William C Kerr1, Edwina Williams2, Thomas K Greenfield2. 1. Alcohol Research Group, Public Health Institute, 6475 Christie Ave., Suite 400, Emeryville, CA 94608, USA wkerr@arg.org. 2. Alcohol Research Group, Public Health Institute, 6475 Christie Ave., Suite 400, Emeryville, CA 94608, USA.
Abstract
AIMS: In June, 2012 the state of Washington ended a wholesale and retail monopoly on liquor sales resulting in about five times as many stores selling liquor. Three-tier restrictions were also removed on liquor, while beer and wine availability did not increase. Substantial taxes at both the wholesale and retail levels were implemented and it was expected that prices would rise. METHODS: To evaluate price changes after privatization we developed an index of about 68 brands that were popular in Washington during early 2012. Data on final liquor prices (including all taxes) in Washington were obtained through store visits and on-line sources between November 2013 and March of 2014. Primary analyses were conducted on five or six brand indexes to allow the inclusion of most stores. RESULTS: Washington liquor prices rose by an average of 15.5% for the 750 ml size and by 4.7% for the 1.75 l size, while only small changes were seen in the bordering states of Oregon and Idaho. Prices were found to vary greatly by store type. Liquor Superstores had generally the lowest prices while drugstore, grocery and especially smaller Liquor Store prices were found to be substantially higher. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that liquor prices in Washington increased substantially after privatization and as compared to price changes in bordering states, with a much larger increase seen for the 750 ml size and with wide variation across store types. However, persistent drinkers looking for low prices will be able to find them in certain stores.
AIMS: In June, 2012 the state of Washington ended a wholesale and retail monopoly on liquor sales resulting in about five times as many stores selling liquor. Three-tier restrictions were also removed on liquor, while beer and wine availability did not increase. Substantial taxes at both the wholesale and retail levels were implemented and it was expected that prices would rise. METHODS: To evaluate price changes after privatization we developed an index of about 68 brands that were popular in Washington during early 2012. Data on final liquor prices (including all taxes) in Washington were obtained through store visits and on-line sources between November 2013 and March of 2014. Primary analyses were conducted on five or six brand indexes to allow the inclusion of most stores. RESULTS: Washington liquor prices rose by an average of 15.5% for the 750 ml size and by 4.7% for the 1.75 l size, while only small changes were seen in the bordering states of Oregon and Idaho. Prices were found to vary greatly by store type. Liquor Superstores had generally the lowest prices while drugstore, grocery and especially smaller Liquor Store prices were found to be substantially higher. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that liquor prices in Washington increased substantially after privatization and as compared to price changes in bordering states, with a much larger increase seen for the 750 ml size and with wide variation across store types. However, persistent drinkers looking for low prices will be able to find them in certain stores.
Authors: Carla Alexia Campbell; Robert A Hahn; Randy Elder; Robert Brewer; Sajal Chattopadhyay; Jonathan Fielding; Timothy S Naimi; Traci Toomey; Briana Lawrence; Jennifer Cook Middleton Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Michael Siegel; Jody Grundman; William DeJong; Timothy S Naimi; Charles King; Alison B Albers; Rebecca S Williams; David H Jernigan Journal: Subst Abus Date: 2013 Impact factor: 3.716
Authors: Robert A Hahn; Jennifer L Kuzara; Randy Elder; Robert Brewer; Sajal Chattopadhyay; Jonathan Fielding; Timothy S Naimi; Traci Toomey; Jennifer Cook Middleton; Briana Lawrence Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Tim Stockwell; Jinhui Zhao; Scott Macdonald; Kate Vallance; Paul Gruenewald; William Ponicki; Harold Holder; Andrew Treno Journal: Addiction Date: 2011-01-18 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Andrew J Treno; William R Ponicki; Tim Stockwell; Scott Macdonald; Paul J Gruenewald; Jinhui Zhao; Gina Martin; Alissa Greer Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2013-01-14 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Tim Stockwell; Jinhui Zhao; Scott Macdonald; Basia Pakula; Paul Gruenewald; Harold Holder Journal: Addiction Date: 2009-08-04 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Abdallah K Ally; Yang Meng; Ratula Chakraborty; Paul W Dobson; Jonathan S Seaton; John Holmes; Colin Angus; Yelan Guo; Daniel Hill-McManus; Alan Brennan; Petra S Meier Journal: Addiction Date: 2014-06-24 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Thomas K Greenfield; Edwina Williams; William C Kerr; Meenakshi S Subbaraman; Yu Ye Journal: Subst Use Misuse Date: 2017-11-27 Impact factor: 2.164
Authors: Meenakshi S Subbaraman; Sue Thomas; Ryan Treffers; Kevin Delucchi; William C Kerr; Priscilla Martinez; Sarah C M Roberts Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2018-06-18 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Sarah C M Roberts; Amy A Mericle; Meenakshi S Subbaraman; Sue Thomas; Ryan D Treffers; Kevin L Delucchi; William C Kerr Journal: Womens Health Issues Date: 2019-03-12
Authors: Renee M Johnson; Charles B Fleming; Christopher Cambron; Lorraine T Dean; Sherri-Chanelle Brighthaupt; Katarina Guttmannova Journal: Prev Sci Date: 2019-02