Indiana cigarette tax just tripled. How much are tobacco taxes now?
Indiana lawmakers earlier this year approved an increase in the state's tobacco taxes to help plug a $2 billion budget shortfall. Gov. Mike Braun signed off on raising the cigarette tax by $2 a pack and the 200% bump went into effect.
The state's cigarette taxes rose from about $1 to $3 a pack. Taxes on other tobacco products, such as cigars and e-cigarettes, also increased.
Legislative leaders, when unveiling the tax increase in the final days of the session, said they expect it to raise roughly $800 million over the two-year budget cycle, helping fund the state's Medicaid costs.
"Along with revenue comes a really pretty good public policy that was going to help persuade people to either not start smoking or stop smoking at the same time," Indiana Sen. Pro Tempore Rodric Bray, R-Martinsville, said in April.
With the tax increasing in Indiana from just under $1 a pack to nearly $3 a pack, the Hoosier State now has the 12th highest state cigarette tax in the country and a higher rate than any of the states that touch its borders.
According to advocacy groups like the American Lung Association and the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids prices per pack are:
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
34 minutes ago
- USA Today
Jeffries uses ‘magic minute' as part of resistance plan against Trump tax bill
On the eve of America's 250th birthday, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-New York, is doing all he can to delay what looks to be the inevitable passage of President Donald Trump's sweeping tax and domestic policy bill. Jeffries, stymied with legislative options to block Trump's signature "big beautiful bill", has now taken his efforts to the court of public opinion, seizing the microphone on the House floor in a marathon speech. The Democratic leader started his protest speech shortly before 5 a.m. on July 3 as House Republicans continue to hammer out the proposal that would extend the 2017 tax cuts, boost military and border security spending and make an estimated $1 trillion cut to Medicaid and other programs meant to help the poor and working-class. "I rise today in strong opposition to Donald Trump's disgusting abomination… that guts Medicaid, rips food from the mouths of children, seniors and veterans, and rewards billionaires with massive tax breaks," Jeffries said. There are stacks of binders next to Jeffries at the podium, which indicates he plans to extend this marathon debate further but the Trump administration and congressional Republicans believe they have enough votes to cross the finish line. Here are some key things to think about in the final hours of the bill's debate. Jeffries using 'magic minute' is part of Democratic resistance plan As the party out of power in every part of the federal government, Democrats don't have many options in terms of stopping Trump's bulldozer in Washington. Instead of defeating the bill, Jeffries appears to be looking to rally national outrage over Trump's measure -- which 55% of registered voters oppose, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released June 26 -- by using a procedural tactic known as the "magic minute" that gives the House leaders unlimited speaking time on the floor. "People will die," Jeffries said. "I'm sad. I never thought that I'd be on the House floor saying this is a crime scene. And House Democrats want no part of it." The marathon speech is similar to the one Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., did in April that lasted for 25 hours and 5 minutes and broke the Senate record. It is unclear if Jeffries' talk-a-thon is getting the same level of attention online as Booker's speech did, but he's using to it pick apart the mega-bill and other parts of Trump's agenda including the focus on illegal immigration. Jeffries said at one point that Democrats support fixing the country's "broken" immigration system and booting those who commit crimes out of the U.S., but that his party opposes targeting law-abiding immigrant families, such as a 2-year-old girl born to two undocumented immigrants in Florida who was deported to Brazil by the administration earlier this year. 