Tobacco tax evasion in Western Balkan countries: tax evasion prevalence and evasion determinants

Background and objectiveTobacco tax evasion undermines the goal of tobacco taxes as a tobacco control measure to make tobacco products less affordable, increases the health risks for those who smoke and decreases the government revenue. This paper analyses the tobacco tax evasion in six Western Balkan (WB) countries: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Serbia. The aim of this research is to estimate the size of the illicit market and identify the main determinants of tax evasion activities in the Southeastern European region.Data and methodsData from 2019 Survey on Tobacco Consumption in Southeastern Europe (STC-SEE) are used. STC-SEE provides uniquely comparable nationally representative data on smoking behaviour for adult (18–85 years old) population for each country. Tax evasion is defined on the basis of available information on tax stamps, health warnings, price and the place of purchase, in accordance with the previous research on tax evasion. In order to estimate the determinants of illicit purchases we use binary choice model of tax evasion.ResultsThe study finds that 20.4% of all current smokers in WB countries evade taxes on tobacco products, with evasion being much more frequent for hand-rolled (HR) tobacco (86.7%) than for the manufactured cigarettes (MC) (8.6%). While HR is predominantly illicit in all six countries, MC evasion varies significantly, with evasion being significantly higher in Montenegro and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Results further suggest that tax evasion is higher in the statistical regions where institutional capacities to tackle illicit trade are lower, in municipalities bordering countries with high MC evasion, as well as among smokers with low income, women and elderly. We also provide evidence that higher tobacco taxes and prices do not increase illicit consumption.ConclusionThe findings from the research suggest that in order to decrease tax evasion, governments should put additional effort to strengthen institutional capacities to tackle illicit tobacco markets. Furthermore, improving regional coordination in development and implementation of tobacco control policies, including the prevention of illicit market, is essential in lowering evasion in all WB countries. Finally, WB countries should regulate and enforce excise tax stamp requirements on the HR tobacco market to a much higher degree.

Differential price responses for tobacco consumption: implications for tax incidence

Increasing tobacco taxes is considered the most effective an cost-effective policy to reduce tobacco consumption. However, a common objection to tobacco taxes is that they tend to rely disproportionately on the poorest individuals since less affluent smokers incur proportionately greater expenditures on cigarettes compared with more affluent smokers. Such objections usually assume that all smokers throughout the income distribution react similarly to an increase in tobacco prices. But, if less affluent smokers are more sensitive to price changes (ie, they have a higher demand price elasticity), reductions in tobacco consumption should be higher at the bottom of the income distribution. This paper uses data from Argentina’s Household Expenditure Survey to estimate demand price elasticities for tobacco by income and age groups. Results indicate that less affluent smokers present higher demand price elasticities for cigarettes than more affluent ones. A 10% increase in cigarette prices would decrease consumption by 8.5% (4.4%) for the poorest (richest) smokers. In addition, young people are the most elastic group. These differential elasticities have relevant implications in terms of the distributional incidence of increasing tobacco taxes. As less well-off individuals reduce consumption relatively more, they bear a relatively lower tax burden. Thus, tobacco tax increases may not be regressive as is often believed. As a whole, this paper provides policymakers with relevant arguments for policy discussion and the public debate on common objections to increasing tobacco taxes.

Framing the policy debate over tobacco control legislation and tobacco taxation in South Africa

BackgroundIn 2018, South Africa opened public consultations on its newly proposed tobacco control bill, resulting in substantial public debate in which a range of arguments, either in favour of or against the Bill, was advanced. These were accompanied by the recurring discussions about the annual adjustments in tobacco taxation. This study uses the concept of framing to examine the public debate in South African print media on the potential effects of the legislation, as well as tobacco tax regulations, between their proponents and detractors.MethodsA systematic search of news articles using multiple data sources identified 132 media articles published between January 2018 and September 2019 that met the inclusion criteria.ResultsSeven overarching frames were identified as characterising the media debate, with the three dominant frames being Economic, Harm reduction and vaping, and Health. The leading Economic frame consisted primarily of arguments unsupportive of tobacco control legislation. Economic arguments were promoted by tobacco industry spokespeople, trade unions, organisations of retailers, media celebrities and think tanks—several of which have been identified as front groups or third-party lobbyists for the tobacco industry.ConclusionThe dominance of economic arguments opposing tobacco control legislation risks undermining tobacco control progress. Local and global tobacco control advocates should seek to build relationships with media, as well as collate and disseminate effective counterarguments to those advanced by the industry.

