Cigars and Cigarettes - News

electronic cigarettes - the odorless, cancer-free, and healthy way to smoke!”
The sheer novelty of this claim is probably what brought smokers and non-smokers to try the electronic cigarettes or “e-cigarettes,” a product that has created a lot of buzz in the Philippine market in the past month. It is typically marketed as a “safer way” to smoke or quit smoking.
Marketing executive Baroy Morga, 31, is virtually the only e-cigarette user in the company he works for, and only one of a few Filipinos who are trying out the product. He has been smoking an average of 15 sticks a day for 10 years now and has been trying to quit the habit.
The e-cigarette, he said, has eased off the amount of nicotine and tar levels he used to get from real cigarettes while at the same time satisfying his cigarette cravings.
“I want to quit, so lowering the nicotine levels is a good start. I’ve tried the nicotine patches, but it only addresses the physical [need for nicotine]. The e-cigarettes address the oral fixation, the act of smoking. So that’s possibly a good combination,” he said.
Tagged as “revolutionary” and “pioneering” products, these battery-operated plastic devices look like and are used like real cigarettes, except that they give off an odorless mist.
As such, they can be used in airports, workplaces, or restaurants - a definite plus for Morga, who can puff on an e-cigarette at his desk when he feels the need to.
E-cigarettes are charged using a special unit, and are fitted with replaceable cartridges that contain nicotine (but some come without it), flavorings, and propylene glycol which produces the smoke-like vapor.
The products were invented in 2004 by a Hong Kong-based firm.

Something as simple as the color of a cigarettes packet can dupe smokers into thinking the cigarettes it contains posses less risk to their health, according to a study published Tuesday.
The study, conducted by researchers at the University of Waterloo in Canada showed that, in addition to words like “light”, “mild”, and “low-tar”, which have been banished from cigarettes packets in more than 40 countries, design elements and color are being used by tobacco companies to lull smokers into a false sense of security about the harmful effects of smoking.
“Substantial proportions of adults in the study associated perceptions of risk and tar delivery with package design,” the study’s authors wrote.
The study involved cigarettes packets that were specifically designed and shown in pairs to some 600 adult smokers and non-smokers, who were then asked questions about what they thought the content of the cigarettes packets would be like.
The cigarettes packets were made to look and feel as if they were real and contained cigarettes, but the brand names were created, to avoid “contamination”.
Each cigarettes packet carried a pictorial health warning, as required under Canadian law.
The pairs of cigarettes packets that were shown to participants in the study were identical, except for one element: either a term such as “full flavour” or “light”, or a design element on the cigarettes packet, such as the color, were different.
The researchers found that around 80 % of participants in the study believed that cigarettes in a light blue cigarettes packet would deliver less tar, have a smoother taste and pose less of a danger to health than those in darker blue packaging.
70 % of study participants said a cigarettes packet with a white symbol would deliver less tar, be smoother and less unhealthy than cigarettes in a cigarettes packet with a grey symbol.
And an equal number - seven in 10 - believed the same benefits to be true of cigarettes in a cigarettes packet bearing the words “charcoal filter” and showing an image of the filter.
Smokers were more likely than non-smokers to be duped by the imagery, words and color of a cigarette package because “they have greater incentive to believe that some cigarettes may be less harmful”, the study found.
According to the study, tobacco use is responsible for one in 10 deaths around the world and is the leading cause of preventable deaths.
With the tobacco industry recognising “rising levels of health concern” as a key threat to its existence, it has made reassuring consumers about the risks associated with smoking “an important function of tobacco marketing”, the study said.
“A central feature of this marketing strategy has been to promote the perception that some cigarettes are less hazardous than others,” wrote David Hammond and Carla Parkinson, the authors of the study.
The pair said tobacco packaging “has served as a critical medium for shaping perceptions of consumer risk”.
Forty-four countries, including the United States, have banned the use of the words “light”, “mild”, and “low-tar,” on cigarette packages, saying they mislead consumers about the health risks of smoking, the study says.
The authors want the list of prohibited words to be expanded and for cigarettes to be sold in plain packaging to try to stop the tobacco industry misleading smokers.
“There is growing evidence that the removal of brand imagery from packaging - so-called ‘plain’ packaging - reduces the appeal of brands and increases the salience of health warnings,” the study says.
“Research to date suggests that plain packages are less attractive and engaging and may reduce brand appeal, particularly among youth.”
The study was published in the Oxford University Press Journal of Public Health.

