Evaluating the Efficiency of Tobacco Taxes Increase - Essay Example

Evaluating the Efficiency of Tobacco Taxes Increase Evaluating the Efficiency of Tobacco Taxes Increase Introduction The useof tobacco presents numerous health adverse effects. Many researchers have confirmed that tobacco smoking not only reduces one’s lifespan, but also exposes the individual to a diverse range of diseases. Tobacco smoking has contributed to a high financial burden on health sectors across the globe because of tobacco-related diseases. Therefore, many governments have sought to introduce stringent measures of reducing tobacco smoking. Increasing the taxation of tobacco products has been launched as one of the strategies aimed at reducing tobacco consumption (Sheng-Hung, Jie-Min, Hsiang-Hsi, Hui-Cheng, & Chun-Yuan, 2011). The rationale for increased taxation of tobacco products is that higher taxes will translate into high prices for tobacco products. Proponents of this strategy opine that when tobacco products have higher prices, the demand is likely to decrease. Many countries have implemented this strategy as one of the efforts of addressing increase tobacco consumption (Cowie, Glover, & Gentles, 2014). Worth noting is the fact that tobacco consumption contributes to a remarkable percentage of deaths. For this reason, it is important to evaluate the efficiency of the taxation strategy for reducing tobacco consumption. This paper will evaluate the efficiency of the taxation strategies on tobacco consumption, relying on evidence-based research. There is evidence that taxation strategies do not contribute to a significant reduction of tobacco smoking, as this paper will highlight. Body As highlighted above, the rationale for increasing taxation on tobacco products is based on the fact that tobacco consumption is proving to be one of the most critical public health threats in the twenty-first century. According to future projections, the globe will register 1.6 billion smokers if effective strategies for reducing smoking are not implemented. Many countries have recognized the tobacco epidemic and are putting in measures in an effort to reduce the prevalence of tobacco consumption (Gigliotti, Figueiredo, Madruga, Marques, Pinsky, Caetano, & Laranjeira, 2014). As mentioned previously, increasing tobacco taxes is viewed as one of the best strategies that can register positive results in reducing the prevalence of tobacco consumption. The World Bank has supported the initiative of introducing increased taxes on tobacco products. Proponents of this strategy believe that it can register positive outcomes in various populations. Governments that have implemented this strategy also achieve associated revenue goals through the additional taxes (Klumbiene, Sakyte, Petkeviciene, Prattala, & Kunst, 2015). However, the main objective of introducing the strategy is to reduce the consumption of tobacco. Different researchers have sought to determine the efficiency of increasing tobacco taxes in different populations. One of the studies carried out by Thomas and his colleagues (2013) sought to determine both the impact and perceptions of a tobacco tax increase in remote Australian Aboriginal communities. Notably, the Australian government increased tobacco taxes by 25% in 2010. The increase of taxation on tobacco products had the objective of reducing tobacco consumption. The government had opined that increasing the taxes would contribute to a remarkable 6% reduction in tobacco consumption. Worth noting is the fact that many Australians support the strategy considering it an effective measure of reducing consumption of tobacco. Thomas and his colleagues focused on the 175 stores located in indigenous communities. Out of these stores, the researchers settled for 21 of the stores that had a governing body. In total, 18 indigenous communities participated. Through purposive sampling, the researchers identified 6 participating communities that were interviewed. The study also calculated the difference in sales of tobacco products from 18 stores located in indigenous communities after the increase of taxation. The researchers compared tobacco sales of 8 months after the tax increase with the sales registered seven months before the tax increase. From the findings of the researchers, it emerges that there was only a 2.3% reduction in the total tobacco sold in the period monitored. Although the study provides reliable findings on the effect of the taxation strategy in aboriginal communities, the researchers only monitored sales for a limited period. The tax increase is expected