The Introduction of Tobacco Excise Taxation in the Gulf Cooperation Council Countries: A Step in the Right Direction of Advancing Public Health

Background The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries relied, until recently, solely on import duties for tobacco products. The agreement for the introduction of an excise and value added tax (VAT) in 2016 and 2017, respectively, in most GCC countries, was a major breakthrough for public health. There is, however, ample room for improvement. Methods The study examines the outcomes of tax reforms, for both public health and public finances, based on the World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations and best practices worldwide. Tax simulations were performed using the WHO TaXSiM model. The study is based on data from Saudi Arabia, the only GCC country for which sufficient data existed. Results We recommend a stepwise tax reform, which involves increasing the current ad valorem excise tax rate, phasing out import duties keeping total tax share constant and introducing a minimum excise, and finally switching to a revenue-neutral specific excise. If implemented, cigarette tax reform simulations show that the recommended reforms would lead to a higher than 50% increase in cigarette prices, 16% reduction in cigarette sales and almost 50% increase in total cigarette tax revenue. A significant number of cigarette-related deaths would be averted. Conclusions The recommended tax reforms are expected to lead to significant improvements in both public health and tobacco tax revenues. Our results provide useful insights that are of relevance to the whole GGC region. The effectiveness of the reforms, however, requires a strong tax and customs administration, including the establishment of a good database to monitor and advance public health.

Tobacco

Tobacco is the most important and avoidable public health problem, killing 5.4 million users per year. At least one in two and up to two in three smokers die prematurely from smoking. Such great and easily understood risks should be more effectively communicated to promote smoking cessation. This chapter describes how raising tobacco tax, banning smoking in public places, and forbidding tobacco advertising, promotion, and sponsorship have effectively reduced smoking rates in many countries. However, many low- and middle-income countries still lack the necessary resources or political will to implement tobacco control. Further progress may come from large and effective pictorial warnings; banning the display of tobacco products at retail outlets; extending smoking bans in public places; innovative use of the mass media; very brief warnings by doctors to promote cessation; telephone quitlines; and capitalizing on the risk perception towards third-hand smoke.

Tobacco price and use following California Proposition 56 tobacco tax increase

Background California Proposition 56 increased cigarette excise tax by $2 per pack with equivalent increases on non-cigarette tobacco products. We estimated the changes in cigarette price, cigarette use, and non-cigarette use following the implementation of Proposition 56 in California in 2017. Methods Seven waves of Tobacco Use Supplements to the Current Population Survey (TUS-CPS) 2011–2019 data were used to obtain state-level aggregate self-reported outcomes, including cigarette price per pack, current and daily cigarette use, cigarette consumption per day, and current and daily use of non-cigarette tobacco products (hookah, pipe, cigar, and smokeless tobacco). A modified version of a synthetic control method was used to create a “synthetic” California that best resembled pre-policy sociodemographic characteristics and outcome trends in California while correcting time-invariant pre-policy differences. Various sensitivity analyses were also conducted. Results The implementation of Proposition 56 was associated with an increase in self-reported cigarette price per pack in California ($1.844, 95%CI: $0.153, $3.534; p = 0.032). No evidence suggested that Proposition 56 was associated with the changes in the prevalence of current or daily cigarette use, cigarette consumption per day, or the prevalence of current or daily use of non-cigarette tobacco products. Conclusion Most of the cigarette tax increase following Proposition 56 in California was passed on to consumers. There is a lack of evidence that the implementation of Proposition 56 was associated with the changes in the use of cigarettes and other tobacco products such as hookah, pipe, cigar, and smokeless tobacco.

