This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Analysis of Proposition 28: Repeal of Proposition 10 Tobacco Surtax Initiative Statute

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Sheryl Magzamen
Stanton Glantz (University of California, San Francisco)
Abstract

Proposition 28, titled the Repeal of Proposition 10 Tobacco Surtax Initiative Statute, would repeal the $.50 tax per pack of cigarettes (and commensurate tax on other tobacco products) enacted on by Proposition 10, passed on November 3, 1998. Proposition 28 would dismantle the California Children and Families First Program, a statewide trust to fund programs for early childhood education, also enacted through Proposition 10. It also prohibits the passage of additional taxes on tobacco products by voter mandate. People are sensitive to the price of cigarettes and other tobacco products. Imposition of the 50 cent tax by Proposition 10 (combined with a wholesale price increase imposed by the tobacco industry to pay for the Master Settlement Agreement that ended state tobacco litigation) substantially reduced cigarette consumption. Repealing the tax could substantially increase cigarette consumption and associated disease and medical costs if the price of cigarettes drops. We analyzed two scenarios, which bracket the likely effects if Proposition 28 passes: 1. The tobacco industry raises wholesale prices to increase industry revenues. Since there is no retail price change, there will be no changes in consumption or tobacco-related disease. Industry revenues would increase by $617 million.2. The tobacco industry does not change wholesale prices, so the retail price of cigarettes drops and consumption increases. There would be an additional 114 million packs of cigarettes consumed, increasing industry revenues by $220 million. There would be an increase in teen smoking, between 7,800 and 46,500 new youth smokers. An additional 102 low birth weights due to maternal smoking, for an additional $2 million in direct medical costs for the first year following the repeal of the tax. An additional combined total of 78 heart attacks and strokes for Californians over 35 years of age for an increase of $3 million in direct medical costs for the first year following the repeal of the tax. Over the longer term, annual medical costs of smoking-induced disease will increase by $500 million annually, with an additional 1,800 annual deaths due to active smoking. Increase in costs for diseases related to secondhand smoke, especially in childhood diseases caused or exacerbated by secondhand smoke including SIDS, middle ear infections, asthma, bronchitis, pneumonia, and lung cancer, including 50 to 90 additional low birth weight infants 5 additional cases of SIDS 3,400-8,100 additional physician office visits for middle ear infections 40 to 135 new asthma cases in children 2,000 to 5,200 additional asthma attacks in children 780 to 1,600 cases of bronchitis and pneumonia in children 16 additional lung cancer deaths 180 to 320 additional heart disease deathsThese two cases bracket the likely effects of enactment of Proposition 28. The actual effect will probably be somewhere between these two scenarios.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://repositories.cdlib.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1024&context=ctcre
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, UC San Francisco in its series University of California at San Francisco, Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education with number 1024.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 05 Oct 2003
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cdl:ctcres:1024

Note: oai:cdlib1.org:ctcre-1024
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://repositories.cdlib.org/ctcre/

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).

Related research
Keywords:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Frank J. Chaloupka & Henry Wechsler, 1995. "Price, Tobacco Control Policies and Smoking Among Young Adults," NBER Working Papers 5012, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  2. Chaloupka, Frank, 1991. "Rational Addictive Behavior and Cigarette Smoking," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(4), pages 722-42, August. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  3. DeCicca, Philip & Kenkel, Donald & Mathios, Alan, 2000. "Putting Out The Fires: Will Higher Taxes Reduce Youth Smoking?," Working Papers 00-3, University of Aarhus, Aarhus School of Business, Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  4. Wasserman, Jeffrey & Manning, Willard G. & Newhouse, Joseph P. & Winkler, John D., 1991. "The effects of excise taxes and regulations on cigarette smoking," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 43-64, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Lewit, Eugene M. & Coate, Douglas, 1982. "The potential for using excise taxes to reduce smoking," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 121-145, August. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? A few items listed on IDEAS are over 2000 years old!

This page was last updated on 2009-12-15.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.