People Ban: NH State Update Page 2

NH court: Roll-your-own retailer liable for fees
By Lynne Tuohy
Associated Press / June 30, 2011
CONCORD, N.H.—The New Hampshire Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a Brookline tobacco retailer is a cigarette manufacturer and should pay into a national fund to offset the costs of tobacco-related illnesses.
The court unanimously rejected the argument by North of the Border Tobacco that customers at its Tobacco Haven store who pay a fee to rent cigarette-rolling machines are the real manufacturers.
“Tobacco Haven’s practice of renting the use of its on-site machines does not vitiate its status as an entity that directly manufactures and sells rolled cigarettes,” Justice Robert Lynn wrote.
The court also rejected North of the Border’s contention that the fees should be paid by the wholesaler that supplies the company its tobacco.
But the legal fight over payment of fees going forward is far from over, said the lead lawyer for the state, Assistant Attorney General David Rienzo.
The Supreme Court sent the case back to the trial court to address constitutional anti-trust issues raised by a second North of the Board entity. It also remanded the case for the trial court to rule on claims stemming from the tobacco retailer’s change in its business plan through the creation of that second entity.
“It’s entirely possible we’ll be looking at another Supreme Court order on this,” Rienzo said.
Lawyers for North of the Border did not immediately return calls seeking comment.
Two years ago, North of the Border Tobacco installed in its Tobacco Haven store two machines that can roll 200 cigarettes — the equivalent of a carton — in 10 minutes. The retailer was charging a total of $19.99 for the loose tobacco, tubes and use of the machines to roll a carton of cigarettes. The company has since raised that to $24.99 for the tobacco and tubes and $5 to rent the machines that do the rolling.
Before the trial court issued its ruling in May 2010, North of the Border created a new business entity — Roll Your Own, known as RYO — and transferred ownership of the machines to the new company. The machines were then moved into a convenience store next door to Tobacco Haven. Tobacco Haven charges customers $24.99 for the tobacco and $5 to use the RYO machines, with both charges appearing on a single receipt.
The trial judge included RYO in its order that North of the Board pay into the national fund without affording the company a hearing when it objected.
Rienzo said the case now returns to Merrimack Superior Court to determine, among other things, whether “moving the machines 30 feet to the left is enough of a difference” in its operations to erase North of the Border’s status as a cigarette manufacturer.

---

New Hampshire Nannies: Why is The “Live Free or Die” State Banning Fish Pedicures?
ReasonTV — March 23, 2010 — The always-expanding Nanny State does more than treat adults like children, it can also smother job creation—even in the “live free or die” state of New Hampshire.
So as the national debate “pivots” from health care to jobs, Reason.tv suggests that politicians looking to”do something” about the stubbornly high unemployment rate first undo the regulations that ensnare entrepreneurs like Kim Ong.
Ong’s parents brought her family from Vietnam to the United States in 1985. “They said this is a country of freedom, a country of opportunities,” recalls Ong, who took their words to heart and now owns Kim’s Spa & Nails in Derry, New Hampshire.
When the recession hit she began looking for new ways to generate business. Her thoughts turned to a luxurious practice that’s popular in parts of Asia—fish pedicures.Ong spent over $6,000 to purchase fish and equipment, a big investment for the small business owner. However, her gamble paid off when she saw how much customers loved having their feet exfoliated by tiny fish.
Soon Ong had a waiting list for this hip new service. But instead of hiring more employees, Ong hired a lawyer to plead her case to state regulators who questioned the safety and hygeine of fish pedicures.
Unfortunately for Ong and her customers, New Hampshire’s Board of Barbering, Cosmetology, and Esthetics banned the practice.
That’s right, the state that lets adults motorcycle without a helmet or drive without a seat belt won’t tolerate tiny fish nibbling at the dead skin on your feet.
This is just one small example of a larger problem. Most people have no idea how many local, state, and federal regulations entrepreneurs struggle against, notes Adrian Moore, an economist with Reason Foundation. “Every day new businesses try to start but find out they’re not allowed to because of some regulation or it’s too expensive because of some regulation,” Moore says.
And if the Nanny State is spreading into New Hampshire, the one place we thought was immune to it, we may all be in bigger trouble than we thought.
“New Hampshire Nannies” is written and produced by Ted Balaker, who also hosts. Producer: Hawk Jensen; Associate Producer: Paul Detrick, Additional Camera: Meredith Bragg. Special thanks to Yvonne Hair & Nails in Alexandria, Virginia. Approximately 5.30 minutes long.
Go to http://reason.tv for iPod, HD, and audio versions of this video.

