Continues a portion of the excise tax levied on cigarettes in statute and authorizes a reduced excise tax rate on certain tobacco products (OR DECREASE GF RV See Note)
HB 668 revises Louisiana’s tobacco excise tax statutes. The bill continues in statute the 4-cent-per-cigarette portion of the existing state cigarette excise tax that is currently maintained through the Louisiana Constitution, while expressly stating that the total state cigarette tax remains $1.08 per pack. It also updates the cigarette definition to include certain tobacco rolls used for heating, not just smoking, and makes several technical and definitional changes to the tobacco tax chapter.
The bill further creates reduced excise tax rates for certain “modified risk tobacco products” that have received specific U.S. Food and Drug Administration orders. Under the proposal, products with an FDA risk modification order would receive a 60% tax reduction, and products with an FDA exposure modification order would receive a 25% tax reduction. The bill also adds definitions related to invoice pricing, promotional incentives, manufacturer’s net invoiced price, and trade discounts to clarify how tax is calculated on tobacco products, including free promotional items listed on invoices.
In terms of state law, HB 668 amends R.S. 47:841 and 842 and adds a new subsection to the tobacco tax statute. It does not increase the overall cigarette tax burden, but it shifts the constitutionally continued 4-cent levy into statute and preserves the existing total cigarette excise tax rate. The bill applies to taxable periods beginning on or after July 1, 2025, and would take effect upon gubernatorial approval or other constitutionally authorized enactment.
The general sentiment reflected in the bill materials is policy-oriented and technical rather than overtly partisan. The bill appears designed to align statutory language with existing constitutional tax treatment, clarify administration of the tobacco tax, and create a tax incentive for FDA-recognized reduced-risk tobacco products. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no documented public debate in the supplied materials, but the bill’s caption notes a potential decrease in general fund revenue, suggesting fiscal concern may be part of the discussion.
The main point of contention likely centers on the reduced tax rates for modified risk tobacco products and the revenue implications of those reductions. Supporters would likely view the bill as encouraging less harmful tobacco alternatives and cleaning up the tax code, while opponents may question whether tax preferences for tobacco products are appropriate or whether the reduced rates could erode state revenue. Another possible issue is the statutory continuation of the 4-cent cigarette tax, though the bill states that it does not increase the total cigarette excise tax.
HB 668 amends Louisiana’s tobacco excise tax law by continuing the constitutionally preserved 4-cent-per-cigarette levy in statute, while preserving the total state cigarette excise tax at $1.08 per pack. It also changes the cigarette definition, adds pricing and invoice-related definitions, and authorizes reduced excise tax rates for certain FDA-designated modified risk tobacco products. The bill affects tobacco manufacturers, wholesalers, retailers, stamping agents, and the Department of Revenue by changing how certain tobacco products are classified and taxed, and by clarifying tax calculation rules for promotional incentives and invoiced pricing.
The bill appears generally neutral-to-supportive in tone based on its drafting and digest, with an emphasis on technical tax conformity and public-health-oriented incentives for modified risk products. No committee testimony or vote history was provided, so there is no direct evidence of organized support or opposition in the supplied record. The caption’s reference to a possible general fund revenue decrease suggests that fiscal effects may be a concern, but the bill itself frames the changes as a continuation of existing cigarette tax policy and a targeted reduction for certain tobacco products.
The most likely contention is over the reduced tax rates for FDA-authorized modified risk tobacco products, which could be viewed as either a harm-reduction incentive or an unwarranted tax break for tobacco companies. Fiscal impact is another likely issue, since the bill is flagged as potentially reducing general fund revenue. There may also be debate over whether moving the 4-cent cigarette levy from constitutional continuation into statute is merely a technical cleanup or a substantive policy change, even though the bill states the total cigarette tax would not increase.