Keeping smoking affordable in higher tax environments via smoking thinner roll-your-own cigarettes: Findings from the International Tobacco Control Four Country Survey 2006–15

Branston, J. Robert; McNeill, Ann; Gilmore, Anna; Hiscock, Rosemary; Partos, Timea R

doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2018.07.047

Cited by 24 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The following socio‐demographics were included in analyses: country (Australia, Canada, England or the United States), age (18–24, 25–39, 40–54 or 55+ years), sex (female, male), ethnicity (majority, minority), income (high, medium, low, no information) and education (high, medium, low). Categorization of ethnicity, income and education was consistent with previous ITC papers .…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 86%

Differences in norms towards the use of nicotine vaping products among adult smokers, former smokers and nicotine vaping product users: cross‐sectional findings from the 2016 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims To examine whether norms towards nicotine vaping product (NVP) use varied between Australia, Canada, England and the United States and by socio-demographics, smoking and NVP status. Design Cross-sectional data from the 2016 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey. Setting Four countries with distinct regulatory policies relating to the sale and advertising of NVPs: Australia (most restrictive), Canada (restrictive), England and the United States (least restrictive). Participants A total of 10900 adult (age 18+) current smokers, former smokers, or at least weekly NVP users. Respondents were from Australia (n = 1366), Canada (n = 3309), England (n = 3835) and the United States (n = 2390). Measurements Questions permitted the categorization of respondents as current smokers, former smokers, NVP users and socio-demographic categories (sex, age, country, ethnicity, income and education). Further questions were asked regarding the frequency of exposure to NVPs in public, whether they had a partner or close friends who vaped and whether they believed society or those considered important to them approved of NVPs. Findings Adjusting for relevant covariates, compared with Australian respondents, those in England, Canada and the United States were more likely to report frequent exposure to NVPs in public (83.1%, 57.3% and 48.3%, respectively, compared to 19.8% in Australia; P < 0.0001), having a partner who vaped (13.8%, 7.1% and 7.7%, respectively, compared to 2.1% in Australia; P < 0.0001) and having close friend(s) who vaped (31.7%, 25.3%, 20.9%, respectively, compared to 10.0% in Australia; P < 0.0001). Compared with Australian respondents, respondents from England were more likely to report that society (27.6% compared to 12.3% in Australia; P < 0.0001) and people important to them approved of NVP use (28.9% compared to 14.3% in Australia; P < 0.0001). Conclusions Norms towards nicotine vaping product (NVP) use appear to vary among countries with different regulatory contexts regarding sales and advertising.

show abstract

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 86%

Differences in norms towards the use of nicotine vaping products among adult smokers, former smokers and nicotine vaping product users: cross‐sectional findings from the 2016 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, the taxation of roll-your-own tobacco (RYO) increased from £129.59/kg in March 2010 to £185.71/kg in March 2015. During this time, RYO also gained considerable market share 13. For instance, between 2009 and 2015 RYO sales increased by 46%, while factory-made cigarettes (FM) declined by 17%,14 such that exclusive RYO had a market share of 26% by 2015 13.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

UK tobacco price increases: driven by industry or public health?

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundTobacco companies claim that higher taxes will force smokers into buying illicit tobacco, but if they were truly concerned about increasing illicit sales with higher prices they would only increase retail prices in line with changes in taxation. In this paper, we explore UK pricing of both factory-made cigarettes (FM) and roll-your-own tobacco (RYO) to explore the extent to which price increases were due to government tax rises or industry strategies to increase profit per pack.MethodNielsen commercial data on UK tobacco sales data (2010–2015) were combined with official UK data on inflation and tax rates, to identify the source of real price increases.ResultsBetween 2010 and 2012, when there were unexpected large tax increases, industry driven price changes were small (16% of the price rise in FM and 20% in RYO), and changes were similar between market segments. Between 2013 and 2015, when tax increases were smaller and expected, industry behaviour generally accounted for a larger share of price rises (33% FM, 48% RYO), but changes varied considerably by segment.ConclusionThe industry has increased its prices beyond that required by tax changes, even when tax rises were larger and unexpected, although were notably smaller in such conditions. This suggests (1) that the industry is not actually concerned by the threat of illicit, especially since RYO had the highest levels of industry driven price increases despite higher levels of illicit, and (2) there remains scope for further tax increases, which should be relatively large and unexpected.

show abstract

“…To allow for the variation in pack size over time (7) we used price per stick (FM) or stick equivalents (RYO). For the latter we used a weight of 0.5g per stick based on the latest evidence on RYO cigarette size in the UK [66]. Real prices were calculated via adjusting nominal prices for inflation to May 2015 prices using the official UK measure of inflation (see Table 1).…”

Section: Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, we were able to estimate confidence intervals in order to understand whether patterns in the data are noise or evidence of a significant change in retail prices. We also took advantage of detailed knowledge of tobacco industry pricing strategies [9,[36][37][38][62][63][64][65][66] to aid analysis, design, and interpretation of model results. Our paper also provides the first analysis of the impact of the MET in the UK.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Standardised packaging, minimum excise tax, and RYO focussed tax rise implications for UK tobacco pricing

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Standardised packaging for factory made (FM) and roll your own (RYO) tobacco was fully implemented in the UK in May 2017. Around the same time, several changes to the tax system were applied (a Minimum Excise Tax (MET) for FM products and tax increases weighted towards RYO products). The tobacco industry claims that standardised packaging will lower prices (a disincentive for quitting) by commoditising the product, yet had itself taken advantage of the previous tax regime to achieve large profits from premium brands while also keeping some products' prices relatively low. Here we evaluate the impact of standardised packaging, the MET and the RYO focussed tax changes on price and industry profitability. Methods and findings Nielsen electronic point of sale (EPOS) data (May 2015 to April 2018) were used to calculate real (inflation adjusted) monthly price per stick overall, by cigarette type (FM and RYO) and by seven market segments. Trend estimation, using additive mixed models, assessed weighted average price (weighted by volume of sales) and tobacco industry net revenue changes. The beginning and end of the data series were compared in terms of: (a) average monthly price growth, (b) average monthly net revenue growth, and (c) undershifting and overshifting patterns after tax changes. FM and RYO real prices changed little over the 3year period-overall prices rose by about 1p per stick. There was no evidence of commoditisation with prices of all FM segments (but not RYO) rising faster after the implementation of standardised packaging than immediately beforehand. The prices of the cheapest FM brands rose with the implementation of the MET. RYO price increases did not close the gap to FM pricing levels despite RYO focussed tax increases. Tax changes following the implementation of standardised packaging and the MET were more widely and quickly passed on to smokers in the form of higher prices than the tax change pre-implementation. The main limitations are first that because we do not know the exact mechanism by which Nielsen scales up sample data to provide UK estimates, we could only use data for a set three year

show abstract

Keeping smoking affordable in higher tax environments via smoking thinner roll-your-own cigarettes: Findings from the International Tobacco Control Four Country Survey 2006–15

Cited by 24 publications

References 33 publications

Differences in norms towards the use of nicotine vaping products among adult smokers, former smokers and nicotine vaping product users: cross‐sectional findings from the 2016 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey

Differences in norms towards the use of nicotine vaping products among adult smokers, former smokers and nicotine vaping product users: cross‐sectional findings from the 2016 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey

UK tobacco price increases: driven by industry or public health?

Standardised packaging, minimum excise tax, and RYO focussed tax rise implications for UK tobacco pricing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About