Harry Wallace, chief of the Unkechaug Nation, and several other owners of shops that sell cigarettes on the tiny Poospatuck Indian reservation on the South Shore of Long Island have been sued by the City of New York. The city claims that this Indian enclave — the closest Indian reservation to New York City — has become a “tax evasion haven” and a drain on the city’s coffers.

The Bloomberg administration says the city and the state lose more than $1 billion a year in tax revenue because of what it calls bootleg cigarettes distributed on Indian Indian reservations in New York. Of that amount, the administration contends, $195 million represents the city’s share, and officials blame the Unkechaug Nation Indian reservation for most of that.

New York City officials say millions of cartons of tax free cigarettes are sold every year by Poospatuck retailers to bootleggers who smuggle them into the city to resell for about $5 a pack, not the $8 or $9 charged by New York retailers who pay the state and city taxes of $4.25 a pack.

As part of their legal challenge, city attorneys have asked a federal judge to block the smoke shops from selling untaxed cigarettes to non-Indians without collecting state and city taxes from them.

Answering these claims is the Unkechaug chief, Mr. Wallace, 55, who was born in Queens, went to Dartmouth and was a lawyer in private practice in Manhattan before moving to the Indian reservation and opening the Poospatuck smoke shop.

But he has been outspoken in defending his tribe, arguing that cigarette sales are the only viable economic engine on the 55 acres of sovereign territory. He calls the city’s lawsuit an attack on legitimate Indian livelihood, and the result of elected officials feeling the economic pinch and blaming budget woes on the smallest Indian reservation in the state.

“They’re picking on us because they think we’re this little tribe with no means to defend ourselves,” he stated. “Bloomberg needs a scapegoat, so he places the fault with us for the city’s deficit, instead of criticizing the financial markets.”

Attorneys for the smoke shop owners have requested a dismissal of the lawsuit, arguing that the court does not have jurisdiction in sovereign territory, Mr. Wallace stated. He is not a defendant in the lawsuit, though he was named in a similar lawsuit that was filed in 2006 by the owner of the Gristedes supermarket chain.

Though Mr. Wallace was brought up in the Bayside and Little Neck sections of Queens, his family nurtured his Indian identity, taking him often to visit his uncles on the Indian reservation. He chose Dartmouth, he stated, because it had as its founding mission the education of Indians, and he helped establish a group on campus called Native Americans at Dartmouth.

Later, at New York Law School in Manhattan, he helped found the Indian Law Committee and wrote a thesis on Indian land claims. In the 1980s, he worked as a lawyer concentrating on cases involving landlord-tenant disputes, real estate, personal injury and American Indian discrimination matters.

Mr. Wallace stated he grew more interested in Indian matters after marrying Margo Thunderbird, a daughter of Chief Thunderbird of the Southampton-based Shinnecock Nation. The couple have two daughters. In 1991, he moved to a plot of land belonging to his mother on the Poospatuck Indian reservation, nestled on the banks of the Mastic River. “It changed my life because I knew I was going to get into matters affecting the Indian reservation,” he stated.

Mr. Wallace opened the Indian reservation’s first full-service smoke shop, to “show the community that we could develop an economy separate and distinct from the state and that it could be done the right way.”

Last year, Wisconsin increased its cigarettes taxes by $1 a pack. Milwaukee Ald. Terry Witkowski states the city of Milwaukee should have the right to raise the taxes also.

“The purpose of this legislation would be two-fold. It would be to deter smoking, especially young smokers and people who’ve not yet begun to smoke from smoking, as well as increase revenue for the city of Milwaukee,” Witkowski states.

Witkowski is offering that the city’s lobbyists be directed to urge the Legislature to pass enabling legislation allowing Milwaukee to have a cigarettes tax. He states the fee would help the community recoup losses caused by cigarettes smokers. The city’s Legislative Reference Bureau states smoking contributes to $250 million a year in health care costs. And spokesman Richard Withers states cigarettes cause costly fires.

“We did look at also the information that the fire department has available right through Dec. 4 from 2005, and we found there were 115 smoking-related fires in the city causing property losses of likely more than $1 million,” Withers states.

The Council’s Judiciary & Legislation Committee debated the proposal Monday. Ald. Jim Bohl objects the measure. He states the taxes would be regressive because he states wealthier people who have a car and live near the suburbs would be able to drive across the border to buy cheaper cigarettes, while others would be stuck with the tax. Bohl also warns that the taxes could make Milwaukee a so-called taxes island.

“As much as we have actions that may further erode the potential for job-sustaining businesses, keeping businesses open — versus allowing for customers to take their purchases across the border, that is something that I think needs to be factored into the equation,” Bohl states.

