Oregon convenience store owners oppose 65% tax on nicotine pouch products

In a heated session at the Oregon Legislature, the House Committee on Revenue convened to discuss House Bill 2528, which proposes a staggering 65% wholesale tax on nicotine pouch products. The atmosphere was charged as local business owners and community members voiced their concerns about the potential impact of this legislation on families, small businesses, and public safety.

Doug Ball, a category manager for Jackson's Food Stores, which operates 56 convenience stores across Oregon, was among the first to speak against the bill. He highlighted the financial burden it would impose on consumers, estimating that a daily user of nicotine pouches could face an additional $1,200 in annual costs. Ball argued that this tax could drive customers toward unregulated markets, undermining responsible retailers who comply with the law. He emphasized that nicotine pouches are not popular among youth, citing recent data showing a significant decline in youth tobacco use, and urged the committee to reconsider the tax on a product that many adults are turning to as a less harmful alternative.

Kevin Kumar, a small business owner along the Oregon Coast, echoed Ball's sentiments, stressing that Oregonians are already grappling with rising living costs. He warned that the proposed tax would force working-class customers to make difficult financial choices, potentially pushing them toward illicit markets where safety regulations do not apply. Kumar passionately called for a vote against the bill, arguing that it would jeopardize jobs and harm local communities.

Jonathan Polonsky, CEO of Plaid Pantry, which operates 104 convenience stores in Oregon, also opposed the bill, asserting that it could reverse the progress made in reducing cigarette use over the past decade. He pointed to the success of previous policy changes, such as raising the legal smoking age and implementing tobacco licensing, which have contributed to a historic decline in cigarette consumption. Polonsky warned that taxing products that help smokers transition away from combustible cigarettes could inadvertently push them back to more harmful tobacco products.

As the meeting progressed, it became clear that the proposed tax on nicotine pouches has sparked a significant debate about public health, consumer choice, and the economic realities facing Oregonians. With voices from the community urging caution, the committee faces a critical decision that could shape the future of nicotine product regulation in the state. The outcome of this discussion remains to be seen, but the implications for small businesses and public health are profound.