Smoking Restrictions as a Self-Control Mechanism

Hersch, Joni

doi:10.1007/s11166-005-2927-2

Cited by 36 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 21 publications

(21 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The government's motivation for introducing such a target is the desire to reduce public sector debt as a share of national income more 17 The spending item in question is funding for temporary accommodation. 18 The Treasury argues that the reallocation to local authorities will tend to put downward pressure on spending in this area because overall local government grants are being cut considerably -see Chapter 6.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…By 2014-15, average pay in the public sector was about the same level relative to the private sector as it had been in 2010-11, and still well above its pre-crisis (2007-08) level. 17 This is shown in Figure 6.4.…”

Section: Public Sector Paymentioning

confidence: 91%

“…However, this was only achieved because the government reclassified an element of housing benefit spending such that it was incorporated into central government grants to local authorities rather than being a separate payment. 17 The charter specifies that the government cannot reclassify which welfare spending is in the scope of the cap; welfare spending can only be affected by policy change. However, because the mere fact of reallocating this spending from central to local government may put downward pressure on this element of spending, this transfer has been treated as a policy change and the entire cost of the grants has been taken out of scope.…”

Section: Has the Cap Lost Credibility Already?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, given current CPI inflation forecasts, current legislated policy suggests that these thresholds will only have increased to £11,900 and £46,100, respectively, by April 2020. 17 Increasing the personal allowance by a further £600 and raising the higher-rate threshold to £50,000 would cost around £8 billion. 18 This is a significant additional cost (amounting to around 3½% of income tax revenues forecast for 2020-21) that has not yet been factored into the official forecasts.…”

Section: Policy Commitments That Are Not Included In the Forecastmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…18 This is a significant additional cost (amounting to around 3½% of income tax revenues forecast for 2020-21) that has not yet been factored into the official forecasts. As the 17 Current policy is for the personal allowance to be increased to £11,200 by April 2017 and for the higher-rate threshold to be increased to £43,600 by that point. Thereafter, both are set to be increased in line with the CPI.…”

Section: Policy Commitments That Are Not Included In the Forecastmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

IFS Green Budget 2016

Emmerson¹,

Johnson²,

Joyce³

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Foreword from ICAEW ICAEW is once again very pleased to be associated with the IFS Green Budget. This 2016 report comes at a crucial juncture at the beginning of a new parliament where the political debate is as polarised as it has been for some time. By providing an independent, evidence-based commentary on the economic choices and challenges that we face, it offers much-needed perspective for policymakers as well as the wider electorate. Terms of use: Documents inThe UK government is committed to delivering a budget surplus by 2019-20. It is also committed to funding a range of major infrastructure projects to help unlock long-term economic prosperity. These competing policy priorities will require deft financial management over the course of this parliament, together with a realistic assessment of what is affordable and how these projects can be funded. As the Chancellor pointed out in January, the economic outlook going into 2016 remains uncertain. Balancing the books while having enough in the bank to invest for the future will require tenacity as well as realism about what is achievable.This year, we have produced two chapters for the report. The first provides an analysis of the government balance sheet. The second explores the policy options for infrastructure spending.ICAEW is a world-leading professional accountancy body with 146,000 members in over 160 countries. As an organisation and a profession, we stand for high-quality financial information that can be used to inform good decision-making. We hope the Green Budget will be widely used to that end. Michael Izza Chief Executive Officer of ICAEW Foreword from the Nuffield FoundationOn 16 March, the Chancellor will make his Budget Statement to the House of Commons, setting out the government's assessment of the state of the economy and proposals for tax and spending policy. It is one of the most important annual events for any government, and consequently for all UK citizens. But it shouldn't be the only opportunity to present and discuss analysis of our public finances, and both public debate and policymaking are better informed by the availability of additional, non-partisan analysis.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Public Sector Paymentioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Has the Cap Lost Credibility Already?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Policy Commitments That Are Not Included In the Forecastmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Policy Commitments That Are Not Included In the Forecastmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

IFS Green Budget 2016

Emmerson¹,

Johnson²,

Joyce³

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Understanding Heterogeneity in Price Elasticities in the Demand for Alcohol for Older Individuals

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper estimates the price elasticity of demand for alcohol using Health and Retirement Study data. To account for unobserved heterogeneity in price responsiveness, we use finite mixture models. We recover two latent groups, one is significantly responsive to price, but the other is unresponsive. The group with greater responsiveness is disadvantaged in multiple domains, including health, financial resources, education and perhaps even planning abilities. These results have policy implications. The unresponsive group drinks more heavily, suggesting that a higher tax would fail to curb the negative alcohol-related externalities. In contrast, the more disadvantaged group is more responsive to price, thus suffering greater deadweight loss, yet this group consumes fewer drinks per day and might be less likely to impose negative externalities.

show abstract

Self-control and support for anti-smoking policies among smokers, ex smokers, and never smokers

Amador

Nicolás

2011

Eur J Health Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we sustain that non-smokers who might be at risk of starting to smoke or relapsing can benefit from anti-smoking policies such as tax hikes and smoking bans because these are mechanisms that enhance their self-control with regard to tobacco consumption. We formalize this conjecture by proposing a model where starting/relapsing might result from time inconsistent preferences in a way that mirrors the inability of some smokers to carry out the decision to quit. Subsequently, we specify econometric models that allow us to test the implications of such conjecture using information on smoking behavior at the individual level from the Catalan Health Survey of 2006. The empirical results support our conjecture and suggest that the welfare gains derived from the reinforcement of self-control caused by tax hikes and smoking bans will accrue not only to smokers but also to the rest of the population.

show abstract

Smoking Restrictions as a Self-Control Mechanism

Cited by 36 publications

References 21 publications

IFS Green Budget 2016

IFS Green Budget 2016

Understanding Heterogeneity in Price Elasticities in the Demand for Alcohol for Older Individuals

Self-control and support for anti-smoking policies among smokers, ex smokers, and never smokers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About