Fellow committee member, Ald. Bob Donovan, doesn’t believe the cigarettes taxes is a good idea either. He states in hard economic times, the city’s lobbyists should be targeting central initiatives that will aid the city — not on controversial proposals that might not go anywhere.

“I would hope that we could set this aside, vote it down, and really target in on some meaningful ways that we can agree upon and go to Wisconsin legislature for help, because we’re not going to get it unless we are united,” Donovan states.

After the discussion Monday, Ald. Witkowski said he recognizes the proposal isn’t likely to go anywhere right away. So he agreed to let the committee delay taking action on the measure. It’s not clear if or when the committee will take up the proposal again.

The piece of law could supply hardly any reasonable responses to Florida’s financial problem. Unfortunately, a very bad one is the leader.

A higher tax on cigarettes online. typically, a sin tax is the last refuge of politicians who don’t want to annoy people with money or face the big issues.

All study shows that the less money Americans make, the more they smoke. So a higher cigarette tax wouldn’t bother most of the businesses and lobbyists who finance political campaigns. If legislators began talking about a higher tax on single-malt Scotch you’d hear a lot more complaining from people who matter to Tallahassee.

Here are the latest numbers. This year’s budget, even after raiding reserves and trust funds, has a $1.4 billion gap. Next year’s state budget will be $2.2 billion short. Tallahassee has cut schools, health care and public safety. The cuts are biting. The state needs money.

So last week, the self-proclaimed tax-cutting Gov. Crist said he was open to … raising the cigarette tax, by 50 cents or maybe $1. He didn’t say that he was open to renewing any of the intangibles taxes that the piece of law abolished under Jeb Bush. That tax on non-retirement fund stocks and bonds affected only the wealthiest Floridians.

Public health-wise, there’s a good argument for raising Florida’s cigarette tax. At 34 cents per pack, it ranks 46th, lower than the smoker-friendly rate in North Carolina of 35 cents. New York is first at $2.75, and Missouri is 50th at 17 cents. Most of the low-tax states are in the South. If you want to deter smoking by making people pay more for cigarettes online, Florida is not showing an example of how to do so.

Higher taxes can reduce smoking. In 2001, Canada raised cigarette taxes not to generate revenue but to make people kick the habit or never start. Not only did the national tax go up $2, Canada’s provinces also raised taxes. Between the two increases, smokers in Quebec, the province that includes Montreal, had to pay $4.50 more.

Last year, Canada reported that the rate of smoking among 15- to 19-year-olds was the lowest ever. Canada also places big warning labels on cigarette packs. The American Public Health Association looked at the years between 1955 and 1988 and concluded that the higher the tax, the fewer the smokers.

The results from north of the border and the United States highlight a major weakness of any plan to raise cigarette taxes in Florida to cover a budget deficit. If you stop people from smoking, cigarette sales drop, and so does the revenue from the tax. So if you increase taxes only modestly, as Florida might do, you really don’t want to stop people from smoking. You just want smokers to bail out the state.

Also, the claim that Florida could raise $1 billion a year from a $1 increase in the cigarette tax may not hold up. Robert Weissert, communications director for Florida TaxWatch, argues that the state might raise barely half that, based on what amount to real-world calculations. If Florida raised taxes, he said, more smokers would buy cigarettes online from other states if they live close to Georgia (37 cents) or Alabama (42 cents), or they would buy cigarettes online or at Indian reservations.

Then there are the moral arguments. As Mr. Weissert summed up in an e-mail:
“Additionally, it is important to remember: 1) the cigarette tax is the most regressive tax in Florida - it taxes those who can least afford it; 2) using a sin tax to fund recurring expenses creates an adverse incentive - the revenues from the sin tax are inversely related to the public policy goal of reducing and deterring tobacco use. … As time moves on, the concept of an increase may become more relevant, but for now, on balance, it would do more harm than good.”

It also would not cut wasteful spending or simplify Florida’s tax system. This remains a piece of law run by people who are better at winning elections than running the state. That frustration is enough to make anyone reach for a cigarette.

Higher federal taxes and more regulations are not predicted to damage the ratings of U.S. cigarettes manufacturers next year, Fitch Ratings analysts told investors on Tuesday.

Higher taxes would further lower demand for cigarettes, though. Sales volume has been falling by about 3 percent to 4 percent a year in the U.S.

But the Fitch analysts believe U.S. cigarette manufacturers such as Philiip Morris USA, Reynolds American Inc., and Lorillard would be relatively stable regardless.

