IntroductionCalifornia’s law raising the minimum tobacco sales age to 21 went into effect on 9 June 2016. This law, known as ‘Tobacco 21’ or ‘T21’, also expanded the definition of tobacco to include electronic smoking devices. This paper describes the T21 evaluation plan and initial evaluation results.MethodsAn evaluation plan and logic model were created to evaluate T21. A tobacco retailer poll was conducted 7 months after the law went into effect to assess awareness, support and implementation; an online survey of California adults was fielded to provide data on tobacco use and attitudinal changes before and after T21 implementation; and tobacco purchase surveys were conducted to assess the retailer violation rate (RVR). Multivariate models estimated the odds of RVR and odds of being aware, agreeing with and observing advertisements related to T21.ResultsSeven months after the T21 effective date, 98.6% of retailers were aware of the law and 60.6% supported the law. Furthermore, 66.2% of retailers agreed that people who start smoking before 21 would become addicted to tobacco products. The RVR using youth decoys under age 18 statistically decreased from 10.3% before T21 to 5.7% after T21 (P=0.002). Furthermore, the RVR using young adult decoys ages 18–19 was 14.2% (95% CI 9.3% to 19.1%) for traditional tobacco and 13.1% (95% CI 10.2% to 16.1%) for electronic smoking devices.ConclusionsSurvey findings suggest that the high awareness and support for the law may have contributed to reducing illegal tobacco sales to youth under 18 and achieving widespread retailer conformity with the new law disallowing sales to young adults under 21.

Much of what is known about neighborhood variation in the price of combustible tobacco products focuses on premium brand cigarettes. The current study extends this literature in two ways, by studying prices for the cheapest cigarette pack regardless of brand and a popular brand of flavored cigarillos and by reporting data from the largest statewide sample of licensed tobacco retailers. Significantly lower prices in neighborhoods with a higher proportion of youth and of racial/ethnic groups with higher smoking prevalence are a cause of concern. The study results underscore the need for policies that reduce availability and increase price of combustible tobacco products, particularly in states with low, stagnant tobacco taxes.

ObjectiveSan Francisco’s comprehensive restriction on flavoured tobacco sales applies to all flavours (including menthol), all products and all retailers (without exemptions). This study evaluates associations of policy implementation with changes in tobacco sales in San Francisco and in two California cities without any sales restriction.MethodsUsing weekly retail sales data (July 2015 through December 2019), we computed sales volume in equivalent units within product categories and the proportion of flavoured tobacco. An interrupted time series analysis estimated within-city changes associated with the policy’s effective and enforcement dates, separately by product category for San Francisco and comparison cities, San Jose and San Diego.ResultsPredicted average weekly flavoured tobacco sales decreased by 96% from before the policy to after enforcement (p<0.05), and to very low levels across all products, including cigars with concept-flavour names (eg, Jazz). Average weekly flavoured tobacco sales did not change in San Jose and decreased by 10% in San Diego (p<0.05). Total tobacco sales decreased by 25% in San Francisco, 8% in San Jose and 17% in San Diego (each, p<0.05).ConclusionsSan Francisco’s comprehensive restriction virtually eliminated flavoured tobacco sales and decreased total tobacco sales in mainstream retailers. Unlike other US flavoured tobacco policy evaluations, there was no evidence of substitution to concept–flavour named products. Results may be attributed to San Francisco Department of Health’s self-education and rigorous retailer education, as well as the law’s rebuttable presumption of a product as flavoured based on manufacturer communication.

Objective: In this study, we investigated whether California's 2017 cigarette tax increase was passed onto smokers equally. Methods: Auditors recorded 4 cigarette prices in the same random sample of licensed tobacco retailers (N = 1049) before the tax increase (January-March 2017) and after (April-September 2018): Natural American Spirit (ultra-premium), Newport menthol (premium), and Pall Mall (value) all from the same manufacturer, and Marlboro (premium). Ordinary least squares regressions examined how the gap in prices varied by market segment and neighborhood demographics, controlling for store type and months since implementation. Paired t-tests assessed whether industry/retail revenue increased. Results: Over-shifting (increase greater than tax) was evident for all 4 brands and was significantly greater for ultra-premium (Mean = $0.40, SD = 0.75) than premium (Mean = $0.25, SD = 0.78) and greater for premium than value brand (Mean = $0.16, SD = 0.67). However, under-shifting (increase less than tax) was evident for Newport in African-American neighborhoods and Pall Mall in Hispanic neighborhoods. After the tax increase, prices were significantly more likely to be discounted and significantly more stores advertised a discount on cigarettes. Conclusion: California's tax increase was not passed onto consumers equally. Non-tax mechanisms to increase price could support intended effects of tobacco taxes.

Purpose Evaluate success of local flavored tobacco (FT) policies in reducing availability of FT products in California. Design Matched-jurisdiction cross-sectional design compared availability of FT at licensed tobacco retailers (LTR) in jurisdictions with and without such policies in 2013 and 2019. Flavor policy jurisdictions were split into strong and weak groups using Flavored Tobacco Policy Rating Rubric. Setting 32 local California jurisdictions Subjects Final sample included 306 LTR in 2013 and 1441 LTR in 2019. LTR were classified as convenience store, liquor store, pharmacy, small market, supermarket, gas station booth, tobacco/vape product store, or other. Measures Retail availability of menthol cigarettes and flavored non-cigarette tobacco. Analysis Logistic regression analysis including covariate (store type) determined whether differences existed in availability of FT in jurisdictions with and without FT policies. Percentage change assessed difference in proportion of retailers that sold FT in 2013 (i.e. before-policies-passed) and in 2019 (i.e. after-policies-became-effective). Results Strong flavor-policy jurisdictions significantly differed from matched no-policy jurisdictions in availability of menthol cigarettes (OR = .04, 95% CI: .02–.08) and flavored non-cigarette tobacco (OR = .07, 95% CI: .05–.11). From 2013 to 2019, these jurisdictions experienced significant declines in menthol cigarettes (87.9% to 35.4%) and flavored non-cigarette tobacco sales (63.8% to 37.0%). Conclusion Strong FT sales restriction policies appear to be effective in reducing availability of FT, thereby creating a healthier retail environment in California.