What is known about tobacco industry efforts to influence tobacco tax?: a systematic review of empirical studies

Katherine E Smith, Emily Savell, Anna B. Gilmore

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    58 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Objective: To systematically review studies of tobacco industry efforts to influence tobacco tax policies. Methods: Searches were conducted between 1 October 2009 and 31 March 2010 in 14 databases/websites, in relevant bibliographies and via experts. Studies were included if they focused on industry efforts to influence tobacco tax policies, drew on empirical evidence, were in English and concerned the period 1985-2010. In total, 36 studies met these criteria. Two reviewers undertook data extraction and critical appraisal. A random selection of 15 studies (42%) was subject to second review. Evidence was assessed thematically to identify distinct tobacco industry aims, arguments and tactics. Results: A total of 34 studies examined industry efforts to influence tax levels. They suggest the tobacco industry works hard to prevent significant increases and particularly dislikes taxes 'earmarked' for tobacco control. Key arguments to counter increases are that tobacco taxes are socially regressive, unfair and lead to increased levels of illicit trade and negative economic impacts. For earmarked taxes, the industry also frequently tries to raise concerns about revenue allocation. Assessing industry arguments against established evidence demonstrates most are unsupported. Key industry tactics include: establishing 'front groups', securing credible allies, direct lobbying and publicity campaigns. Only seven studies examined efforts to influence tax structures. They suggest company preferences vary and tactics centre on direct lobbying. Conclusions: The tobacco industry has historically tried to keep tobacco taxes low using consistent tactics and misleading arguments. Further research is required to explore efforts to influence tax structures, excise policies beyond the USA and recent policies. Copyright Article author (or their employer) 2012.
    LanguageEnglish
    Pages144-153
    Number of pages10
    JournalTobacco Control
    Volume22
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 12 Aug 2012

    Fingerprint

    Tobacco Industry
    Taxes
    taxes
    nicotine
    Tobacco
    industry
    Industry
    tactics
    Lobbying
    tax policy
    evidence
    Bibliography
    publicity
    economic impact
    allies
    bibliography
    website
    revenue
    employer
    Economics

    Keywords

    • tobacco tax
    • tobacco industry
    • systematic review

    Cite this

    @article{15be55f560c6438b919b0e223a74cded,
    title = "What is known about tobacco industry efforts to influence tobacco tax?: a systematic review of empirical studies",
    abstract = "Objective: To systematically review studies of tobacco industry efforts to influence tobacco tax policies. Methods: Searches were conducted between 1 October 2009 and 31 March 2010 in 14 databases/websites, in relevant bibliographies and via experts. Studies were included if they focused on industry efforts to influence tobacco tax policies, drew on empirical evidence, were in English and concerned the period 1985-2010. In total, 36 studies met these criteria. Two reviewers undertook data extraction and critical appraisal. A random selection of 15 studies (42{\%}) was subject to second review. Evidence was assessed thematically to identify distinct tobacco industry aims, arguments and tactics. Results: A total of 34 studies examined industry efforts to influence tax levels. They suggest the tobacco industry works hard to prevent significant increases and particularly dislikes taxes 'earmarked' for tobacco control. Key arguments to counter increases are that tobacco taxes are socially regressive, unfair and lead to increased levels of illicit trade and negative economic impacts. For earmarked taxes, the industry also frequently tries to raise concerns about revenue allocation. Assessing industry arguments against established evidence demonstrates most are unsupported. Key industry tactics include: establishing 'front groups', securing credible allies, direct lobbying and publicity campaigns. Only seven studies examined efforts to influence tax structures. They suggest company preferences vary and tactics centre on direct lobbying. Conclusions: The tobacco industry has historically tried to keep tobacco taxes low using consistent tactics and misleading arguments. Further research is required to explore efforts to influence tax structures, excise policies beyond the USA and recent policies. Copyright Article author (or their employer) 2012.",
    keywords = "tobacco tax, tobacco industry, systematic review",
    author = "Smith, {Katherine E} and Emily Savell and Gilmore, {Anna B.}",
    year = "2012",
    month = "8",
    day = "12",
    doi = "10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050098",
    language = "English",
    volume = "22",
    pages = "144--153",
    journal = "Tobacco Control",
    issn = "0964-4563",
    number = "2",

    }

    What is known about tobacco industry efforts to influence tobacco tax? a systematic review of empirical studies. / Smith, Katherine E; Savell, Emily; Gilmore, Anna B.

