The increasing taxes on tobacco encourage people to give up smoking or never start in the first place. The conflict over increasing the ‘tobacco taxes has become perhaps the greatest morality play of the 21st century”. (Lang and Marks 1996)

Income for the government from tobacco taxes generates a large sum of money. The tobacco industry supports hundreds of thousands of jobs (in farming, manufacturing, and distribution sales), and excise taxes on tobacco products, for example, allow for “$12 billion

In a recent article form The Toronto Star, (A6 pg.12) it was stated that, “the federal government announced yesterday it will spend more than $500 million on its tobacco-control strategy over the next five years”. (The Toronto Star A6 pg.12) This is a law the government has set to reduce the number of Canadians who smoke to 20 percent of the population from 25 percent over the next 10 years. The government expects cigarette sales to fall by almost one-third. The “government’s strategy is to make a $4 –per-carton federal – provincial tax hike in Ontario and four other provinces”. (The Toronto Star A6 pg. 13)

tocking a company’s brands”. (Lang and Marks 1996) The retailer wants to sell cigarettes, the more seductive the in-store advertising the happier the storeowner.

The future of the tobacco industry is going to continue to face counter attacks from the government to try and decreases smoking. The government is trying to regulate and enforce more laws to decrease the number of people that smoke in Canada.

There will be the impetus for change that will come from steady regulatory pressure on the harm caused by nicotine delivery through tobacco smoke. We already know there are many patents and techniques for reducing toxins in tobacco smoke for example, “to remove nitrosamines, carbon monoxide, phenols, hydrogen cyanide, and many more. This would be the start of a long process of "purifying" nicotine delivery. (www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full) Smokers take the nicotine they need from smoke, but they inhale the toxins that come with the nicotine. By reducing the concentration of toxins in the smoke relative to nicotine the smoke will become genuinely less hazardous unlike so-called low tar cigarettes. Continuous regulatory pressure would force innovation in tobacco product design that would suggest an evolution from burning to heating tobacco, and then perhaps into products which are sucked or chewed, or the active ingredients extracted and repackaged. This means changing the approach of some very entrenched conservative pharmaceutical regulators who have never had to face their deacon complicity in protecting and nurturing tobacco interests. One of the toughest questions the government asks is with new nicotine products is the extent to which established tobacco control policies, such as taxation, advertising restrictions, and health promotion campaigns should be applied.

The truth is, tobacco taxes takes a exceedingly high financial tool on society. Yet such high costs do little to discourage the one million teenagers who start smoking every year from picking up one of the most difficult-to-break habits in the world which contributes to the success of the tobacco industry.

In the multimedia marketing of cigarettes two decades ago, most of the advertisi

Some topics in this essay:
Lang Marks, Star A6, Budget Act, Tobacco Industry*, Civil War, North America”, Health Canada, tobacco industry, Mark Taylor, marks 1996, lang marks 1996, lang marks, Ontario Quebec, toronto star a6, bender 1995, tobacco taxes, excise tax, star a6, toronto star, Toronto Star, future tobacco, success tobacco industry, success tobacco, future tobacco industry, persuasive advertising marketing,