logo
WA lawmakers light up plan for cigarette tax hike

WA lawmakers light up plan for cigarette tax hike

Yahoo22-02-2025

(Photo by)
Increasing taxes on cigarettes, cigars and vapor products could be on the buffet of revenue-raising options Washington lawmakers consider to erase a looming budget shortfall.
Legislation discussed in the House Finance Committee on Thursday would boost taxes on an array of tobacco products to generate $23.1 million for the general fund in the next two-year budget.
While it will cover only a sliver of the projected $6 billion gap, the dollars would help pay health care and societal costs linked to the effects of smoking and vaping, the bill's sponsor told the committee.
'I feel very strongly that those who are most prone to utilize this product should be the people paying for the impacts of this product,' said Rep. Kristine Reeves, D-Federal Way.
Reeves shared that her mother started smoking menthol cigarettes at age 9, eventually becoming a three-pack-a-day smoker. She died of lung cancer when she was 60. Her nicotine habit, Reeves said, led to other addictions including substance misuse and alcohol abuse.
Reeves said she's had a 'lifetime struggle' with asthma from her exposure to secondhand smoke. The bill is about 'ensuring accountability' and taxing tobacco products at a rate 'that is going to bring value to the community for those who are most impacted.'
Students from Lake Washington High School urged the committee to back the legislation.
'I've seen peers struggle with nicotine addiction before they even turn 18. I've watched students hide in restrooms and sneak out during class because of this compelling dependence,' said Liana Khachatouriansoradehi. 'By passing House Bill 1416 you are choosing to help my friends, smokers or not, by taking a step in protecting us against addiction and investing in healthier futures.'
Representatives of the Association of Washington Business, Washington Retail Association, Cigar Association of America and Washington Food Industry Association voiced opposition.
They said higher taxes will push up product prices, leading to fewer sales and less income for small business owners. Some argued it could lead individuals to cross into neighboring states to make purchases.
'We understand the desperate need to get revenue this year. Unfortunately, we don't think this is the right answer,' said Katie Beeson of the Washington Food Industry Association. 'We know that tobacco tax increases actually result in a direct decline in sales which will have an impact on your smallest local retailers.'
With the budget shortfall looming, Democratic lawmakers in the House and Senate are batting around many ideas for raising enough revenue to avoid deep cuts to programs and services.
Republican lawmakers say they soon expect to see proposals for a 'wealth tax' on intangible assets like bonds and stocks, a payroll tax imposed on companies with many workers earning high wages and surcharge on business taxes paid by the state's largest corporations. Democrats have floated these tax options but have not yet put them forward in bills.
Taxing tobacco products is one of the smallest generators of new dollars now under discussion. The legislation would increase the tax on a single cigarette by one-and-a-half cents. That would raise the tax on a pack of 20 cigarettes by 30 cents to $3.33. The typical price of a single pack runs a little more than $10, according to a fiscal analysis of the bill.
The levy on cigars would rise seven cents to a maximum of 72 cents apiece. Little cigars would be taxed one-and-a-half cents more, bringing the total to nearly 17 cents apiece.
For smokeless tobacco, also known as moist snuff, the tax on a consumer-sized can or package weighing 1.2 oz or less would go up a quarter to $2.78 and by 21 cents to $2.31 on larger size cans.
Vapor products, such as electronic cigarettes and cigars, are subject to sales and use taxes and an additional tax tied to the amount of liquid nicotine or consumable solution. As proposed, the tax on containers of 5 milliliters or more would go up a penny to 10 cents per milliliter. For all other vapor products, the tax would be 30 cents per milliliter of liquid or solution, a three-cent bump.
If the bill is enacted, proposed increases would go into effect Jan. 1, 2026.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

‘We've lost the culture war on climate'
‘We've lost the culture war on climate'

Yahoo

time15 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

‘We've lost the culture war on climate'

