Higher cigarette prices influence cigarette purchase patterns

Abstract

Objective: To examine cigarette purchasing patterns of current smokers and to determine the effects of cigarette price on use of cheaper sources, discount/generic cigarettes, and coupons. Background: Higher cigarette prices result in decreased cigarette consumption, but price sensitive smokers may seek lower priced or tax-free cigarette sources, especially if they are readily available. This price avoidance behaviour costs states excise tax money and dampens the health impact of higher cigarette prices. Methods: Telephone survey data from 3602 US smokers who were originally in the COMMIT (community intervention trial for smoking cessation) study were analysed to assess cigarette purchase patterns, use of discount/generic cigarettes, and use of coupons. Results: 59% reported engaging in a high price avoidance strategy, including 34% who regularly purchase from a low or untaxed venue, 28% who smoke a discount/generic cigarette brand, and 18% who report using cigarette coupons more frequently that they did five years ago. The report of engaging in a price avoidance strategy was associated with living within 40 miles of a state or Indian reservation with lower cigarette excise taxes, higher average cigarette consumption, white, non-Hispanic race/ethnicity, and female sex. Conclusion: Data from this study indicate that most smokers are price sensitive and seek out measures to purchase less expensive cigarettes, which may decrease future cessation efforts.

Cigarette Price-Minimization Strategies by U.S. Smokers

“…The cigarette consumption weight was used to obtain the average price per pack, because evidence from selected states shows that the use of priceminimization strategies was related closely to smoker's cigarette consumption, meaning heavy or more-addicted smokers were more likely to use these strategies. [11][12][13][14][15] In other words, self-reported cigarette prices in the NATS may differ depending on smoker's cigarette consumption.…”

“…5 Strategies smokers use to minimize their cigarette costs include crossing borders to purchase cigarettes in states with lower excise taxes; purchasing lower-priced cigarettes from retailers on the Internet or on Indian reservations; purchasing cigarettes on the black market; rolling their own cigarettes; switching to a less expensive or generic brand; using price-related discounts such as coupons or multi-pack offers; and purchasing cartons instead of packs. [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14] Using the 2009-2010 National Adult Tobacco Survey (NATS), the main purpose of the current analysis is to evaluate the prevalence of adult smokers who used one or more of five common price-minimization strategies in the previous year, and per-pack price reductions associated with use of these strategies at both the national and state level. The national prevalence also is stratified by type of strategies and by smokers' cigarette consumption level.…”

“…The national prevalence also is stratified by type of strategies and by smokers' cigarette consumption level. Although estimates of the extent of use of price-minimization strategies have been published for selected states, 8,[11][12][13]15 this is the first study, to the authors' knowledge, to provide these estimates for all states.…”

Targeted Advertising, Promotion, and Price For Menthol Cigarettes in California High School Neighborhoods

“…Given that Black smokers and youth are among the most price-sensitive groups (Hyland et al, 2005) and that menthol smokers are more likely than others to take advantage of promotional offers (White et al, 2006), further investigation of the disparities in promotions and price for menthol and nonmenthol cigarettes is warranted. Evidence about the environmental (in)justice of menthol marketing should inform the Food and Drug Administration's regulation about the use of menthol as a characterizing flavor in cigarettes.…”

Cigarette Price Minimization Strategies in the United States: Price Reductions and Responsiveness to Excise Taxes

“…This decrease may be a result of some potential smokers choosing not to smoke and more successful quit attempts among current smokers (Chaloupka et al, 2002;Chaloupka & Warner, 1999;Frieden et al, 2005;Hyland et al, 2005Hyland et al, , 2006Levy et al, 2000;Lewitt & Coate, 1982;Licht et al, 2011;McGoldrick & Boonn, 2010). Unfortunately, not all smokers will respond beneficially to tax increases, and some will continue their usual smoking behaviors by either using compensatory price minimization strategies (Choi, Hennrikus, Forster, & St Claire, 2012;DeCicca, Kenkel, & Liu, 2010;Fong et al, 2006;Frieden et al, 2005;Goolsble, Lovenheim, & Slemrod, 2010;Hyland, Higbee, Bauer, Giovino, & Cummings, 2004;Hyland et al, 2005Hyland et al, , 2006Licht et al, 2011;Pesko, Kruger, & Hyland, 2012; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2000;White, Gilpin, White, & Pierce, 2005) or paying higher prices. Use of price minimization strategies, thus, mitigates the positive public health impact of cigarette price increases.…”