to register a higher percentage of reduced tobacco consumption for a longer period. However, previous studies have focused on developed countries and upper-class societies. For this reason, an outstanding strength of this study is that it focused on Aboriginal communities. Callison and Kaestner (2014) support the views of Thomas and his colleagues. In their study titled “Do higher tobacco taxes reduce adult smoking? New evidence of the effect of recent cigarette tax increases on adult smoking”, Callison and Kaestner highlight that there is a negative association between cigarette taxes and smoking participation. From their study, they conclude that increasing tobacco taxes do not have a significant effect on reducing the prevalence of smoking. Data for their study was obtained from Current Population Survey Tobacco Use Supplements (CPSTUS). The research focused on calculating the logistics regression model that defines the association between increased tobacco taxes in different states and the smoking propensity registered in the states. Specifically, the authors estimated the relationship between increased tobacco taxes in different states and the daily consumption of tobacco in the state relying on a generalized linear model. The authors also utilized a paired difference-in-difference strategy in an effort to establish any existing relationship of the tax increase and the rate of smoking. From their research, it became evident that increasing taxation on tobacco products does not have any positive outcomes in reducing tobacco consumption. Since different states have imposed varying rates of taxes on tobacco products, people can buy cigarettes in bulk from states that have lower taxes. Callison and Kaestner conclude that only large tax increases have the potential of reducing the tobacco consumption. Worth noting is the fact that the authors obtained data from a reliable source and used a remarkable methodology, a factor that makes their findings valid. Saadatmand, Toma, and Choquette (2014) highlight that the taxation strategy presents significant outcomes of reduced smoking rates in some American states. However, his study revealed that smoking reduction was only observed among adults, but smoking rates increased among high school students. Saadatmand, Toma, and Choquette’s study sought to determine the impact of increased taxation on tobacco products on the smoking rates of adults and high school students. Panel-data regression was the methodology employed in the research from 2002 to 2012. The data used in the study were obtained from the American Lung Association. From the study, it emerged that states that have implemented taxation policies on tobacco products have registered reduced smoking rates among adults. The high school student group exhibited different results as more students smoked tobacco irrespective of the increased taxes. The researchers explain that increasing tobacco taxes translates to a strong stigma associated with smoking. For this reason, high school students who are most vulnerable to participating in risky behaviors are likely to consume more tobacco. The main limitation of this study is that it did not give attention to the Food and Drug Administration Tobacco Law forbidding the sale of cigarettes to the youth. An evident strength of the research is that it obtained data from a reliable source (Walton, Li, Newcombe, Tu, & Berentson-Shaw, 2013). Ross and her colleagues (2014) support Saadatmand, Toma, and Choquette’s views that increased taxation on tobacco products can have positive outcomes in reducing the rates of smoking. Ross and colleagues sought to determine the effect of increased tobacco taxes on reducing smoking in Poland, Russia, and Ukraine. The authors relied on data from the Global Adult Tobacco Survey from 1994 to 2010. Unlike other studies that have focused on the developed world, Ross and colleagues focused on the three countries mentioned, which have exhibited high smoking rates as well as smoking-related deaths. The researcher adopted a duration analysis method in order to estimate the probability of quitting smoking after a certain period. From their study, it emerges that increased taxation registered statistically significant outcomes in reducing smoking rates. The researchers collected data for a remarkable period, making it possible to determine the statistical significance of increasing tobacco taxes and reducing smoking rates (Tseng, Moody-Thomas, Horswell, Yong, Celestin, & Jones, 2014). It emerges that increasing tobacco taxes has registered varied outcomes in different