Use of Price-Minimizing Strategies by Smokers and Their Effects on Subsequent Smoking Behaviors

Abstract

Use of cigarette price-minimizing strategies is common among smokers and appears to hinder smokers from attempting to quit and reducing cigarette consumption. Prohibiting the use of coupons and promotions may uphold the effect of cigarette taxes to reduce the prevalence of smoking.

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.…”

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.…”

“…However, these studies did not estimate price reductions from individual strategies while controlling for overlapping strategies. Given that individuals are likely to practice multiple price minimization strategies concurrently (Choi et al, 2012;Licht et al, 2011;White et al, 2005), price reductions may be overestimated for any individual strategy if not controlling for overlapping strategies. Independent estimates of the price reductions, which compensate for overlapping strategies where possible, are important to provide more accurate information in the ongoing policy debates surrounding cigarette price minimization strategies.…”