This study estimated a system of demand for cigarettes, little cigars/cigarillos, large cigars, e-cigarettes, smokeless tobacco, and loose smoking tobacco using market-level scanner data for convenience stores. We found that the unconditional own-price elasticities for the six categories are -1.188, -1.428, -1.501, -2.054, -0.532, and -1.678, respectively. Several price substitute (e.g., cigarettes and e-cigarettes) and complement (e.g., cigarettes and smokeless tobacco) relationships were identified. Magazine and television advertising increased demand for e-cigarettes, and magazine advertising increased demand for smokeless tobacco and had spillover effects on demand for other tobacco products. We also reported the elasticities by U.S. census regions and market size. These results may have important policy implications, especially viewed in the context of the rise of electronic cigarettes and the potential for harm reduction if combustible tobacco users switch to non-combustible tobacco products. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer-reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications.

Introduction Little cigars are comparable to cigarettes in terms of shape, size, filters and packaging. Disproportionate tobacco excise taxes, which directly affect purchase price, may lead consumers to substitute cigarettes with less expensive little cigars. This study estimated the effects of little cigar and cigarette prices on little cigar sales. Methods Sales data from a customised retail scanner database were used to model a log–log equation to infer own-price and cross-price elasticity of demand for little cigars relative to little cigar and cigarette prices, respectively, from quarter 4 of 2011 to quarter 4 of 2013. Data were available for convenience stores (C-stores) (n=29 states); food, drug and mass merchandisers (FDMs) (n=44 states); and C-stores and FDMs combined (n=27 states). The dependent variable was per capita little cigar pack sales, and key independent variables were the price index for little cigars and cigarettes. Results A 10% increase in little cigar price was associated with a 25% (p<0.01) decrease in little cigar sales in C-stores alone, and a 31.7% (p<0.01) decrease in C-stores and FDMs combined. A 10% increase in cigarette price was associated with a 21.5% (p<0.05) increase in little cigar sales in C-stores, and a 27.3% (p<0.01) increase in C-stores and FDMs combined. Conclusions Our results suggest that US cigarette smokers are avoiding the high cost of cigarettes by switching to lower priced little cigars. Increasing and equalising prices among comparable products, like cigarettes and little cigars, may motivate cost-conscious smokers to quit.