President Donald Trump's latest climate rollback makes it all but official: The United States is giving up on trying to stop the planet's warming. In some ways, the effort has barely started. More than 15 years after federal regulators officially recognized that greenhouse gas pollution threatens 'current and future generations,' their most ambitious efforts to defuse that threat have been blocked in the courts and by Trump's rule-slicing buzzsaw. Wednesday's action by the Environmental Protection Agency would extend that streak by wiping out a Biden-era regulation on power plants — leaving the nation's second-largest source of climate pollution unshackled until at least the early 2030s. Rules aimed at lessening climate pollution from transportation, the nation's No. 1 source, are also on the Trump hit list. Meanwhile, the GOP megabill lumbering through the Senate would dismember former President Joe Biden's other huge climate initiative, the 2022 law that sought to use hundreds of billions of dollars in tax breaks and other incentives to encourage consumers and businesses to switch to carbon-free energy. At the same time, Trump's appointees have spent months shutting down climate programs, firing their workers and gutting research into the problem, while making it harder for states such as California to tackle the issue on their own. The years of whipsawing moves have left Washington with no consistent approach on how — or whether — to confront climate change, even as scientists warn that years are growing short to avoid catastrophic damage to human society. While the Trump-era GOP's hardening opposition to climate action has been a major reason for the lack of consensus, one former Democratic adviser said her own party needs to find a message that resonates with broad swaths of the electorate. 'There's no way around it: The left strategy on climate needs to be rethought,' said Jody Freeman, who served as counselor for energy and climate change in President Barack Obama's White House. 'We've lost the culture war on climate, and we have to figure out a way for it to not be a niche leftist movement." It's a strategy Freeman admitted she was 'struggling' to articulate, but one that included using natural gas as a 'bridge fuel' to more renewable power — an approach Democrats embraced during the Obama administration — finding 'a new approach' for easing permits for energy infrastructure and building broad-based political support. As the Democratic nominee in 2008, Obama expressed the hope that his campaign would be seen as 'the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.' But two years later, the Democrats' cap-and-trade climate bill failed to get through a Senate where they held a supermajority. Obama didn't return to the issue in earnest until his second term, taking actions including the enactment of a sweeping power plant rule that wasn't yet in effect when Trump rescinded it and the Supreme Court declared it dead. Republicans, meanwhile, have moved far from their seemingly moderating stance in 2008, when nominee John McCain offered his own climate proposals and even then-President George W. Bush announced a modest target for slowing carbon pollution by 2025. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin contended Wednesday that the Obama- and Biden-era rules were overbearing and too costly. 'The American public spoke loudly and clearly last November: They wanted to make sure that all agencies were cognizant of their economic concerns,' he said when announcing the rule rollback at agency headquarters. 'At the EPA under President Trump, we have chosen to both protect the environment and grow the economy.' Trump's new strategy of ditching greenhouse gas limits altogether is legally questionable, experts involved in crafting the Obama and Biden power plant rules told POLITICO. But they acknowledged that the Trump administration at the very least will significantly weaken rules on power plants' climate pollution, at a moment when the trends are going in the wrong direction. Gina McCarthy, who led EPA during the Obama administration, said in a statement that Zeldin's rationale is "absolutely illogical and indefensible. It's a purely political play that goes against decades of science and policy review." U.S. greenhouse gas emissions were virtually flat last year, falling just 0.2 percent, after declining 20 percent since 2005, according to the research firm Rhodium Group. That output would need to fall 7.6 percent annually through 2030 to meet the climate goals Biden floated, which were aimed at limiting the rise in global temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius since the start of the Industrial Revolution. That level is a critical threshold for avoiding the most severe impacts of climate change. Those targets now look out of reach. The World Meteorological Organization last month gave 70 percent odds that the five-year global temperature average through 2029 would register above 1.5 degrees. The Obama-era rule came out during a decade when governments around the world threw their weight behind blunting climate pollution through executive actions. Ricky Revesz, who was Biden's regulatory czar, recalled the 'great excitement' at the White House Blue Room reception just before Obama announced his power plant rule, known as the Clean Power Plan. It seemed a watershed moment. But it didn't last. 'I thought that it was going to be a more linear path forward,' he said. 'That linear path forward has not materialized. And that is disappointing.' Opponents who have long argued that such regulations would wreck the economy while doing little to curb global temperature increases have traveled the same road in reverse. Republican West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey said he felt dread when Obama announced the Clean Power Plan in 2015. Then the state's attorney general, he feared the rule's focus on curbing carbon dioxide from power plants would have a 'catastrophic' impact on West Virginia's coal-reliant economy. 'It was really an audacious and outrageous attempt to regulate the economy when they had no power to do so,' said Morrisey, who led a coalition of states that sued the EPA over Obama's proposal. 