'Take my sweet time': How long will Jeffries speak? Democrats aren't saying how long Jeffries plans to speak, but from the binders and other materials joining the 54-year-old congressman at the podium he appears to be ready to take up as much time as he can physically muster. "I'm still here to take my sweet time," Jeffries said at one point. The House Democratic leader is about halfway to breaking the all-time record for the longest House floor speech set by former Rep. Kevin McCarthy, who as the GOP leader in 2021 spoke against a Democratic spending measure. For much of this year Democrats and their progressive allies have been searching for different ways to regain voters' confidence and stop Trump's winning streak, whether by using congressional procedures or crashing press conferences held by administration officials. For most of the speech, Jeffries has been reading the testimonials of average Americans who will be impacted by spending cuts in what the president has dubbed his "one, big beautiful bill." But he has also been condemning other parts of the Trump agenda, including the massive effort to remove undocumented immigrants from the country. Vance scoffs at delay tactic as White House reschedules signing ceremony Republicans don't seem too deterred by Jeffries' protest speech, even as the White House is reportedly having to change plans on what day and time Trump will hold a ceremonial signing of the mega-bill. Vice President JD Vance took to X, formerly known as Twitter, suggesting the Democratic leader's speech is having the opposite effect. "GOP Congressman just texted me: 'I was undecided on the bill but then I watched Hakeem Jeffries performance and now I'm a firm yes.'" Other White House aides are mocking the marathon speech, too. Dan Scavino, a longtime Trump adviser and deputy chief of staff, posted a portion of Jeffries talking about stripping parts of the Affordable Care Act featuring the president playing an off-tune version of "My Heart Will Go On" on a flute. Contributing: Savannah Kuchar, Sudiksha Kochi and Joey Garrison
The Onion
34 minutes ago
- The Onion
What's In Trump's Big Beautiful Bill
President Donald Trump's budget megabill is in the House of Representatives after being narrowly passed by the Senate. Here are the key items in 'The One Big Beautiful Bill Act.' Funding for something called 'The Facility.' Smaller, phone booth–sized detention boxes on every American street corner. Coupon for 'buy two get one free' 12-packs of Coca-Cola products at ShopRite. A few new mean nicknames for Jeb Bush. A map of California inside a red circle with a cross through it. A glossy centerfold photo of a hot woman who is about to lose her health insurance. The end of treatment for those currently receiving CPR. Sen. Lisa Murkowski's world-famous moose tracks ice cream recipe. Moderate cuts to Medicaid compared to what's coming.
Vox
an hour ago
- Vox
Why Trump's big legislative win could be short-lived
is a senior politics reporter at Vox, where he covers the Democratic Party. He joined Vox in 2022 after reporting on national and international politics for the Atlantic's politics, global, and ideas teams, including the role of Latino voters in the 2020 election. President Donald Trump speaks during an address to a joint session of Congress at the US Capitol on March 4, 2025. Allison Robbert/AFP via Getty Images President Donald Trump is about to achieve his biggest legislative victory yet: His 'big, beautiful bill' — the massive tax- and Medicaid-cutting, immigration and border spending bill passed the Senate on Tuesday — is on the verge of passing the House of Representatives. It's a massive piece of legislation, likely to increase the national debt by at least $3 trillion, mostly through tax cuts, and leave 17 million Americans without health coverage — and it's really unpopular. Majorities in nearly every reputable poll taken this month disapprove of the bill, ranging from 42 percent who oppose the bill in an Ipsos poll (compared to 23 percent who support) to 64 percent who oppose it in a KFF poll. Today, Explained Understand the world with a daily explainer, plus the most compelling stories of the day. Email (required) Sign Up By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. And if history is any indication, it's not going to get any better for Trump and the Republicans from here on out. In modern American politics, few things are more unpopular with the public than big, messy bills forged under a bright spotlight. That's especially true of bills passed through a Senate mechanism called 'budget reconciliation,' a Senate procedure that allows the governing party to bypass filibuster rules with a simple majority vote. They tend to have a negative effect on presidents and their political parties in the following months as policies are implemented and campaign seasons begin. Part of that effect is due to the public's general tendency to dislike any kind of legislation as it gets more publicity and becomes better understood. But reconciliation bills in the modern era seem to create a self-fulfilling prophecy: forcing presidents to be maximally ambitious at the outset, before they lose popular support for the legislation and eventually lose the congressional majorities that delivered passage. Presidents and their parties tend to be punished after passing big spending bills The budget reconciliation process, created in 1974, has gradually been used to accomplish broader and bigger policy goals. Because it offers a workaround for a Senate filibuster, which