Article

Targeting the affordability of cigarettes: a new benchmark for taxation policy in low-income and-middle-income countries

International Tobacco Control Research Program, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA 30303, USA.
Tobacco control (Impact Factor: 5.15). 08/2010; 19(4):325-30. DOI: 10.1136/tc.2009.030155
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To investigate the appropriateness of tax incidence (the percentage of the retail price occupied by taxes) benchmarking in low-income and-middle-income countries (LMICs) with rapidly growing economies and to explore the viability of an alternative tax policy rule based on the affordability of cigarettes.
The paper outlines criticisms of tax incidence benchmarking, particularly in the context of LMICs. It then considers an affordability-based benchmark using relative income price (RIP) as a measure of affordability. The RIP measures the percentage of annual per capita GDP required to purchase 100 packs of cigarettes. Using South Africa as a case study of an LMIC, future consumption is simulated using both tax incidence benchmarks and affordability benchmarks.
I show that a tax incidence benchmark is not an optimal policy tool in South Africa and that an affordability benchmark could be a more effective means of reducing tobacco consumption in the future.
Although a tax incidence benchmark was successful in increasing prices and reducing tobacco consumption in South Africa in the past, this approach has drawbacks, particularly in the context of a rapidly growing LMIC economy. An affordability benchmark represents an appropriate alternative that would be more effective in reducing future cigarette consumption.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Evan Harold Blecher, May 18, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
86 Views
 · 
8 Downloads
  • Source
    • "Several studies over the past decade have developed the concept of cigarette affordability as a function of cigarette price and individuals' income level (Blecher, Ross, & Leon, 2012; Blecher & van Walbeek, 2004, 2009; Bogdanovica, Murray, McNeill, & Britton, 2012; Guindon, Tobin, & Yach, 2002; Kan, 2007) In a more recent series of studies, Blecher et al. (2012) have shown the relevance of cigarette affordability in low-and middle-income countries whose economies have experienced rapid economic growth (Blecher, 2010; Blecher & van Walbeek, 2009). However, no previous study has examined cigarette affordability in the United States despite substantial state variation in cigarette prices and incomes as well as their trends over time (Bernstein, McNichol, & Nicholas, 2008; Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, 2011b). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: Cigarette excise tax and price increases reduce smoking consumption and prevalence. Studies have previously defined cigarette affordability internationally and have discussed its relevance as a tobacco control policy measure. This study provides the first estimates on cigarette affordability in the United States. METHODS: Cigarette affordability was defined as cigarette price in relation to individuals' income level. Three measures of cigarette affordability were estimated for U.S. states and nationally between 1970 and 2010. RESULTS: In 2010, on average, it took 1.62% of an individual's annual personal disposable income to purchase 100 packs of cigarettes in a U.S. state (relative income price). An individual who earned the equivalent of the hourly median wage in a U.S. state needed to work 21.4min in an hour to purchase a pack of cigarettes (minutes of labor, MoL50), whereas a relatively poorer individual earning the hourly 25th percentile wage needed to work 32.7min (MoL25). Cigarettes were most affordable in parts of the South and West and were least affordable in Northeastern states. While cigarette prices increased significantly between 1970 and 2008, affordability remained unchanged during this time and cigarettes may have become more affordable since the early 2000s in many states. CONCLUSIONS: Cigarette affordability in 2010 varied widely across U.S. states, a result of cigarette price increases not keeping pace with income increases in some parts of the United States, especially in Southern and Western states. In order to maximize the public health gains from cigarette tax increases, state taxation policies may consider affordability in benchmarking excise tax increases.
    Nicotine & Tobacco Research 03/2013; DOI:10.1093/ntr/nts348 · 2.81 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "In some instances, scholarly studies generate country-specific estimates of tobacco-related deaths [41] or proven economic impacts [42], which are particularly helpful for presenting to local policymakers. In other cases, African researchers are making original and important contributions to the broader tobacco control discourse, though perhaps in areas particularly relevant to developing countries, for example in taxation [43] or maternal health [44]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The public health rewards of smoke-free policies are well documented. But in their enthusiasm to achieve such policies, public health advocates and policymakers frequently underestimate the political complexity of passing laws, and then implementing and enforcing them. Using 12 African countries as the focus of discussion, this research examines the basic political process for and the barriers to achieving smoke-free policies. Moreover, in addition to the obstacles, it examines why some countries have been experiencing comparatively more success in the smoke-free policy area. The findings of the research suggest strongly that the presence of a vigorous tobacco control civil society movement, some will on the part of government institutions, and active research support contribute significantly to successful smoke-free policies. It is also apparent that the emerging battle fronts in smoke-free policies are in the areas of implementation and enforcement, and while similar variables that affect the passing of new laws also condition these outcomes, there are the added distinct challenges of policy fatigue and additional resource constraints.
    CVD Prevention and Control 09/2010; DOI:10.1016/j.cvdpc.2010.07.001
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Increasing excise tax on tobacco is one of the most powerful and cost-effective smoking interventions. Despite this evidence, there has been no substantial tax increase in New Zealand between 2000 and 2010. In April 2010 a 10% tax increase on factory-made cigarettes and a 24% tax increase on loose leaf tobacco was implemented. To evaluate the effect of cost as a motivating reason for smokers to make a quit attempt before and after the 2010 tobacco tax increase. A regression analysis of a cross-sectional study was conducted. Data were collected from August to October 2009 and compared with data collected in July 2010. In 2009, 25.5% of smokers cited cost as a reason for trying to quit smoking compared with 55.6% in 2010. The adjusted odds of making a quit attempt with cost as a reason were 3.6 (95% CI 2.3-5.6, P = <0.001). Furthermore, smokers were more likely to make a quit attempt in 2010 than in 2009. Thirty percent of smokers made at least one quit attempt in 2009 and 39% made a quit attempt in 2010 (adjusted odds ratio 1.5, 95% CI 0.95-2.3, P = <0.1) The recent tax increase on tobacco in New Zealand has resulted in more smokers making an attempt to quit smoking and more smokers identifying cost as a motive for quitting.
    Journal of primary health care 01/2011; 3(4):283-8.
Show more