Poor Smokers, Poor Quitters, and Cigarette Tax Regressivity

Remler, Dahlia K.

doi:10.2105/ajph.94.2.225

Cited by 108 publications

(95 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, Smed et al 24 found that food taxes were only slightly regressive and that lower-income households reduced their consumption proportionately more than wealthier households, as has been observed with tobacco taxes. 49 Combining food taxes with subsidies could help alleviate potential regressivity by enabling consumers to switch to more healthy products without incurring additional costs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of fiscal policy on diet, obesity and chronic disease: a systematic review

Thow

Jan

Leeder

et al. 2010

Bull. World Health Organ.

237

191

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research 2 from Business Source Premier. In addition, 55 papers from Google Scholar were judged relevant. Once duplicate references were removed, 62 remained. Thereafter, 41 papers were excluded following a full text review, leaving 21. The reference lists from three recent reviews [17][18][19] were also examined, yielding two further publications, and the details of one recently published study were obtained directly from a coauthor. 20 Finally, 24 studies were included in the current review (Fig. 1). AnalysisFor the purposes of the analysis, studies were classified according to: (i) the outcome assessed, such as the effect on food consumption or expenditure, body weight or health, (ii) whether they were modelling or empirical studies, and (iii) whether or not they were peer-reviewed. ResultsOf the 24 studies reviewed, 13 were from the peer-reviewed literature, including one published in an edited book, and 11 were published online, as summarized in Table 1 (available at: http://www.who. int/bulletin/volumes/88/8/09-070987). All were published between 2000 and 2009, and mostly since 2006. All studies but one were set in high-income countries, and more than half were in the USA.The majority of studies used predictive models to assess the effect of a proposed tax on consumption. Only 6 studies used observational data and 4 of these used data at the population rather than the individual level to look for associations between taxes and body weight.Nine studies assessed the effect of taxes on food consumption or expenditure alone, five on consumption and body weight, four on consumption and disease, and six on body weight only. Studies on soft drink taxes were the most common: there were 10 such studies, 2 of which also included "snack" taxes. Thereafter, 7 studies examined food taxation based on nutrient content, most commonly fat. Three studies assessed fruit and vegetable subsidies, and another assessed three taxes on a variety of "unhealthy" foods. Effect on consumptionPeer-reviewed studies The four peer-reviewed studies on food consumption all found that a subsidy, tax or change to a tax altered consumption in the expected direction. In an empirical study in Ireland, Bahl et al. 21 found that a 20% reduction in a soft drink tax resulted in a 6.8% increase in average soft drink consumption. However, had all of the tax reduction been passed on, consumption would actually have risen by 15%.Three studies modelled the effect of proposed taxation strategies on the whole diet. Smed et al. 24 examined seven scenarios for taxing unhealthy and subsidizing healthy foods and nutrients in Denmark. Each involved the equivalent of halving value added tax (VAT) on fruit and vegetables. They concluded that subsidizing specific nutrients was more effective than subsidizing food groups. Their best revenue-neutral scenario decreased average consumption of sugar by 6.5%, fat by 2.5% and saturated fat by 3.6%, and increased consumption of fibre by 6.5%.In a similar study, Jensen & Smed 22 found that younger consumers and loweri...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of fiscal policy on diet, obesity and chronic disease: a systematic review

Thow

Jan

Leeder

et al. 2010

Bull. World Health Organ.

237

191

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because the poor are more responsive to price increases, they benefit more from higher taxes as commitment mechanisms. Remler (2004) addressed qualitatively the different underlying notions of regressivity. In this paper, we investigate thoroughly whether Warner's contention that cigarette tax increases are a movement toward progressivity in a traditional framework is true empirically.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vertical equity consequences of very high cigarette tax increases: If the poor are the ones smoking, how could cigarette tax increases be progressive?

Colman¹,

Remler²

2008

J Policy Anal Manage

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cigarette smoking is concentrated among low-income groups. Consequently, cigarette taxes are considered regressive. However, if poorer individuals are much more price sensitive than richer individuals, then tax increases would reduce smoking much more among the poor and their cigarette tax expenditures as a share of income would rise by much less than for the rich. Warner (2000) said this phenomenon would make cigarette tax increases progressive. We test this empirically. Among low-, middle-, and high-income groups, we estimate total price elasticities of _0.37, _0.35, and _0.20, respectively. We find that cigarette tax increases are not close to progressive, using both tax expenditure-based and traditional welfare measures. This finding is robust to cross-border purchasing, generic cigarettes, and substantial external effects. However, we find that taxes can be progressive under some behavioral economic models (Gruber & Koszegi, 2004) but that these may only apply to a small share of smokers. © 2008 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.

show abstract

“…15 We must also be conscious that the imperative to reduce specific pathologies, however logical, reflects personal and structural biases-research methods, funding systems, and career trajectories that are tied to and show impact on individual diseases.…”

Section: Public Health Law Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Law in a Social Determinants Strategy: A Public Health Law Research Perspective

Burris

2011

Public Health Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Poor Smokers, Poor Quitters, and Cigarette Tax Regressivity

Cited by 108 publications

References 13 publications

The effect of fiscal policy on diet, obesity and chronic disease: a systematic review

The effect of fiscal policy on diet, obesity and chronic disease: a systematic review

Vertical equity consequences of very high cigarette tax increases: If the poor are the ones smoking, how could cigarette tax increases be progressive?

Law in a Social Determinants Strategy: A Public Health Law Research Perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About