Economic irony involving smoking, Michigan and Ohio…
In reading this story at the Toledo Free Press, Mich. eyes new penalties for having illegal smokes I couldn’t help think of the smoking ban scenario.
You have Michiganders who cross the line into Ohio who buy smokes here because our taxes are cheaper and according to the article:
State law generally allows incarceration or fines for violations involving six or more cartons, or more than 1,200 cigarettes. Bills up for approval during December’s lame-duck legislative session would make it a civil infraction to have as few as 180 illegal cigarettes, nearly one carton’s worth.
Small-time activity involves residents simply driving to Indiana or Ohio, where taxes are up to $1 less per pack. It’s illegal to possess cigarettes in Michigan without a Michigan tax sticker.
Yet, you have Ohioans who cross the border into Michigan to be able to legally smoke in bars.
Which means, it’s bad according to Michigan to have Ohio profit from their decision to increase the tax on cigarettes to one of the highest in this area, but it’s good for Michigan to profit from Ohio’s decision to have a smoking ban in bars…If the bill passes in Michigan, changing the limits, it means a person who purchases a carton of cigarettes (200) would be guilty, unless they hurry up and smoke one pack and at least one cigarette from the second pack to be under the 180 smoke limit before they cross the border back into Michigan.
Michigan also didn’t mind when Ontario’s smoking ban increased some of their casino traffic.
Yes, Ohio has also done this related to alcohol sales. Which means it’s an ironic game of who will cross the border to buy what…
Here weeeeee go again….someone’s gonna chime in about the ban. BTW, interesting observation but it will not stop the “others” endless rant.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:19 pmi think that someone that chimed in is YOU.
December 1st, 2008 at 5:23 pmThe cross-border restriction aspect of this legislation is a waste of time and will be overturned by the first challenge. According to the Commerce Clause, only the federal government can place restrictions on interstate trade. In 2006, this argument was successfully used to strike down an Ohio law restricting transport of alcohol across state lines and I expect the same result if this bill is passed.
December 1st, 2008 at 6:30 pmCan I transport several $$ worth of food items from Ohio into Michigan? What about lumber or other home improvement items? Can I as a Michigan resident travel to Ohio to buy a snowblower and transport it back without having to fear arrest? In all cases, I have paid no tax in Michigan, so why is it that tobacco is targeted?
How are they going to know how many cigarettees I’m bring over the line? Are the ‘Tobacco Police’ stationed at carry outs and grocery stores all along the Ohio/Michigan line?
And what about this Amendment thing- the Fourth – something about:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
or is that something I studied in high school history that was not ‘quite’ true?
December 1st, 2008 at 6:39 pmAnd a hearty THANKS to upgraydd. I vaguely remembered something about the commerce clause, but try as I might, I could not find where it was!
December 1st, 2008 at 6:41 pmThanks Upgrayedd, I knew they were going to challenge based on the Commerce Clause, but I didn’t remember if there had been an outcome on that case.
It seemed fair to point out that Michigan was not the only one looking for people at the border to nail them for things bought in another state.
December 1st, 2008 at 6:52 pmI guess the next question is – If this Commerce Clause has been around for a few years and is part of the original Constitution of the United States, then why are Michigan & Ohio (and probably other states as well) attempting to ‘bypass’ it? 1 of 2 answers to that question:
1) They know about Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3, but are going to forge ahead anyway, the Constitution be damned.
2) They’ve never heard of it and are enforcing their laws in complete and utter ignorance.
No matter which answer, the responsible parties should have their license to practice law revoked.
If the parties responsible are elected officials, then it should be made known that these folks are UnAmerican and are NOT the people to vote for in the next election.
The People need to speak, and loudly!
December 1st, 2008 at 9:56 pmeek! As many times as I crossed into Michigan off Telegraph road to the county line store for $9.99 cases of Molsen lo so many years ago! WHEW!!!
Graphics, cigarettes, unlike many of the commerce you’ve listed, has a tax stamp from the state of origin.
The 1978 Contraband Cigarette Act prohibits the transport, receipt, shipment, possession, distribution, or purchase of more than 60,000 cigarettes (300 cartons) not bearing the official tax stamp of the U.S. state in which the cigarettes are located.
December 1st, 2008 at 10:05 pmcan I ask an obvious question…..who is checking cars for cigarettes on the Ohio / Michigan border?
December 2nd, 2008 at 12:07 amThe State Police would be the ones who would be given the task if the law is changed in Michigan. The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has also been stated has given state’s assistance in this.
December 2nd, 2008 at 12:45 am(Quoting Toledo Free Press) “Department of Treasury flagged more than 23,000 residents over 31/2 years who owe taxes on tobacco bought from Internet or mail-order companies. Total taxes and penalties from those sales was $36 million.”
Anyone have any ideas as to how they came up with these figures?
December 2nd, 2008 at 3:43 amGraphicsGuy wrote:
The internet tobacco companies cooperated with LE and gave them info on who they sold to.
December 3rd, 2008 at 5:18 pmOkay, so we have the Feral Govt ….ahhh.. I mean Federal Govt requesting (demanding?) sales receipts from businesses based on SUSPICION there were crimes committed? Misdemeanor crimes at that!
GREAT! Just freakin’ GREAT!
I do love my government….I do love my government….I do love my government….I do love my government….I do love my government….
(Thinking that if I say it enough, I’ll convince myself an overthrow isn’t VERY much needed)
Can you say “Ruby Ridge”?
December 3rd, 2008 at 6:34 pmOhio has done it too:
December 3rd, 2008 at 7:46 pm