Would you support a tax break for smokers trying to quit?

There's already a smoking thread, I know, but I feel if I post this in the other thread, it would only prove to derail it, and that's not what I want to do. Anyway, we all know cigarettes and other tobacco products are taxed up the ass. The reason for this is to make them less desirable, but millions upon millions of people are still smoking. So, what I think would be a better solution would to offer a tax break for people who are clinically trying to quit. What I mean by clinically is smokers that actually have to go to a doctor for prespcription medication or some other forms to help them kick the habit so there's some kind of proof they can submit to the IRS to indeed prove they're quitting. Instead of trying to get people to quit by charging them more money, I honestly believe they should give them back money for quitting. What do you all think?

Of course not. The very idea is absurd, IMO.

Of course not. The very idea is absurd, IMO.

Pirate700

[QUOTE="Pirate700"]

Of course not. The very idea is absurd, IMO.

JustPlainLucas

]Making cigarettes less expensive does nothing to help someone quit.

Pirate700

[QUOTE="Pirate700"]

]Making cigarettes less expensive does nothing to help someone quit.

JustPlainLucas

The get they ultimate refund once they quit,

Pirate700

If it was fully funded by a new cigarette tax. wstfld

[QUOTE="Pirate700"]

The get they ultimate refund once they quit,

JustPlainLucas

No. I wouldn't support it for the same reason I don't support "sin" tax. The government shouldn't be persuading its people to quit or use less of any kind of legal drug. It's a personal choice.

Of course not. The very idea is absurd, IMO.

Pirate700

[QUOTE="Pirate700"]

]Making cigarettes less expensive does nothing to help someone quit.

JustPlainLucas

Show them proof? That's impossible. I think they should give refunds for patches and gum that helps them to stop smoking. I certainly do think that there should be tax cuts for people who go green.

Of course not. The very idea is absurd, IMO.

Pirate700

Of course not. The very idea is absurd, IMO.

Pirate700

The idea is patently ridiculous. There are already much, much stronger incentives in place. Furthermore, what is to stop me from starting smoking to get a free tax break? And no, I do not think that persons buying hybrids should receive tax breaks either.

Actually, that would be correct. I don't think they should.

Pirate700

[QUOTE="Pirate700"]

Of course not. The very idea is absurd, IMO.

testfactor888

Figures...

What is the effective difference between making cigarettes expensive and giving people money for trying to quit? Both make those quitting smoking have more spending money. The only difference I can see is the latter is more exploitable, so...

What is the effective difference between making cigarettes expensive and giving people money for trying to quit? Both make those quitting smoking have more spending money. The only difference I can see is the latter is more exploitable, so...

GabuEx

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

What is the effective difference between making cigarettes expensive and giving people money for trying to quit? Both make those quitting smoking have more spending money. The only difference I can see is the latter is more exploitable, so...

mattbbpl

OK, sure, that too. :P

I like the idea.

What's to stop someone taking up smoking just to quit and get the tax break?kamikaze_pigmy

I like the idea.

SgtKevali

If it was fully funded by a new cigarette tax. wstfld

[QUOTE="wstfld"]If it was fully funded by a new cigarette tax. yellosnolvr

Actually, this is a good idea. The only way that we'd be able to support this is with testing however, which takes both time and money.

Personally, I think we should just keep raising the price of cigarettes. I really don't care how much they are. I don't smoke, and the money from those taxes goes towards eventually saving those people when they inevitably go in for surgery or medical aid that I KNOW FOR A FACT that they won't be able to afford.

Charge them more upfront, less impact on taxpayers and the health care system later. Works for me.

Only if those who already don't smoke get them too.harashawn

It's impossible to prove that you don't smoke.

[QUOTE="harashawn"]Only if those who already don't smoke get them too.bloodling

It's impossible to prove that you don't smoke.

Tax cuts for everyone! *Campaigns on proposal and gets elected*

The better option would be to mandate the amount of cigarettes allowed in each pack(8 per) then tax them up to $20 a pack... If that doesn't stop smoking then nothing will!jeremiah06

The point is not to force people to stop smoking, but to help them.

The point is not to force people to stop smoking, but to help them.

bloodling

[QUOTE="harashawn"]Only if those who already don't smoke get them too.bloodling

It's impossible to prove that you don't smoke.

[QUOTE="bloodling"]

[QUOTE="harashawn"]Only if those who already don't smoke get them too.HoolaHoopMan

It's impossible to prove that you don't smoke.

And there is a simple solution for one to put it into their system for a test.

[QUOTE="jeremiah06"]The better option would be to mandate the amount of cigarettes allowed in each pack(8 per) then tax them up to $20 a pack... If that doesn't stop smoking then nothing will!bloodling

The point is not to force people to stop smoking, but to help them.

[QUOTE="testfactor888"][QUOTE="Pirate700"]

Of course not. The very idea is absurd, IMO.

Wii4Fun

Figures...

[QUOTE="bloodling"]

[QUOTE="jeremiah06"]The better option would be to mandate the amount of cigarettes allowed in each pack(8 per) then tax them up to $20 a pack... If that doesn't stop smoking then nothing will!jeremiah06

The point is not to force people to stop smoking, but to help them.

[QUOTE="bloodling"]

[QUOTE="harashawn"]Only if those who already don't smoke get them too.HoolaHoopMan

It's impossible to prove that you don't smoke.

It would be a case of "spend 3 dollars to receive one". These things cost money.

What's to stop someone who's never smoked from going to the doctor, telling they doctor that they do smoke and asking for a prescription for Nicorette just to get the tax break?

Also I didn't get a tax break when I quit, so no one should.

What is the effective difference between making cigarettes expensive and giving people money for trying to quit? Both make those quitting smoking have more spending money. The only difference I can see is the latter is more exploitable, so...

GabuEx

The tax both provides an incentive to stop smoking and to not start smoking. The subsidy provides an incentive to stop smoking but not to not start smoking (in fact, it may cause people to start smoking so that they can 'quit' and get a tax break).

Getting healthier + saving money by not buying cigarettes in the future should be enough incentive for someone who wants to quit.JML897

This. If people can afford $15+ for a packet of smokes a day, then a tax break won't help.

No, it would be abused heavily.chessmaster1989