“This outlook is supported by the companies’ significant liquidity positions and by their ability to continue to generate sizeable free cash flow as a result of their high operating margins,” analyst Wesley Moultrie II wrote in a note.

Moultrie claimed anlaysts predict an growth of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, which could lead to a hike in the federal taxes.

Another hurdle for some cigarette manufacturers is the probable success of a bill to give the Food and Drug Administration the authority to regulate tobacco. Analysts say a bigger Democratic majority in both houses of Congress make the passage of such a bill more likely.

Still, tobacco companies are seen as a defensive holding in a tumultuous market since consumers tend to buy cigarettes even when they cut back on other purchases.

Lorillard Chief Executive Martin Orlowsky on Tuesday reiterated the company’s predictation for revenue growth based on price rises. He claimed the company would report 5 percent to 7 percent growth of earnings per share.

Further, Orlowsky claimed he didn’t see any evidence that Lorillard was losing any of its cigarette busine$1.22, or 3.2ss to smokeless tobacco products such as moist snuff, chewing tobacco and teabag-like snus pouches. Lorillard’s bigger rivals, Altria Group-owned Philip Morris USA, and Reynolds American Inc. are aggressively pursuing smokeless products in the hope of finding new revenue streams as cigarettes decline.

Speaking at the same conference, Philip Morris International Chief Executive Louis Camilleri expressed confidence in the company’s earning potential going forward. He claimed earnings per share would grow by 10 percent to 12 percent next year as consumption held up in emerging markets outside the U.S.

“We are very confident we can meet our long-term targets next year and beyond, in terms of growth,” Camilleri claimed. “We are not witnessing any undue shift in consumer behavior. In one or two places, uptrading may have slowed down a bit.”

Shares of Lorillard fell 18 cents to $61 in afternoon trading while Altria shares rose 14 cents to $16.33.

Reynolds American declined 8 cents to $44.09 as Philip Morris cigarettes International fell $1.24, or 3.2%, to $ $37.11

This year, Iowa and Illinois joined 27 states enacting a smoke-free law.

Iowa’s Smokefree Air Act took effect July 1; the Smoke-Free Illinois Act, Jan. 1.

But those smoking bans haven’t had much of an effect on two tri-state tobacco purveyors.

Among its numerous offerings, including beer, Tobacco World in Dubuque features discount American cigarettes and roll-your-own cigarettes. Churchill & Burns, a Galena, Ill., tobacconist, touts its hand-rolled cigars, imported cigarettes and pipe tobacco.

“Negligible,” Brady Liberg, co-owner of Churchill & Burns, succinctly claimed of Illinois’ law on his sales.

If anything has put a dent in the Galena Main Street staple’s sales was $4 gasoline this summer.

“The slouching economy hasn’t benefitted us,” Liberg claimed.

Jason Waddell, Tobacco World co-owner, claimed recent tobacco tax increases have the most impact on sales. Waddell recalled the $1 increase on a pack of cigarettes that took effect in Iowa on March 1, 2007.

“That dropped our business at least 60 to

70 percent,” he claimed. “(Gov. Chet) Culver claimed customers would quit. I don’t think they have.”

The tax did boost the state’s coffers by tens of millions of dollars.

Tobacco World caters to the do-it-yourself, roll-your-owns. A 6-ounce bag (A 6-ounce bag of tobacco is the equivalent to a carton of cigarettes) of Gambler-brand tobacco sells for $8.99, a box of tubes (paper and filter), $2.29. And a one-time investment of $6.99 buys an injection machine (larger, multi-cigarette machines are more expensive), where tobacco is fed into the tube.

Compare that to a carton of Marlboro cigarettes, which recently sold for $42.01 (with tax, $44.95).

“Yes, there’s time involved, but you’re saving money. It’s still cheaper than a carton of cigarettes,” Waddell claimed. “You buy cigarettes machine, then away you go.”

Smokeless tobacco sales — chewing tobacco and snuff — have increased along with the roll-your-own.

In an increasingly smoke-free society and declining adult cigarette consumption, tobacco manufacturers are pushing more smokeless products, hoping to grab market share and sales.

“That’s until the state finds out and puts more tax on,” Waddell claimed. “That’ll be the next step.”

Iowa’s tax increase cut cigarette sales by about 30 percent in its first three months, according to the Iowa Department of Revenue. Sales were expected to decline from 246.3 million packs of cigarettes in Iowa in 2006, to 186.6 million this year — a downward trend that groups like the American Cancer Society celebrate.

Liberg calls cigarette tax increases the law of diminishing returns.

