Prop. 28 | Prop. 29
PROP
29
Imposes Additional Tax on Cigarettes for Cancer Research

Proposition 29 would increase taxes on cigarettes by $1 per pack to fund certain research and tobacco prevention programs. The current tax per pack is 87 cents. If the proposition passes, consumers would pay $1.87 per pack in cigarette taxes. Experts estimate the measure would generate about $850 million a year in new tax revenues.

Official Election Results:
Yes: 2,260,496
[49.8%]
No: 2,293,704
[ 50.2%]

Pro / Con

PRO 

Proponents of the measure argue that it will help fund groups which are experiencing shrinking budgets such as the National Cancer Institute. They say that tobacco companies are targeting low income and minority populations and that the measure will help offset the harm done to those communities. Finally, they claim that the measure can fund important cancer research.

Supporters

Californians for a Cure [Website archived in Internet Archive]

American Cancer Society

American Lung Association of California

American Heart Association

CON 

Opponents of the measure argue that Proposition 29 is poorly written and does not require enough oversight from outside agencies. They claim that the measure will not bring in enough money to keep the program going and tobacco prevention and research, while important, is not the area in which the state should be spending money during the financial crisis.

Opponents

Californians Against Out-of-Control Taxes & Spending [Website archived in Internet Archive]

California Republican Party

Polling

Polling

PPIC Statewide Survey: Californians and their Government, March 2012 [pdf]

“Proposition 29, also on the June ballot, is an initiative that would impose an additional $1.00 per pack tax on cigarettes and an equivalent tax increase on other tobacco products. The revenues would fund research for cancer and tobacco-related diseases. When read the ballot title and label for Proposition 29, 67 percent of likely voters would vote yes, 30 percent would vote no, and 3 percent are undecided."

USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll
California Initiatives: March 2012 Poll Results

Field Poll # 2409, May 31, 2012
California voters are backing Prop. 29 by an 8 point margin.

In-Depth

In-Depth

Background

Cigarettes sold in California are subject to two excise taxes: the cigarette tax and the cigarette and tobacco products surtaxes. Currently, the rate is 12 cents for the cigarette tax and 75 cents for the combined surtaxes, amounting to 87 cents per pack. Other tobacco projects, not including cigarettes, are only subject to the surtaxes. Excise taxes raise approximately $1.1 billion a year in California.

Tmarlborohese taxes are distributed to various funds and programs. Ten cents of the cigarette tax goes into the General Fund and two cents goes to the Breast Cancer Research Fund.

Additional taxes have been mandated by voter approval of two initiatives in recent years.

Proposition 10, passed by voters in 1998, was created to provide funding for community health care programs, child care and education programs for young children and families, early childhood development programs, and programs to educate the public about the negative effects of smoking.Fifty cents of the cigarette surtax goes to Proposition 10 programs.

Proposition 99, a ballot initiative passed by voters in the November 1988 election, imposed a 25-cent per pack tax on cigarettes (and equivalent excise taxes on other tobacco products).

Cigarette tax revenue distribution (summary):

  • 50 cents: early childhood development programs mandated by Proposition 10 (1998).
  •  25 cents: tobacco prevention education programs, health care services for the poor, tobacco related illness programs and environmental protection programs, mandated by Proposition 99 (1988).
  • 10 cents: state’s General Fund.
  • 2 cents: breast cancer research and programs aimed at breast cancer detection in uninsured women.

Sales of cigarettes and other tobacco products are also subject to use taxes imposed by state and local governments. The federal government also imposes an excise tax on each pack of cigarettes and other tobacco products. In 2009, the tax increased by 62 cents per pack to partially fund the fund the Children’s Health Insurance Program, which provides subsidized health insurance coverage to children from low-income families.

The most recent tobacco-tax initiative, Proposition 86 was placed on the November 2006 ballot. It would have amended the state constitution by raising the tax on cigarettes in California an additional $2.60 per pack. As the Board of Equalization is required by law to increase taxes on other tobacco products in an amount equivalent to any increase in the tax on cigarettes, the excise tax on other tobacco products would have increased as well. Experts predicted the measure would have increased excise tax revenues by about $2.1 billion in 2007-08. The measure was defeated 51.7% to 48.3%.

