Do taxes on smoking pay for smokers' diseases?

It’s a frequent debate between smokers and non-smokers.

“Why should I pay for smokers out of my taxes?” complain the non-smokers. To which the smoker will point out the incredible tax they pay every time they light up.

But with half of all smokers dying of a smoking related disease, is the tax on tobacco really enough to pay for the strain on the NHS?

In fact smokers need not feel guilty. Despite huge rises in the cost of treating smoking related diseases, smokers are actually subsidising the NHS to the tune of several billion a year.

According to a recent report in the BBC, smoking costs the NHS 2.7 billion pounds a year. This huge figure compares with 1.7 billion a year ago, and the only reason it is not higher is because so many smokers have given up in recent years – a fall from 12 billion to 9 billion.

This is still a fraction, however, of the amount of money the government raises from tobacco. According to figures from the Tobacco Manufacturers Association the government raised a huge 10 billion in revenue in the tax year 2006/07.

In fact smokers have no reason to be ashamed of what they cost the NHS – in fact they are paying for the health treatment of those grumpy non-smokers. They may, however, feel grumpy about having to pay out so much money. Nevertheless, the government does have a serious justification: raising prices has been shown to be one of the most effective methods of reducing the amount of cigarettes smoked and, as a result, of saving lives.

The World Health Organisation once estimated that a price rise of 10% would cause 4% of smokers in developed countries to quit, and 8% of smokers in developing countries to give up. A worldwide price rise of 10% in 1995 would have lead to 40 million smokers giving up, and would
have prevented at least ten million tobacco related diseases.

In addition the real cost of smoking to the economy is far greater than 2.7 billion, with time lost due to illness, impaired physicial and mental faculties and of course losing 120,000 of the population a year to smoking, many of whom would still be in their prime if it wasn’t smoking.

Despite this, and with a Prime Minister who, with his money grabbing raids on pensions funds has shown that he does not always understand the wider picture, we can’t help wondering if a government desperate for money from any source will eventually ban the electronic cigarette – one method of smoking which currently escapes the punitive taxes placed on tobacco.

If you don’t feel you should be subsidising the NHS, try our E-cigarettes – they could save you a substantial amount over the long term.

Related posts:

1. Tens of Millions of Chinese to Die from Smoking
2. Smoking & the Brain
3. Smokers Paradox
4. Vaccines for smokers

electronic cigaratte