---

N.H Senate: a cigar is just a cigarette

May 2, 2008

In a close vote, the New Hampshire Senate agreed in principle Thursday to tax mini-cigars, but the battle over the change in law isn’t over yet.

In a 13-11 vote, the Senate adopted the federal definition of a cigarette that “closes the loophole,” which had enabled mini-cigars to escape the cigarette tax, according to Sen. Bob Odell, R-Lempster.

While cigarette sales have fallen, mini-cigars sales have gone up by some 20 to 30 percent, enabling young people to obtain get tobacco at a relatively cheap price, said proponents of the change. The mini-cigars are nothing more than poor quality cigarettes, they argue.

But opponents said the change is more than closing a loophole, it is an expansion of a tax to cover cigars. The mini-cigars are cigars, even if they are wrapped in paper and come in a carton, because most people don’t inhale them, they said.

“It’s a new tax on another product,” said Sen. Bob Clegg, R-Hudson, who called the legislation anti-business. “It’s just another way to hit the retailer. You dip his hand into his pocket to see if he has any change. Stop trying to collect every nickel.”

Under the change, the product will have to be stamped, which would be difficult when they aren’t sold in cartons. But Odell say he was assured by the state Department of Revenue Administration that it would bypass the stamping when it isn’t feasible, and just collect the tax in advance.

Sen. Lou D’Allesandro, D-Manchester, another opponent of the measure, also warned that the move might jeopardize the state’s tobacco settlement money, but other senators disagreed, and ended up passing the bill.

The battle isn’t over yet, however. The bill still has to go before D’Allesandro’s Senate Finance Committee before returning to the full Senate again. Then it still must be sent back to the House, since the Senate amended the measure’s language. – BOB SANDERS/NEW HAMPSHIRE BUSINESS REVIEW

---

Hot Legs Get the Cold Shoulder

By Lily Robertson
March 31, 2008
The Liquor Commission Enforcement Division is putting its foot down on Portsmouth drinking establishments for, among other things, over-serving patrons.

If I owned a bar in New Hampshire, in the middle of winter, I’d be hard pressed to stop serving someone because they got a little wobbly. I’d need to make up for the loss of money from banning smokers.

Let’s face it. Ask any smoker and they’ll tell you that drinking and smoking go hand in hand, like beans and cornbread in my favorite Louis Prima song. Want me to stick around your fine establishment in the middle of winter in New England? Let me light up. I don’t even care if you put me in a room that has to be entered through a phone booth and fifteen air filter locks like I was on Get Smart or something. Actually, that would be kinda fun. But tell me that after I get all dolled up I have to go outside in the snow to have a few puffs and I’m going to hit the liquor store instead.

Before you start applauding, oh great and grand granola munching non-smokers, ask yourself what you think your profit margin would be in the winter if you made people go outside every hour. You’d be alienating a huge percentage of the most serious drinkers available. Sure, you can use the argument that you can drive past a pub and there are only a handful of smokers standing on the street, but it’s ten bloody degrees out there. Most of the smokers are at home…where it’s warm. We’d be inside the bar, drinking, smoking, and dancing, spending our hard earned bourbon bucks if we didn’t have to worry about hypothermia being the actual cost of a night out.

And it’s not just the bar owners who are paying the price for the smoking bans. Oh no. Just think of how the men must suffer! We smoking girls know that in order to brave the winter at a saloon, we have to bundle up. Short skirts aren’t an option. Unless we want to re-bundle every time we have a nic fit. Think of all the leg watching opportunities missed by those poor, flesh deprived, gentlemen. Is it fair? I say, “No!”

Furthermore, what about the taxi drivers? As a proud member of the drinking smoker community, I know I’d rather take a cab home than chance losing my license, or worse, hurting someone, on the way home after a few cocktails. I’m not alone in this, either. I did a brief stint as a cabbie (in a city far, far, away and long, long ago) and the majority of fares were folks getting rides home from clubs. We may as well pass legislation banning cabbies from breeding because they can’t afford to support a family anymore.

We smokers, as a rule, don’t tend to be the wealthiest folks in the states, but we do like to drink. We like music. We like mingling with others. We dance. We’re even willing to pay to do it, provided the stamp we get on our hand from the cover charge is ink and not frostbite. And after we’re done, we want a ride home.