PROPOSITION 29

Proposition 29 would increase the existing state excise tax by $1 per pack making the total excise tax $1.87 per pack. Proposition 29 would introduce a "floor tax" on the majority of cigarettes which are stored by businesses when a new excise tax is passed, in order to tobacco leafencourage businesses not to stockpile products before the tax goes into effect. Cigars and other tobacco products are currently subject to a tax set by the Board of Equalization. The BOE annually sets the tax in an amount equivalent to the tax on cigarettes. With Proposition 29's tax increases on cigarettes, other tobacco products would therefore also increase when the measure takes effect.

Revenues from the new tax would be deposited into a newly created fund: The California Cancer Research Life Sciences Innovation Trust Fund. This fund administers the revenues to the support of research on cancer and tobacco-related diseases. Existing tobacco tax programs that experiences losses by the effects of the new program would be reimbursed after the tax is imposed.

The remaining funds would be distributed among five separate funds:

  • Sixty percent of the funds would be used to provide grants and loans to support tobacco prevention, health treatment, and cures for cancer and tobacco-related diseases. Qualified researchers would be able to compete for these funds.
  • Twenty percent would be used to fund smoking prevention and treatment programs directed by the California Department of Health and the California Department of Education.
  • Fifteen percent of the funds would be used to provide grants and loans to build and rent facilities and equipment for research and development related to cancer and tobacco-related diseases. In the event of a surplus in this fund, the Cancer Research Citizen's Oversight Committee (see below) could transfer revenues to any of the other funds.
  • Three percent would be used to fund law enforcement efforts to combat cigarette smuggling, illegal sales of tobaccos to minors and tax evasion related to tobacco sales.
  • Two percent would be used for administrative costs.

The trust fund would be supervised by a nine-member committee called the Cancer Research Citizen’s Oversight Committee. Members would be appointed by the governor, the director of the state Department of Health, and three chancellors from UC campuses that are members of the California Institute for Quantitative Biosciences Research. The committee would have the authority to develop financial plans, create and establish a process for awarding grants and loans, appoint employees to administer the fund, and develop policies related to intellectual property rights over research findings. The committee would be required to issue an annual report which would detail administrative expenses, research accomplishments, and a list of grants provided. The committee would undergo an annual financial audit.

The measure is expected to raise approximately $615 million in 2012-13 (affecting a portion of the year) and approximately $810 million in 2013-14 minus the amount needed to reimburse other tobacco tax programs for financial losses.

Voter Resources

Voter Resources

Official CA Documents

Official Voter Information Guide

Campaign Finance Information

Cal-Access
Check out how much money is being raised and spent to pass or defeat this measure, and where the money is coming from.

Cal-Access Ballot Measure Summary Data Search
Select "General 05 June 2012" and "Proposition 029" from the drop-down menus.
Cal-Access provides financial information supplied by state candidates, donors, lobbyists, and others.

Nonpartisan Analyses

Ballotpedia

Proposition 29: Should California Increase the Cigarette Tax?
California Budget Project, May 2012.

League of Women Voters: Pros and Cons

Multimedia

Multimedia

Supporters

  • See video
    Prop 29: State of Emergency
  • See video
    Stand Up to Big Tobacco -- Yes on Prop 29
  • See video
    Why we support Prop 29: The California Cancer Research Act
  • See video
    Proposition 29 - The California Cancer Research Act: Launch Video

Non-partisan

Endorsements

Endorsements
News and Opinion
Updated: 0 sec ago

A parent’s outlook on child starting kindergarten

Wed, 2014-08-27 19:30
A parent's perspective on education, child's first day of kindergarten.

More classes at OCC make first day easier

Mon, 2014-08-25 18:51
Students hustled to classes for the first day of the fall semester at Orange Coast College on Monday morning, but unlike in previous years, most were confident a seat would be waiting for them ...

The Highest State And Local Income Taxes On A $1 Million Income: Post Election 2012

Tue, 2014-08-19 08:13
With the passage of Proposition 30 on Election Day, California boasts the top state income tax rate of 13.3% and moves up in the rankings of states taking the biggest bite out of a $1 million salary.

California Would Create More Jobs Without Prop 30

Wed, 2014-07-30 16:23
In his recent piece for The Sacramento Bee, "State's job growth defies predictions after tax increases," David Cay Johnston argues that California's recent job creation numbers prove