Assessing the Effects of a Tobacco Tax Reform on the Industry Price-Setting Strategy

In July 2020, the Executive Power submitted Bill no. 3887-2020 as the first step towards a wide reform of the Brazilian tax system. It will replace the current PIS/COFINS (charged on turnover of companies) by the CBS (a tax on goods and services), which includes a special regime for cigarettes. The novelty is that the specific cigarette tax will be charged on the highest retail price per cigarette brand across the country. This research simulates three scenarios that differ according to the price-setting strategy of the tobacco industry in reaction to the proposed tax reform. In all simulations, the tax reform would result in considerably higher cigarette prices, lower cigarette consumption, higher tax collection, and an implicit minimum price that is far above the current official price floor. Furthermore, the price dispersion and cross-border shopping across states would be reduced because prices and tax burden per brand would tend to be the same across the country due to the dominant price-setting strategy in the cigarette industry.

Effects of the Brazilian tax reform plans on the tobacco market

BackgroundThere has been an intense debate in the Brazilian National Congress on how to reform the country’s tax system on consumption. This paper investigates the effects of the tax reform under the Constitutional Amendment Bill 45/2019 on cigarette prices, consumption and tax collection. The reform will introduce a new goods and services tax (GST) and tobacco excise tax (TET).MethodsThe micro data from the National Household Sample Survey (PNAD) of 2008 and the National Health Survey (PNS) of 2013 are inputs in the simulation in order to determine the smoking behaviour and consumer responses to price changes as accurately as possible across the different Brazilian states. We developed three scenarios for the tobacco tax reform and their effects on cigarette prices, smoking behaviour and tax collection. We also estimate the size of the illicit cigarette market by Brazilian state and simulate the impacts of a 10% reduction in its market share.FindingsOverall, we found that a GST of 27% and a TET of either 51%, 56% or specific 3.89 BRL per pack would lead to considerably higher cigarette prices, lower cigarette consumption and, above all, an increase of cigarette tax collection between 8% and 27% depending on the state. A discretionary 10% reduction in the illicit market would add about 8.5% of extra tax collection per year to the country.ConclusionsThe simulated scenarios demonstrated that, to keep the cigarette prices at least at the same level as those in the current tax scheme, TET should be no less than 77.85% of the retail price. This means that any politically feasible tax reform should result in higher cigarette prices and a reduction in cigarette consumption. Considering the nationwide effect, in all scenarios, the total increase in tobacco tax revenue is around 8.5% or 1.5 billion BRL per year. This extra revenue is highly desirable in an environment of chronic fiscal imbalance and the COVID-19 pandemic crisis.

Inequality-Reducing Effects of Tobacco Tax Increase: Accounting for Behavioral Response of Low-, Middle-, and High-Income Households in Serbia

While previous research has indicated that increasing tobacco excises is a crucial instrument for lowering tobacco demand, this policy has been criticized for its alleged regressive impact on the poor. However, this critique does not take into account the behavioral response, i.e., decrease in consumption that occurs after excises and prices increase. In this paper, we examine the effect of cigarettes’ price increase on tobacco consumption, household expenditures, and tax burdens in three income groups and provide empirical arguments on the regressivity/progressivity effects of tobacco tax increase. Estimated elasticities indicate that all groups decrease their cigarettes demand with increasing prices, with demand decrease stronger for low- than for middle- and high-income households. Results further suggest that increasing tobacco excises (1) decreases tobacco expenditure of low-income households, which increases their productive consumption, such as on food, clothes, etc., and (2) redistributes the tobacco tax burden from low- to high-income households. Therefore, excise increase policies do not have an adverse effect on the position of the low-income households; on the contrary, they lower their cigarettes expenditure and their tax burden, while lower cigarettes consumption has an additional, positive effect on their health, which attenuates future inequalities.