‘Both Sides of the Argument’? A critical review of existing evidence on the illicit trade in tobacco products in Canada

Abstract

IntroductionThe illicit trade in tobacco products (ITTP) is widely recognised as a substantial and complex problem in Canada. However, the independence of available data and quality of analyses remains unknown. Reliable and accurate data on the scale and causes of the problem are needed to inform effective policy responses.MethodsWe searched the scholarly and grey literature using keywords related to ITTP in Canada. We identified 26 studies published in English since 2008 that present original research drawing on primary data. We analysed these studies for their independence from the tobacco industry, methodology, findings and gaps in knowledge.ResultsThe study finds 42% of the literature reviewed has links to the tobacco industry. These studies provide insufficient methodological detail, present higher estimates of the volume of ITTP and attribute the causes to higher rates of tobacco taxation. The classification of all indigenous tobacco sales as illicit, by both industry linked and independent studies, contributes to overestimates and serves the interests of transnational tobacco companies. There is need for independent and comprehensive data on the ITTP in Canada over time, across population groups and geographies.ConclusionWhile there is evidence that the ITTP in Canada is a major and complex issue that requires effective tobacco control policies, there is a limited evidence base on which to develop such responses. This review finds industry-linked studies lack independence, employ biased methodologies and serve tobacco industry interests. Independent studies present more rigorous approaches, but primarily focus on youth and the province of Ontario.

Measuring the illicit cigarette market in Mexico: a cross validation of two methodologies

“…A growing number of studies expose the tobacco industry tactics around illicit trade and invalidate industry statements about the scope of the problem 12. Some of these studies evaluate the quality of the estimates presented by the tobacco industry and find that industry-funded studies are usually not peer reviewed, rarely methodologically transparent, and almost inevitably suffer from grievous problems with data collection, analytical methods and results interpretation 12 13. Other studies use one of the proven methods to estimate illicit trade and contrast their results with the numbers provided by the tobacco industry.…”

“…Among the methods used in industry-independent studies, the three most popular are: (1) analysis of the gap between tax-paid sales and survey-reported consumption, (2) empty pack surveys and (3) surveys of smokers and their packs 14. The estimates of illicit trade from industry-independent studies are usually lower than those presented by the tobacco industry, suggesting that the latter exaggerate the sales of illicit cigarettes 12 13…”

Tobacco excise tax policy in Indonesia: who does reap the benefits?

“…Both policies aim to reduce cigarette consumption, to increase government revenue, and to control illegal cigarette in the market (Levy, Yuan, & Mays, 2018;Rosser, 2015;Mackay, Ritthiphakdee, & Reddy 2013;Chaloupka, Yurekli, & Fong 2012;Chaloupka, Straif, & Leon, 2011;Barber & Ahsan, 2009;Ranson et al, 2002;Wakafield & Chaloupka, 2000;Hu, Sung, & Keeler 1995). Therefore, the policy is considered effective if it is successful in reducing cigarette consumption, optimizing government revenue, and preventing the possibility of illegal cigarette (Bhatnagar et al, 2019;Smith, Thompson, & Lee 2019;Hiscock et al, 2018;Ho et al, 2018;Van Hedger et al, 2018;Levy, Chaloupka, & Gitchell 2004;Lantz et al, 2000). However, empirical evidence shows an anomaly, in which the yearly increase of cigarette excise tariff is not followed by significant reduction of cigarette consumption.…”

Illicit Tobacco in Lithuania: A Cross-Sectional Survey

“…Evaluation of industry-funded studies conclude that there are some major issues regarding the quality of the estimates, including lack of methodological transparency; problems with data collection, analytical methods and result interpretation; and that they are not peer-reviewed [ 10 , 28 ]. Some studies show that industry-driven data exaggerate the extent of illicit trade [ 3 , 10 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 ]. It appears that our findings support this observation.…”