Michael F Pesko1, Xin Xu2, Michael A Tynan3, Robert B Gerzoff4, Ann M Malarcher4, Terry F Pechacek4. 1. Department of Healthcare Policy and Research, Weill Cornell Medical College, Cornell University, 402 East 67th Street, New York, NY 10065, USA. 2. Office on Smoking and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, Mailstop K-50, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA. Electronic address: xinxu@cdc.gov. 3. Public Health Division, Oregon Health Authority, 800 NE Oregon St., Portland, OR 97232, USA. 4. Office on Smoking and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, Mailstop K-50, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Following cigarette excise tax increases, smokers may use cigarette price minimization strategies to continue their usual cigarette consumption rather than reducing consumption or quitting. This reduces the public health benefits of the tax increase. This paper estimates the price reductions for a wide-range of strategies, compensating for overlapping strategies. METHOD: We performed regression analysis on the 2009-2010 National Adult Tobacco Survey (N=13,394) to explore price reductions that smokers in the United States obtained from purchasing cigarettes. We examined five cigarette price minimization strategies: 1) purchasing discount brand cigarettes, 2) using price promotions, 3) purchasing cartons, 4) purchasing on Indian reservations, and 5) purchasing online. Price reductions from these strategies were estimated jointly to compensate for overlapping strategies. RESULTS: Each strategy provided price reductions between 26 and 99cents per pack. Combined price reductions were possible. Additionally, price promotions were used with regular brands to obtain larger price reductions than when price promotions were used with generic brands. CONCLUSION: Smokers can realize large price reductions from price minimization strategies, and there are many strategies available. Policymakers and public health officials should be aware of the extent that these strategies can reduce cigarette prices. Published by Elsevier Inc.
OBJECTIVE: Following cigarette excise tax increases, smokers may use cigarette price minimization strategies to continue their usual cigarette consumption rather than reducing consumption or quitting. This reduces the public health benefits of the tax increase. This paper estimates the price reductions for a wide-range of strategies, compensating for overlapping strategies. METHOD: We performed regression analysis on the 2009-2010 National Adult Tobacco Survey (N=13,394) to explore price reductions that smokers in the United States obtained from purchasing cigarettes. We examined five cigarette price minimization strategies: 1) purchasing discount brand cigarettes, 2) using price promotions, 3) purchasing cartons, 4) purchasing on Indian reservations, and 5) purchasing online. Price reductions from these strategies were estimated jointly to compensate for overlapping strategies. RESULTS: Each strategy provided price reductions between 26 and 99cents per pack. Combined price reductions were possible. Additionally, price promotions were used with regular brands to obtain larger price reductions than when price promotions were used with generic brands. CONCLUSION: Smokers can realize large price reductions from price minimization strategies, and there are many strategies available. Policymakers and public health officials should be aware of the extent that these strategies can reduce cigarette prices. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cigarette purchasing strategy; Price reduction; United States
Authors: Thomas R Frieden; Farzad Mostashari; Bonnie D Kerker; Nancy Miller; Anjum Hajat; Martin Frankel Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: A Hyland; F L Laux; C Higbee; G Hastings; H Ross; F J Chaloupka; G T Fong; K M Cummings Journal: Tob Control Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Andrea S Licht; Andrew J Hyland; Richard J O'Connor; Frank J Chaloupka; Ron Borland; Geoffrey T Fong; Nigar Nargis; K Michael Cummings Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2011-01-20 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Kristy L Marynak; Xin Xu; Xu Wang; Carissa Baker Holmes; Michael A Tynan; Terry Pechacek Journal: Public Health Rep Date: 2016 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.792
Authors: Emily J Wasserman; Samantha M Reilly; Reema Goel; Jonathan Foulds; John P Richie; Joshua E Muscat Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2018-03-06 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Alex C Liber; Luz María Sánchez-Romero; Christopher J Cadham; Zhe Yuan; Yameng Li; Hayoung Oh; Steven Cook; Kenneth E Warner; Lisa Henriksen; Ritesh Mistry; Rafael Meza; Nancy L Fleischer; David T Levy Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2022-10-17 Impact factor: 5.825
Authors: David T Levy; Alex C Liber; Christopher Cadham; Luz Maria Sanchez-Romero; Andrew Hyland; Michael Cummings; Cliff Douglas; Rafael Meza; Lisa Henriksen Journal: Tob Control Date: 2022-01-24 Impact factor: 6.953