Back to the Report

More publications like . . .

The 2020-21 Budget: Taxation of E-Cigarettes


[PDF] Cigarette Tax Initiative

June 14, 2016 - Presented to: Assembly Health Committee Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee Senate Health Committee


Cigarette Tax Stamp Purchases And Surety Bonds in California

January 25, 2006 - In October 2003, the Legislature approved and the Governor signed Chapter 867, Statutes of 2003 (AB 1666, Cogdill, which allows alternatives for the payment of cigarette tax stamps by cigarette distributors. Prior law allows cigarette distributors (which are responsible for affixing the stamps to cigarette packages prior to their sale) to defer the payment for such stamps under certain conditions, including the posting of a surety bond or other form of security. The 2003 statute reduced-on a temporary basis until January 2007-the minimum amount of the required security posted by distributors while increasing the frequency of their required tax remittances to the state from monthly to bimonthly. The measure requires the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) to report on the impact of the statute.


[PDF] Effects of Cigarette Taxes on Smoking Behavior

December 17, 2015 - Presented to: Conference Committee on SBX2 2 and ABX2 1, Second Extraordinary Session


The Tobacco Settlement: What Will It Mean for California?

January 14, 1999 - The Tobacco Settlement: What Will It Mean for California?


The Governor's Tax Proposal: Evaluation and Alternatives

February 19, 2003 - The Governor is proposing an $8.3 billion total tax increase to fund his realignment program and reduce the General Fund's budget shortfall. This proposal would raise the sales and use tax by one percentage point ($4.6 billion), establish 10 percent and 11 percent high-income tax brackets ($2.6 billion), and raise the cigarette tax by $1.10 per pack ($1.2 billion).


The 2015-16 Budget: Cigarette Tax and Licensing Programs

April 22, 2015 - California imposes excise taxes on cigarettes and on other tobacco products such as cigars and chewing tobacco. The state also licenses tobacco sellers and distributors. Recently, there has been considerable legislative interest in the cost of these programs, which are administered by the State Board of Equalization (BOE). The Legislature faces two key decisions: (1) how to pay for BOE’s cigarette and tobacco programs, and (2) how much to spend on them. This report recommends that the state use excise tax revenue to pay for excise tax administration but not for the tobacco licensing program. To address the imbalance between the licensing program’s costs and revenue, we further recommend the Legislature (1) temporarily increase fees on tobacco retailers, wholesalers, and distributors, and (2) direct BOE and the California Department of Justice to explore options to reduce the program’s costs by promoting electronic filing of schedules and tax returns.