'You can't take the actions that they were trying to take without going to the legislature.' Meanwhile, Congress has become harsher terrain for climate action. In May, House Republicans voted to undo the incentives for electric cars and other clean energy technologies in Biden's Inflation Reduction Act, the nation's most significant effort to spur clean energy and curb climate change. That same week, 35 House Democrats and Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) crossed the aisle and voted to kill an EPA waiver that had allowed California to set more stringent tailpipe pollution standards for vehicles to deal with its historically smoggy skies. California was planning to use that waiver to end sales of internal combustion engine vehicles in 2035, a rule 10 other states and the District of Columbia had planned to follow. The Supreme Court has added to the obstacles for climate policy — introducing more existential challenges for efforts to use executive powers to corral greenhouse gas emissions. In its 2022 decision striking down the Obama administration's power plant rule, the court said agencies such as EPA need Congress' explicit approval before enacting regulations that would have a 'major' impact on the economy. (It didn't precisely define what counts as 'major.') In 2024, the court eviscerated a decades-old precedent known as the Chevron doctrine, which had afforded agencies broad leeway in how they interpret vague statutes. Many climate advocates and former Democratic officials contend that all those obstacles are bumps, not barriers, on the tortuous path to reducing greenhouse gases. They say that even the regulatory fits and starts have provided signals to markets and businesses about where federal policy is heading in the long term — prodding the private sector to make investments to green the nation's energy system. One symptom is a sharp decline in U.S. reliance on coal — by far the most climate-polluting power source, and the one that would face the stiffest restrictions in any successful federal regulation to lessen the electricity industry's emissions. Coal supplied 48.5 percent of the nation's power generation in 2007, but that fell to 15 percent in 2024. Last year, solar and wind power combined to overtake coal for the first time. 'Regulation has served the purpose of moving things along faster,' said Janet McCabe, who was deputy EPA administrator under Biden and ran EPA's Office of Air and Radiation during Obama's second term. 'The trajectory is always in the right direction.' Freeman, who is now at Harvard Law School, said federal regulations plus state laws requiring renewable power to comprise portions of the electricity mix helped justify utility investments in clean energy. That, in turn, accelerated price drops for wind and solar power, she said. Clean energy advocates point to those broader market shifts, calling a cleaner power grid inevitable. 'There are people in each of these industries who wouldn't have taken the climate problem seriously and cleaner technology seriously, and invested in it, if it weren't for the pressure of the Clean Air Act and the incentives that more recently had been built into the IRA,' said David Doniger, senior attorney and strategist at the Natural Resources Defense Council. 'So policy does matter, even when it's not in a straight line and the implementation is inadequate.' But even if those economic trends continue — an open question given the enormous new power demand from data centers — it will not bring the U.S. closer to cuts needed to keep the world from overheating, multiple climate studies have concluded. And the greatest chunk of the emissions decline since 2005 comes from shifting coal to natural gas, another fossil fuel, which fracking made cheap and abundant. Biden's power plant rule, now being shelved by Trump's EPA, would have imposed limits on both coal-burning power plants and future gas-fired ones, requiring them to either capture their greenhouse gases or shut down. Staving off regulations may well keep coal-fired power plants running longer than anticipated to meet forecast demand growth, belching more carbon dioxide into the air. The Trump administration has even sought to temporarily exempt power plants from air pollution rules altogether and is trying to use emergency powers to prevent coal generators from shuttering. Without federal rules that say otherwise, power providers would also be likely to add more natural gas generation to the grid. Failing to curb power plants' pollution, scientists say, means temperatures will continue to rise and bring more of the floods, heat waves, wildfires, supply chain disruptions, food shortages and other shocks that cost the U.S. hundreds of billions of dollars each year in property damage, illness, death and lost productivity. 'I don't think the economics are going to take care of it by any means,' said Joe Goffman, who led the Biden EPA air office. 'The effects of climate change are going to continue to be felt and they're going to continue to be costly in terms of dollars and cents and in terms of human experience.' Some state governors, such as Democrats Kathy Hochul of New York and Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan, have vowed to go it alone on climate policy if need be. But analyses have shown state actions alone are unlikely to achieve the greenhouse gas reductions at the scale and speed needed to avoid baking in catastrophic effects from climate change. The Sierra Club, for example, has helped shutter nearly 400 coal-fired units across the U.S. since 2010 through its Beyond Coal campaign, which has argued the economic case against fossil fuel generation in front of state utility commissions. While Joanne Spalding, the group's legal director, said it can continue to strike blows against coal with that strategy, she acknowledged that 'gas is a huge problem' — and left no doubt that the Trump administration's moves would do damage. 'Given what the science says about the need to act urgently, this will be a lost four years in the United States,' she said.