“So each state projects x-number of dollars a year and what happens when it’s not there?” he claimed. “You’re killing the goose that laid the golden egg. customers can buy cigarettes online, go to bordering states where they’re cheaper, or quit because of the price.”

Tobacco Outlet Plus, operated by the

La Crosse, Wis.-based Kwik Trip Inc., offers discount cigarettes and walk-in cigar humidor at its Dubuque store. John McHugh, Kwik Trip’s manager of corporate communications, claimed companywide, its stores in Minnesota, Iowa and Wisconsin have seen a decrease in tobacco sales.

He cites smoke-free legislation in Iowa and individual municipalities in Wisconsin, increased taxes, and an overall public sentiment about tobacco use compared to 20 to 30 years ago.

“Fewer customers are smoking, and all that combined has affected tobacco sales,” he claimed.

Liberg is quick to point out the difference between cigars and cigarettes. Cigars, he adds, are the “premier artisan” product.

“A cigar is like a fine bottle of wine, made to be enjoyed,” he claimed. “A cigarette is a habitual thing.”

Liberg urges government entities to resist restrictions and tax increases on cigars. He cites the existence of a nationwide cigar rights lobby — “Cigar Rights of America” — that “fights to protect your freedom to enjoy cigars.”

Like cigarettes, cigars are a legal product, he continued, but under the scrutiny of many state governments.

“If you’d raise the taxes on beer, customers would be marching in Washington. There’s a large, noisy anti-smoking lobby that’s pushed this through local, state and federal governments.”

Liberg is sure that restaurants should be smoke-free, but smoke-free taverns, bars or lounges should be the individual business owners’ decision.

Waddell believes Iowa’s smoking ban has impacted bars and taverns the most, especially small-town establishments where customers used to go for conversation and smoke.

“Now they’re most likely to stay home,” he claimed. “And the biggest joke is the casinos (where smoking is allowed in Iowa). Where’s the legality of that?”

Survival is about diversifying.

Like Iowa, the smoking ban has affected Illinois bars and taverns. But not so much Churchill & Burns, which diversified into upscale men’s grooming and shaving merchandise. Liberg plans to unveil its own Bay Rum men’s cologne in January. Later in the year, Churchill & Burns will have a barber who offers hot-towel face wraps and straight-edge razor shaves.

Government Legislation voted upon on Wednesday illegalized the online sale of electronic cigarettes designed to help users give up smoking. Since electronic cigarettes fall under the category of tobacco prescribed in the Tobacco Business Act, they can be sold only at retailers making online sale illegal.

Electronic cigarettes are electronic devices in the shape of a normal cigarette that allow people to inhale a gasified liquid made of various ingredients including nicotine.

A ministry official stated, “Cigarettes prescribed in the Tobacco Business Act encompass substances that can be smoked like a cigarette even if no tobacco leaf is used. Therefore, electronic cigarettes, an electronic device for intake and a filter with condensed nicotine extracted from tobacco leaf, correspond to cigarettes under the Tobacco Business Act.”

The Indonesian Consumers Foundation says that the government’s plan to raise the duty on cigarettes by up to 7% would not be sufficient to discourage the younger generation from continuing to buy cigarettes and smoke.

Tulus Abadi, a member of the foundation claims that the increase should follow the 2007 law on excise duty, which allows an increase by up to 57%.

Tulus also stated that the duty for cigarettes in Indonesia is the 2nd lowest in the world right after Cambodia.

Tulus claimed that “Students and poor people are able to buy cigarettes because of the cheap price,”.

He also claimed that increasing the duty by up to 57% would help the government with an increase in annual tax revenues, which could be useful to pay for fuel subsidies.

he stated “The government currently collects around Rp 40 trillion (US$3.68 billion) from cigarette excise duty in a year. If they increase the duty, it would cover the budget of gasoline subsidy.” .

A spokes person for the Pennsylvania state police claimed they would like to hace a chat with the woman who bought a pack of cigarettes with a handful of rare coins.

WGAL-TV in Lancaster reported that the lady the did the cigarettes buy didn’t do anything wrong, but detectives were intrigued with where the money came from.

Sate Police Cpl. John Duby claimed “It’s not a crime to present old coins to buy something at a store, but we would be interested to know if in fact the coins came from a theft or burglary, or simply (were) owned by an individual who wanted to get rid of them,” .

WGAL stated the cigarettes sale was made at a Lancaster store about 2 weeks ago with coins that included a 1964 silver half-dollar, a wheat penny, a few Indian head nickels and mercury dimes.