Feeds

New York fumes over online loss of ciggy taxes

Web puffers must pay up

  • alert
  • submit to reddit

Beginner's guide to SSL certificates

The city of New York has concocted an unusual scheme for going after lost tax revenue. Officials this week decided to target smokers who have bought cheap cigarettes online by demanding payment for past purchases of smokes.

The city's Finance Department has sent out some 2,000 letters, insisting that smokers pay back taxes on their cigs. Should the smokers not pay within 30 days, the city has threatened to charge interest on the tax due and up to a $200 penalty per carton.

This situation is the result of a lawsuit against now defunct Cigs4Cheap.com in which the city was able to obtain the names of smokers who had purchased cigarettes online. New York forbids online sellers to ship cigarettes to its residents, avoiding a $3 per pack tax. New York, in October of 2003, sued 7 online cigarette sellers, including Cigs4Cheap.com.

The city reckons that it's missing out on $40m per year in taxes due to online ciggy sales. It hopes to collect close to $1m from the smokers identified in the Cigs4Cheap.com lawsuit and will apparently stop at nothing to get its cash. Along with sending out a flood of threatening letters, the Finance Department also plans to kick off an advertising campaign, warning smokers about their duties to pay the $3 per pack tax.

One local smoker interviewed by the New York Daily News didn't take news of her $900 in due taxes well.

"How dare they ask for $900 in 30 days," Sheila Hansen told the paper. "Do they think I'm [Mayor] Bloomberg? The tone of the letter is so threatening. I didn't even know I was doing anything wrong."

The city has vowed to go after more smokers as their names are revealed. One can't help but wonder if the city will actually bring in as much as it spends on this smoker hunt.

There's more on the situation here

Related stories

LA sues travel sites for hotel tax chicanery
Digital music: flat fee futures
Canadian 'iPod tax' illegal, judge rules
Customs and tax merger to cost £75m

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk

More from The Register

next story
Scrapping the Human Rights Act: What about privacy and freedom of expression?
Justice minister's attack to destroy ability to challenge state
WHY did Sunday Mirror stoop to slurping selfies for smut sting?
Tabloid splashes, MP resigns - but there's a BIG copyright issue here
Google hits back at 'Dear Rupert' over search dominance claims
Choc Factory sniffs: 'We're not pirate-lovers - also, you publish The Sun'
EU to accuse Ireland of giving Apple an overly peachy tax deal – report
Probe expected to say single-digit rate was unlawful
Inequality increasing? BOLLOCKS! You heard me: 'Screw the 1%'
There's morality and then there's economics ...
Hey Brit taxpayers. You just spent £4m on Central London ‘innovation playground’
Catapult me a Mojito, I feel an Digital Innovation coming on
While you queued for an iPhone 6, Apple's Cook sold shares worth $35m
Right before the stock took a 3.8% dive amid bent and broken mobe drama
EU probes Google’s Android omerta again: Talk now, or else
Spill those Android secrets, or we’ll fine you
prev story

Whitepapers

Forging a new future with identity relationship management
Learn about ForgeRock's next generation IRM platform and how it is designed to empower CEOS's and enterprises to engage with consumers.
Storage capacity and performance optimization at Mizuno USA
Mizuno USA turn to Tegile storage technology to solve both their SAN and backup issues.
The next step in data security
With recent increased privacy concerns and computers becoming more powerful, the chance of hackers being able to crack smaller-sized RSA keys increases.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.
A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.