Stephen Miller Explicitly Ordered ICE Raid Home Depots
Stephen Miller Explicitly Ordered ICE Raid Home Depots

Yahoo

time15 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Stephen Miller Explicitly Ordered ICE Raid Home Depots

Stephen Miller explicitly ordered ICE to target Home Depot parking lots to arrest undocumented day laborers, a report alleges. The White House deputy chief of staff gave the order in late May, gloating in a meeting that he could leave ICE's D.C. headquarters and arrest 30 people outside the nearest Home Depot, sources told the Wall Street Journal. Miller, 39, is also said to have reminded top immigration officials they are not just targeting the 'worst of the worst' criminals, but anybody who is in the country illegally—even if that is their only alleged wrongdoing. 'Just go out there and arrest illegal aliens,' he said, according to the Journal. ICE officials appear to have heeded the White House's call. The Journal reported that ICE conducted an immigration sweep at a Home Depot on Friday in a predominantly Latino neighborhood of Los Angeles. The raid was among those that spurred widespread anti-ICE demonstrations and occasional riots in the city, which escalated after President Donald Trump activated the National Guard and deployed Marines against the wishes of Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom. Day laborers are known to use Home Depot parking lots to find work at locations across the country, often waving down contractors or homeowners as they exit the home improvement store. Home Depot has acknowledged the practice, but does not explicitly allow it. Some stores feature signage to make clear that soliciting work is illegal in their parking lots. MAGA influencers have seized on this practice by migrants and are now encouraging ICE to continue targeting Home Depot parking lots. 'I'd like to report the front entrance of @HomeDepot at 5 am,' said Laura Loomer on Wednesday, responding to a promotion for the Department of Homeland Security's tip line to report undocumented immigrants. 'Location: Every Home Depot in the U.S.' Recent Home Depot raids have occurred at a minimum of seven locations in California, according to the Journal, The Guardian, and NBC Los Angeles. This appears to have workers skiddish about finding work in their go-to spot. Martha Arévalo, the executive director of the Central American Resource Center of Los Angeles, told the Journal that Home Depot parking lots in Southern California, once filled with hundreds of willing workers, have dwindled down to a 'handful.' Home Depot spokeswoman Beth Marlowe told the Daily Beast that the Atlanta-based corporation is not working in conjunction with ICE and that it does not receive any advance notice of raids at or near its locations. 'We tell associates to report [raids] immediately and not to engage with the activity for their safety,' she said. 'If associates feel uncomfortable after witnessing ICE activity, we offer them the option to go home for the rest of the day, with pay.' ICE did not respond to emails from the Daily Beast. White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson told the Beast in a statement, 'If you are present in the United States illegally, you will be deported. This is the promise President Trump made to the American people, and the administration is committed to keeping it.' Miller has reportedly orchestrated the Trump administration's immigration crackdown. In the same meeting he reportedly ordered ICE to target Home Depot locations, he also allegedly threatened to terminate officials if their arrest numbers did not rise significantly. Miller told ICE it needed an arrest total at or near 3,000 migrants per day. A plan, dubbed 'Operation At Large,' was implemented shortly after. It saw thousands of federal law enforcement officers and special forces, who don't typically assist with immigration, being activated to help ICE round up migrants accused of being in the country illegally. This supercharging of arrests resulted in several notable mishaps. That included ICE briefly detaining a U.S. Marshal in Arizona by mistake last week.

'The View' co-host warns cast mates not to demonize ICE and military personnel over LA riots
'The View' co-host warns cast mates not to demonize ICE and military personnel over LA riots

Yahoo

time16 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

'The View' co-host warns cast mates not to demonize ICE and military personnel over LA riots

"The View" co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin on Wednesday warned her co-hosts against "demonizing" Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in their discussion about the Los Angeles riots. "I think Trump is not doing this just for optics," co-host Sunny Hostin said. "I think that this is a test case so that he can dismantle some of our institutions. I think it's a power grab. I think he is trying to use the might of the military to suppress people's rights. I think that is very clear. When you use the military against your own citizens, that is a sign of fascism. That is just the truth." The co-hosts continued to criticize the president for his decision to send in troops to aid law enforcement. Griffin then urged the co-hosts to be careful not to "take the bait," as Hostin insisted that she didn't think it was bait. Newsom Says Los Angeles Rioters Will Be Prosecuted, Slams Trump For 'Traumatizing Our Communities' "I haven't made my point yet," Griffin said. "The ICE agents, those are nonpartisan actors, for the most part, who signed up for jobs and served under multiple administrations. They did not necessarily sign up to be doing this, and they're following an order of the commander-in-chief." Read On The Fox News App Co-host Whoopi Goldberg and Hostin said they weren't demonizing them. "We're saying this is the result of ICE, ICE's actions," Hostin insisted. The liberal co-host blamed ICE for the crisis in LA on Tuesday. Griffin added, "I think it's important to remember it's the commander-in-chief that made the decision. They're following the orders." Federal Officials Slam Democrats For 'Dangerous' Rhetoric As Ice Agents Face Violent Mobs In La, Nyc Click Here For More Coverage Of Media And Culture Goldberg then made a seeming comparison to Germany in the 1930s, saying, "Where have you heard that before? 'I'm just following orders from the commander-in-chief.'" Goldberg agreed with co-host Sara Haines, who said she didn't blame the National Guard or the Marines, but said they needed to be careful. "I think it's important we remember statistically the National Guard, the Marines and even these ICE agents… half of them probably have your political views. Half of them are probably pretty uncomfortable with these orders. They have families at home. They have bills to pay, and they're questioning should I walk away from this," Griffin pushed back. Goldberg agreed and then went on to say construction companies and more would have a harder time getting people to work without immigrants. Hostin insisted on Monday that being undocumented was not illegal during a conversation about the riots in article source: 'The View' co-host warns cast mates not to demonize ICE and military personnel over LA riots

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store