products" usage declines, tax needs to rise to retain revenue, so "legal" usage declines more, and on and on.  So, if intelligent people are promoting a sin tax (and I'm not making that assumption), the motive isn't truly revenue related....it's to eliminate the taxable item or activity.  

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Chibearsv said:

 

"Sin tax" is always promoted as some sort of financial solution but it never works.  As "sin products" usage declines, tax needs to rise to retain revenue, so "legal" usage declines more, and on and on.  So, if intelligent people are promoting a sin tax (and I'm not making that assumption), the motive isn't truly revenue related....it's to eliminate the taxable item or activity.  

This logic actually applies to all taxes, including the income tax. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Chibearsv said:

Wow, who could say "no" to keeping new mothers from dying during childbirth?

"Sin tax" is always promoted as some sort of financial solution but it never works.  As "sin products" usage declines, tax needs to rise to retain revenue, so "legal" usage declines more, and on and on.  So, if intelligent people are promoting a sin tax (and I'm not making that assumption), the motive isn't truly revenue related....it's to eliminate the taxable item or activity.  

The argument holds if revenue is the only objective. In theory, sin taxes are targeted to disincent people from engaging in the targeted activity, thus saving socially -borne expenses created by those of us choosing to engage in them. Absent that benefit, the tax becomes solely punitive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Community Software by Invision Power Services, Inc.