requires 60 votes to break, it has become the primary way that presidents and their parties implement their economic and social welfare visions. The public, however, doesn't tend to reward the governing party after these bills are passed. As political writer and analyst Ron Brownstein recently pointed out, presidents who successfully pass a major reconciliation bill in the first year of their presidency lose control of Congress, usually the House, the following year. In 1982, Ronald Reagan lost his governing majority in the House after using reconciliation to pass large spending cuts as part of his Reaganomics vision (the original 'big, beautiful' bill). And the pattern would repeat itself for George H.W. Bush (whose reconciliation bill contradicted his campaign promise not to raise taxes), for Bill Clinton in 1994 (deficit reductions and tax reform), for Barack Obama in 2010 (after the passage of the Affordable Care Act), for Trump in 2018 (tax cuts), and for Biden in 2022 (the American Rescue Plan and the Inflation Reduction Act). The exception in this list of modern presidents is George W. Bush, who did pass a set of tax cuts in a reconciliation bill, but whose approval rating rose after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Increasing polarization, and the general anti-incumbent party energy that tends to run through midterm elections, of course, explains part of this overall popular and electoral backlash. But reconciliation bills themselves seem to intensify this effect. Why reconciliation bills do so much political damage First, there's the actual substance of these bills, which has been growing in scope over time. Because they tend to be the first, and likely only, major piece of domestic legislation that can execute a president's agenda, they are often highly ideological, partisan projects that try to implement as much of a governing party's vision as possible. These highly ideological pieces of legislation, Matt Grossman, the director of Michigan State University's Institute for Public Policy and Social Research, and his partners have found, tend to kick into gear a 'thermostatic' response from the public — that is, that public opinion moves in the opposite direction of policymaking when the public perceives one side is going too far to the right or left. Because these bills have actually been growing in reach, from mere tax code adjustments to massive tax-and-spend, program-creating bills, and becoming more ideological projects, the public, in turn, seems to be reacting more harshly. These big reconciliation bills also run into an issue that afflicts all kinds of legislation: It has a PR problem. Media coverage of proposed legislation tends to emphasize its partisanship, portraying the party in power as pursuing its domestic agenda at all costs and emphasizing that parties are fighting against each other. This elevates process over policy substance. Political scientist Mary Layton Atkinson has found that just like campaign reporting is inclined to focus on the horse race, coverage of legislation in Congress and policy debates often focuses on conflict and procedure, adding to a sense in the public mind that Congress is extreme, dysfunctional, and hyperpartisan. Adding to this dynamic is a quirk of public opinion toward legislation and referenda: Proposals tend to get less popular, and lose public support, between proposal and passage, as the public learns more about the actual content of initiatives and as they hear more about the political negotiations and struggles taking place behind the scenes as these bills are ironed out. Lawmakers and key political figures also 'tend to highlight the benefits less than the things that they are upset about in the course of negotiations,' Grossman told me. 'That [also] occurs when a bill passes: You have the people who are against it saying all the terrible things about it, and actually the people who are for it are often saying, 'I didn't get all that I wanted, I would have liked it to be slightly different.' So the message that comes out of it is actually pretty negative on the whole, because no one is out there saying this is the greatest thing and exactly what they wanted.' Even with the current One Big Beautiful Bill, polling analysis shows that the public tends not to be very knowledgeable about what is in the legislative package, but gets even more hostile to it once they learn or are provided more information about specific policy details. Big reconciliation bills exist at the intersection of all three of these public image problems: They tend to be the first major legislative challenge a new president and Congress take on, they suck up all the media's attention, they direct the public's attention to one major piece of legislation, and they take a pretty long time to iron out — further extending the timeline in which the bill can get more unpopular.
