tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7167149547535484177.post2108461821656224249..comments2024-01-20T14:08:08.057+05:30Comments on Serendipity: Ceylon Tobacco – Are we about to see the import of all our cigarettes? After the Govt. intentionally destroys the Tobacco Industry!Ratmale,Minneriya,Sri Lankahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17252632858481217930noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7167149547535484177.post-85323530631230522882016-08-16T14:40:29.097+05:302016-08-16T14:40:29.097+05:30This is a Daily Mirror Editorial of 16th August 20...This is a Daily Mirror Editorial of 16th August 2016 which goes completely against my premise.<br /><br />http://www.dailymirror.lk/114189/Tobacco-tax-the-lies-go-up-in-smoke-EDITORIAL<br /><br />I believe one of the points to note here is the use of facts of the word ability to pay or as a percentage of spending power to justify the tax increase implying it will NOT result in a total tax decline.<br /><br />It goes along to say that the poor will cut down on smoking, which goes against my premise that it is the better off who for financial reasons will cut down on smoking and the poor will suffer even more as they will spend less on their families whilst feeding their smoking habit.<br /><br />What is at stake here is practices aimed at educating people to stop smoking. Not use taxation as a means to regressively hurth the poor. In essence that HUGE point is missed in the Editorial which just says that smoking kills 20,000 a year and implies that the increase in tax will reduce that.<br /><br />Then at the same breadth say increase sugar tax by 100% so that we can reduce the 20,000 deaths per year attributed to Diabetes.<br /><br />We can go on arguing about this till the cows come home, but tackle the reduction of smoking and eating sugar separately from using the tax as a means to do so. It is the most vulnerable in society that you are hurting by your taxation to stop consumption model!Ratmale,Minneriya,Sri Lankahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17252632858481217930noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7167149547535484177.post-51574650175849995182016-08-02T11:29:44.330+05:302016-08-02T11:29:44.330+05:30The important point is to have a holistic argument...The important point is to have a holistic argument for consumption taxes that applies accross the board and is NOT discriminatory. Look at Beedi and Cigarettes for example and make the social case for differential taxes or not. What about the health issues of both?<br /><br />Similarly on Low alcohol beers and high alcohol spirits, this too is blurred as far as using taxation to affect social behavior.<br /><br />Above all there must be a policy that is consistantly adopted if Companies are to pursue future strategies. Currently everything is in limbo, on someone's heresay, to believe or ignore at your perilAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com