I think the reason the Nicotine Nazis are winning, actually, is because they are wealthier, in general. They can pay for the ads. Their Garden Club, soccer-mom, charity ball funding women have all the time and money in the world to stand around whining about other people doing things they don’t like. What else do they have to do besides protest against their neighbors being aesthetically displeasing? Well, that and buy a five thousand dollar dress to attend a five hundred dollar a seat charity function where they’ll magnanimously donate fifty bucks to find a cure for three legged, albino, crack kitties.

Frankly, I don’t care if these people get a life. All I ask is that they keep their little brown noses out of mine.

So, since the bartending folks have to find a new way to make up for the profit loss incurred by a smoking ban, why not let them set up another round? It is, after all, the drinker’s responsibility to get their own butt home alive. They could even invent a new drink for those who want one more for the road. I say we call it, Black Ink. (And here in New England, it would be served, naturally, on ice.)

---

Resident reacted to second-hand smoke by lobbing stink bomb

By Elizabeth Dinan, edinan@seacoastonline.com
March 25, 2008

PORTSMOUTH — When gaggles of smokers began puffing outside Molly Malone’s Pub following the state-wide smoking ban, neighbor Amy Dodge decided to make a stink by hurling a “stink bomb” into their midst.

According to police records, officers were dispatched to the pub on October 29 at 8:30 p.m., after Dodge, 37, of 175 State St., expressed her disdain for the second-hand smoke by hurling a novelty item, which upon impact emits a foul odor. As a result, Dodge was cited with a violation-level charge of disorderly conduct, to which she pleaded guilty Tuesday.

Appearing without an attorney, Dodge entered the plea admitting she breached the peace and was fined $500, with half suspended for one year pending her good behavior.

Following the hearing, prosecutor Corey MacDonald said he was working as a patrol sergeant that evening with Officer Laura Purslow and responded to the call.

“People were smoking outside because of the new law and because she lives next door, she was not happy,” said MacDonald. “The smell wafted indoors where people who were eating their corned beef and cabbage were inundated with the smell of no good.”

---

For Immediate Release… 3/21/08
?
Libertarian State Legislator in NH successful in efforts to back bill legalizing small amounts of Marijuana
?
Steve Villaincourt is a New Hampshire State Representative.? In the late 1990s he was first elected on both the Libertarian Party and Republican Party lines in New Hampshire. He has since claimed Libertarian Party membership from time to time, and even listed himself as an “Elected Libertarian” on at least one NH political website.
?
Oddly, the Libertarian Party National Headquarters does not seem aware of him or recognize him as an Elected Libertarian.
?
Now comes this breaking news…
?
The New Hampshire State House of Representatives just legalized Marijuana for personal possession in small amounts in a vote 193 – 142.?
?
It was Steve Villaincourt who led the effot and brought together a coalition of Democrats and Republicans to support the measure.?
?
Though, sadly, Democrat Governor John Lynch has vowed to veto the bill.?
?
Full Story now up at www.mainstreamlibertarian.com

---

N.H. House votes to exempt cigar bars from smoking ban

March 6, 2008

CONCORD, N.H. — Cigar bars would be exempt from New Hampshire’s smoking ban and cigarettes masquerading as little cigars would be taxed under bills making their way to the state Senate.

The House voted without debate Wednesday to exempt businesses that get at least 60 percent of their income from the sale of cigars or cigar-related products.

The bill also would allow the business to have a liquor license, which under current law also requires the sale of food.

Employees would be required to sign a form acknowledging they understand the dangers of secondhand smoke and choose to work in the cigar bar. Entry would be prohibited to anyone under age 18.

The state banned smoking in bars and restaurants last year. During the debate over the bill, cigar shops tried unsuccessfully to carve out an exception like one approved Wednesday by the House. More than two dozen cigar and tobacco shop owners had worked together to oppose efforts to ban smoking in bars and restaurants.

Gov. John Lynch said Wednesday he has not seen the proposal and does not know if he would sign it.

Also Wednesday, the House voted 187-136 to change the definition of a cigarette to capture smokes being packaged as cigars. Cigars aren’t subject to the state’s $1.08 per pack cigarette tax.

The bill defines a cigarette by the materials used to make it and by its weight.

Ways and Means Chairwoman Susan Almy said the state is losing money from sales of the fake cigars. But Manchester Republican Steve Vaillancourt argued the smokes are cigars, not cigarettes. He said if the state wants to tax cigars, it should tax all cigars and not just mini-cigars or cigarillos.

Almy acknowledged some premium, small cigars could fall under the bill’s new definition unless the state exempts them through rules.

The Senate next considers the bill.

---

Libertarian Political Report

by Eric Dondero