    In: Tobacco Control, Vol. 22, No. 2, 12.08.2012, p. 144-153.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - What is known about tobacco industry efforts to influence tobacco tax?

    T2 - Tobacco Control

    AU - Smith, Katherine E

    AU - Savell, Emily

    AU - Gilmore, Anna B.

    PY - 2012/8/12

    Y1 - 2012/8/12

    N2 - Objective: To systematically review studies of tobacco industry efforts to influence tobacco tax policies. Methods: Searches were conducted between 1 October 2009 and 31 March 2010 in 14 databases/websites, in relevant bibliographies and via experts. Studies were included if they focused on industry efforts to influence tobacco tax policies, drew on empirical evidence, were in English and concerned the period 1985-2010. In total, 36 studies met these criteria. Two reviewers undertook data extraction and critical appraisal. A random selection of 15 studies (42%) was subject to second review. Evidence was assessed thematically to identify distinct tobacco industry aims, arguments and tactics. Results: A total of 34 studies examined industry efforts to influence tax levels. They suggest the tobacco industry works hard to prevent significant increases and particularly dislikes taxes 'earmarked' for tobacco control. Key arguments to counter increases are that tobacco taxes are socially regressive, unfair and lead to increased levels of illicit trade and negative economic impacts. For earmarked taxes, the industry also frequently tries to raise concerns about revenue allocation. Assessing industry arguments against established evidence demonstrates most are unsupported. Key industry tactics include: establishing 'front groups', securing credible allies, direct lobbying and publicity campaigns. Only seven studies examined efforts to influence tax structures. They suggest company preferences vary and tactics centre on direct lobbying. Conclusions: The tobacco industry has historically tried to keep tobacco taxes low using consistent tactics and misleading arguments. Further research is required to explore efforts to influence tax structures, excise policies beyond the USA and recent policies. Copyright Article author (or their employer) 2012.

    AB - Objective: To systematically review studies of tobacco industry efforts to influence tobacco tax policies. Methods: Searches were conducted between 1 October 2009 and 31 March 2010 in 14 databases/websites, in relevant bibliographies and via experts. Studies were included if they focused on industry efforts to influence tobacco tax policies, drew on empirical evidence, were in English and concerned the period 1985-2010. In total, 36 studies met these criteria. Two reviewers undertook data extraction and critical appraisal. A random selection of 15 studies (42%) was subject to second review. Evidence was assessed thematically to identify distinct tobacco industry aims, arguments and tactics. Results: A total of 34 studies examined industry efforts to influence tax levels. They suggest the tobacco industry works hard to prevent significant increases and particularly dislikes taxes 'earmarked' for tobacco control. Key arguments to counter increases are that tobacco taxes are socially regressive, unfair and lead to increased levels of illicit trade and negative economic impacts. For earmarked taxes, the industry also frequently tries to raise concerns about revenue allocation. Assessing industry arguments against established evidence demonstrates most are unsupported. Key industry tactics include: establishing 'front groups', securing credible allies, direct lobbying and publicity campaigns. Only seven studies examined efforts to influence tax structures. They suggest company preferences vary and tactics centre on direct lobbying. Conclusions: The tobacco industry has historically tried to keep tobacco taxes low using consistent tactics and misleading arguments. Further research is required to explore efforts to influence tax structures, excise policies beyond the USA and recent policies. Copyright Article author (or their employer) 2012.

    KW - tobacco tax

    KW - tobacco industry

    KW - systematic review

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=yv4JPVwI&eid=2-s2.0-84864794436&md5=31d46b56a6a8e13a4681feb864d95b40

    U2 - 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050098

    DO - 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050098

    M3 - Article

    VL - 22

    SP - 144

    EP - 153

    JO - Tobacco Control

    JF - Tobacco Control

    SN - 0964-4563

    IS - 2

    ER -