Price smoking participation elasticity in Colombia: estimates by age and socioeconomic level

Abstract

BackgroundTobacco prevalence in Colombia is small compared with other Latin America despite the nation’s tobacco taxes being among the lowest in the region. However, tobacco taxes have increased several times during the last decade, and large increases in 2010 and 2016 impacted consumer prices.ObjectiveThis paper aims to estimate the price smoking participation elasticity (PPE) in Colombia, with specific reference to regional increases in consumer prices after 2010 tax policy changes.MethodsThe PPE is computed using logistic regression based on individual-level data from the National Psychoactive Substances Consumption Survey for 2008 and 2013. Our specific focus is state-level variation in Colombian cigarette prices between 2008 and 2013 induced by the tax hike in 2010.ResultsThe estimated PPE in Colombia is around −0.66 (p value=0.046). We find almost no differences across socioeconomic level, but price sensitivity was greater for women than men, and for relatively older individuals (ages 51–64).ConclusionsPPE for Colombia is above estimates for comparable middle-income countries such as Mexico. As a result, current estimates for health gains of tax policies are likely to be underestimated. Moreover, in contrast with the literature, we find that the PPE for the youth (≤25 years) is lower than older age groups, and there is no evidence of a prominent socio-economic status (SES) gradient.

Modelling the Reduction in Cancer Incidence After Variations in the Prevalence of Tobacco Consumption in Colombia in the Period 2016-2050

“… 34 As calculated by Gallego and collaborators, this increase would decrease the prevalence of cigarette consumption between 14.6% and 18.1%. 7 Our simulations used a more conservative intervention approach of 10% cumulative decrease in smoking prevalence starting in 2016 and considering no further increments in cigarette prices or taxation. However, considering this more modest reduction in smoking exposure our results showed a decrease of 3.2%, .5%, .2%, and .2% in lung, liver, cervical and colorectal cancer cases, respectively, by 2050.…”

“…5 , 6 In recent decades, the Colombian government has implemented policies to prevent, discourage, and reduce smoking. 7 Colombia has implemented multiple actions to reduce the prevalence of smoking, including the adoption of the Framework Convention for Tobacco Control of the World Health Organization (WHO FCTC) and the implementation of a national Ten-Year Plan for Cancer Control 2012-2021 8 , 9 with reduction of smoking included as one of the main actions for cancer risk control. There have been various control mechanisms to reduce tobacco consumption, with tax reforms between 1997 and 2016 being the most effective.…”

“…There have been various control mechanisms to reduce tobacco consumption, with tax reforms between 1997 and 2016 being the most effective. 7 The continuation of such interventions should significantly reduce cancer cases, including reinforcement of the existing and potentially new national public health programs to reduce tobacco consumption. 10 …”

Tobacco industry pricing strategies for single cigarettes and multistick packs after excise tax increases in Colombia

“…This score represents a considerable increase on the 2016 score, 2.38,12 but shows there is still room for substantial improvement, particularly in cigarette prices and the tax share of price. Indeed, despite several reforms with limited tax increases between 1997 and 2010,13 taxation on tobacco remained one of the lowest in Latin America in 2016, while the smoking prevalence was one of the highest at 32.2%, particularly among children aged 13–15 years 14–17. In 2016, the nominal price of 20 Marlboro cigarettes was 3872 Colombian pesos (COP$) (then US$0.97) 18 19…”

Quantile regression of tobacco tax pass-through in the UK 2013–2019. How have manufacturers passed through tax changes for different tobacco products?

“…A substantial body of evidence has documented the effectiveness of tobacco tax increases on reducing tobacco prevalence, 1-5 participation [6][7][8][9] and initiation [10][11][12] as well as raising government revenue. However, the effectiveness of tax increases on health-related outcomes relies heavily on the tobacco industry (TI) passing on such tax increases to smokers, also known as tax pass-through.…”