Lenihan & Smoking

Dannyboy83

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0327/breaking57.htm

In the Dáil yesterday, Finance Minister Brian Lenihan appears to have ruled out a tobacco price increase in the forthcoming Budget even though it would yield an estimated a badly needed €420 million to the Exchequer, without any significant impact on inflation. Instead the Minister, in a letter to us, has cited the excuse of smuggling as a reason not to increase tax on tobacco, even though there is compelling evidence to show that such an increase would deter young people from starting and encourage smokers to quit,” said Irish Cancer Society chief executive John McCormack.

Myself and my girlfriend both quit smoking now nearly 4 weeks ago, as we were expecting another big increase in the price of cigarettes and we just could not afford it anymore.
I don't see myself going back smoking, my girlfriend says she may smoke with a drink in the future but cannot envisage herself smoking on a regular basis.
With the current price of cigarettes, most of those who smoke that I know and who are determined to continue to do so, are just buying contraband already anyway. But I know a few people who were expecting it to hit E9 per box and they have stopped along with me.

However, the Minister is not increasing the price because it will mean a loss of revenue to the exchequer and an increase in smuggling.
But a box of cigarettes in Ireland is 400% more expensive than a box in Spain or Eastern Europe already, meaning smugglers can make a 100 to 200% profit while still significantly undercutting Irish shops.

If the Minister was truely worried about the effect of smuggling, he would reduce the price of a box of cigarettes by a Euro or two. Then the contraband wouldn't be worth the effort on the buyer's behalf and the profit margins would be smaller on the smugglers behalf.
End result: Government take in significantly more revenue.

If the Minister was truely worried about deterring young people from smoking and encouraging existing smokers to stop, he would significantly increase the price.

At the moment, this silly approach is simply growing the black market, losing revenue for the exchequer and not doing enough to deter or discourage anyone. He is trying to strike a balance but missing all 3 targets.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0319/breaking57.htm
One in four cigarettes illegal, DPP says

dodgyme

how much do they cost a up the north?

sovtek

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

Myself and my girlfriend both quit smoking now nearly 4 weeks ago, as we were expecting another big increase in the price of cigarettes and we just could not afford it anymore.
I don't see myself going back smoking, my girlfriend says she may smoke with a drink in the future but cannot envisage herself smoking on a regular basis.
With the current price of cigarettes, most of those who smoke that I know and who are determined to continue to do so, are just buying contraband already anyway. But I know a few people who were expecting it to hit E9 per box and they have stopped along with me.

However, the Minister is not increasing the price because it will mean a loss of revenue to the exchequer and an increase in smuggling.
But a box of cigarettes in Ireland is 400% more expensive than a box in Spain or Eastern Europe already, meaning smugglers can make a 100 to 200% profit while still significantly undercutting Irish shops.

If the Minister was truely worried about the effect of smuggling, he would reduce the price of a box of cigarettes by a Euro or two. Then the contraband wouldn't be worth the effort on the buyer's behalf and the profit margins would be smaller on the smugglers behalf.
End result: Government take in significantly more revenue.

If the Minister was truely worried about deterring young people from smoking and encouraging existing smokers to stop, he would significantly increase the price.

At the moment, this silly approach is simply growing the black market, losing revenue for the exchequer and not doing enough to deter or discourage anyone. He is trying to strike a balance but missing all 3 targets.

In addition to that making an addictive drug like cigarettes and alcohol expensive only exacerbates the effect on poor people and does very little if anything to curb use (the same for illegal drugs like herion apply too).

yoshytoshy

Having cigarettes in grocery and sweet shops is a big problem. If cigarettes were sold in dedicated off-licences/tobacco shops ,it would be better for everyone.

sovtek

yoshytoshy wrote: »

Having cigarettes in grocery and sweet shops is a big problem. If cigarettes were sold in dedicated off-licences/tobacco shops ,it would be better for everyone.

How so?

yoshytoshy

sovtek wrote: »

How so?

You are not being subjected to advertising ,you create jobs by tobacco shops opening up.
I haven't smoked in five years ,but yet I seen a packet of smokes the other day in a shop.

If you specialize something like smoking ,you automatically make it less trivial to deal with. Smokes are part of weekly shopping lists for people ,because of where they can buy them.

Dumbledore

yoshytoshy wrote: »

Having cigarettes in grocery and sweet shops is a big problem. If cigarettes were sold in dedicated off-licences/tobacco shops ,it would be better for everyone.

Yes, I too fail to see how this would prevent people from smoking, which is what the government is obviously trying to do. Would th3se tobacco shops be the only places allowed to sell cigarettes? In which case would they be 24/7 etc.?

yoshytoshy

Dumbledore wrote: »

Yes, I too fail to see how this would prevent people from smoking, which is what the government is obviously trying to do. Would th3se tobacco shops be the only places allowed to sell cigarettes? In which case would they be 24/7 etc.?

Price increasing isn't going to stop people smoking ,increases never have before.
People who can't afford cigarettes ,normally smoke roll your own tobacco. I think rollies are even worse than normal cigarettes on peoples health.

With regard to 24/7 ,thats something people who smoke would have to deal with.

franbrehon

They could bring in a public ban but that would hit the exchequer,as sales would drop, i gave up in january and i havent looked back ,no patches or nothen:cool:

smallBiscuit

yoshytoshy wrote: »

Having cigarettes in grocery and sweet shops is a big problem. If cigarettes were sold in dedicated off-licences/tobacco shops ,it would be better for everyone.

sovtek wrote: »

How so?

When your buying your smokes, you can get drink as well, handier all round

deadhead13

Is there any evidence that increasing the price of cigarettes reduces the number of smokers?

Venom

deadhead13 wrote: »

Is there any evidence that increasing the price of cigarettes reduces the number of smokers?

People will always have a personal limit to what they are prepaired to pay for an item.

sceptre

deadhead13 wrote: »

Is there any evidence that increasing the price of cigarettes reduces the number of smokers?

I can recall a proper study that found that it did (and as Venom said, people do have a limit), after a quick google search, there's an EU survey/study that a 10% increase in price leads to a 4% decrease in smoker numbers. I'm sure someone else may find the actual survey but apparently yes.

yoshytoshy

sceptre wrote: »

I can recall a proper study that found that it did (and as Venom said, people do have a limit), after a quick google search, there's an EU survey/study that a 10% increase in price leads to a 4% decrease in smoker numbers. I'm sure someone else may find the actual survey but apparently yes.

It's not going to stop cigarettes selling though ,people will in general still smoke.
Sorry if I was coming across as criticising dannyboy ,I didn't mean to.
Someone who quits smoking is helping another ten or more people to stop or never start. Seeing someone smoke is the best advertisment for cigarettes.