countries. According to some researchers, increasing tobacco taxes does not present statistically significant reduction of smoking. For this reason, those researchers opine that only high tax increases to the level of 100% can have the capacity to contribute to a 5% reduction in smoking rates (Levy, de Almeida, & Szklo, 2012). In the United States, some studies have highlighted that increased taxation has the potential of reducing smoking rates in some states. However, studies such as those of Callison and Kaestner (2014) highlight that increased taxation has not produced any significant impact in the United States. According to Saadatmand, Toma, and Choquette (2014), increasing taxation on tobacco products can only register positive outcomes among adults. Therefore, it is evident that different populations as well as different categories of smokers based on gender and age have responded variedly to the increasing tobacco taxes (Saadatmand, Toma, & Choquette, 2014). Conclusion Without a doubt, governments need to adopt other strategies in addition to increased tobacco taxation. From the studies described above, it emerges that increasing tobacco taxes do not have the capacity to register the required impact. None of the studies registered a smoking reduction of 5%. For this reason, addressing the tobacco epidemic may require a combination of strategies. Increasing tobacco taxes has proved ineffective in addressing the social and health problem of tobacco smoking. If the globe is to reduce the soaring tobacco smoking rates, more efficient strategies need to be developed (Verdonk-Kleinjan, Candel, Knibbe, Willemsen, & de Vries, 2011). References Callison, K., & Kaestner, R. (2014). Do higher tobacco taxes reduce adult smoking? New evidence of the effect of recent cigarette tax increases on adult smoking. Economic Inquiry, 52(1), 155-172. doi:10.1111/ecin.12027 Cowie, N., Glover, M., & Gentles, D. (2014). Taxing times? Smoker response to tax increases. Ethnicity and Inequalities In Health And Social Care, 7(1), 36-48. doi:10.1108/EIHSC-08-2013-0014 Gigliotti, A., Figueiredo, V. C., Madruga, C. S., Marques, A. R., Pinsky, I., Caetano, R., & ... Laranjeira, R. (2014). How smokers may react to cigarette taxes and price increases in Brazil: data from a national survey. BMC Public Health, 14(1), 1-16. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-14-327. Klumbiene, J., Sakyte, E., Petkeviciene, J., Prattala, R., & Kunst, A. E. (2015). The effect of tobacco control policy on smoking cessation in relation to gender, age and education in Lithuania, 1994-2010. BMC Public Health, 15(1), 1-10. doi:10.1186/s12889-015-1525-8 Levy, D., de Almeida, L. M., & Szklo, A. (2012). The Brazil SimSmoke Policy Simulation Model: The Effect of Strong Tobacco Control Policies on Smoking Prevalence and Smoking-Attributable Deaths in a Middle Income Nation. Plos Medicine, 9(11), 1-12. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001336 Ross, H., Kostova, D., Stoklosa, M., & Leon, M. (2014). The impact of cigarette excise taxes on smoking cessation rates from 1994 to 2010 in Poland, Russia, and Ukraine. Nicotine & Tobacco Research: Official Journal Of The Society For Research On Nicotine And Tobacco, 16 Suppl 1S37-S43. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntt024 Saadatmand, Y., Toma, M., & Choquette, J. (2014). The effects of excise taxes and clean air laws on adult and high school smoking rates in the United States. International Journal Of Business & Public Administration, 11(2), 98. Sheng-Hung, C., Jie-Min, L., Hsiang-Hsi, L., Hui-Cheng, W., & Chun-Yuan, Y. (2011). The cross-effects of cigarette and betel nut consumption in Taiwan: have tax increases made a difference?. Health Policy & Planning, 26(3), 266-273. doi:10.1093/heapol/czq041 Tseng, T., Moody-Thomas, S., Horswell, R., Yong, Y., Celestin, M. D., & Jones, K. D. (2014). Using a Health Informatics System to Assess Effect of a Federal Cigarette Tax Increase on Readiness to Quit Among Low-Income Smokers, Louisiana, 2009. Preventing Chronic Disease, 111-8. doi:10.5888/pcd11.130203 Verdonk-Kleinjan, W. I., Candel, M. M., Knibbe, R. A., Willemsen, M. C., & de Vries, H. (2011). Effects of a Workplace-Smoking Ban in Combination With Tax Increases on Smoking in the Dutch Population. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 13(6), 412. Walton, D., Li, J., Newcombe, R., Tu, D., & Berentson-Shaw, J. (2013). Smokers behavioural responses before and after the 2012 tobacco excise increase. Kotuitui: New Zealand Journal of Social Sciences, 8(1/2), 27. doi:10.1080/1177083X.2013.833956. Read More