IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/nattax/doi10.1086-712915.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effect of Cannabis Legalization on Substance Demand and Tax Revenues

Author

Listed:
  • Keaton Miller
  • Boyoung Seo

Abstract

Cannabis advocates argue that legalization will increase tax revenues. However, if legal substances are substitutes, cannabis revenues may cannibalize other taxes. We document substitution between legal cannabis products and alcohol and tobacco products using detailed administrative and scanner data from Washington State. We estimate a flexible demand system for legal substances and find legalizing cannabis leads to a 15 percent decrease in alcohol, mainly by liquor and wine, and 5 percent decrease in cigarette demand. Approximately 40 percent of Washington’s 2015 cannabis revenue was cannibalized from preexisting sources. We find that Washington’s current substance taxes, even after accounting for substitution, are on the upward-sloping side of the Laffer curve.

Suggested Citation

  • Keaton Miller & Boyoung Seo, 2021. "The Effect of Cannabis Legalization on Substance Demand and Tax Revenues," National Tax Journal, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(1), pages 107-145.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:nattax:doi:10.1086/712915
    DOI: 10.1086/712915
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/712915
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/712915
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/712915?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jerry A. Hausman, 1996. "Valuation of New Goods under Perfect and Imperfect Competition," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of New Goods, pages 207-248, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Dora Gicheva & Justine Hastings & Sofia Villas-Boas, 2010. "Investigating Income Effects in Scanner Data: Do Gasoline Prices Affect Grocery Purchases?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(2), pages 480-484, May.
    3. Matthew Gentzkow, 2007. "Valuing New Goods in a Model with Complementarity: Online Newspapers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(3), pages 713-744, June.
    4. Liran Einav & Dan Knoepfle & Jonathan Levin & Neel Sundaresan, 2014. "Sales Taxes and Internet Commerce," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(1), pages 1-26, January.
    5. Dhar, Tirtha & Chavas, Jean- Paul & Cotterill, Ronald W. & Gould, Brian W., 2005. "An Economic Analysis of Brand-Level Strategic Pricing Between Coca-Cola Company and Pepsi," Working Papers 201538, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Food System Research Group.
    6. David R. Agrawal, 2015. "The Tax Gradient: Spatial Aspects of Fiscal Competition," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 7(2), pages 1-29, May.
    7. Donald S. Kenkel, 2005. "Are Alcohol Tax Hikes Fully Passed Through to Prices? Evidence from Alaska," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(2), pages 273-277, May.
    8. Wallace E. Oates & Wallace E. Oates, 2004. "An Essay on Fiscal Federalism," Chapters, in: Environmental Policy and Fiscal Federalism, chapter 22, pages 384-414, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Brett Hollenbeck & Kosuke Uetake, 2021. "Taxation and market power in the legal marijuana industry," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 52(3), pages 559-595, September.
    10. Matthew Harding & Ephraim Leibtag & Michael F. Lovenheim, 2012. "The Heterogeneous Geographic and Socioeconomic Incidence of Cigarette Taxes: Evidence from Nielsen Homescan Data," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 4(4), pages 169-198, November.
    11. Liana Jacobi & Michelle Sovinsky, 2016. "Marijuana on Main Street? Estimating Demand in Markets with Limited Access," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(8), pages 2009-2045, August.
    12. Andrew Goodman-Bacon, 2018. "Difference-in-Differences with Variation in Treatment Timing," NBER Working Papers 25018, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Timothy F. Bresnahan & Robert J. Gordon, 1996. "The Economics of New Goods," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number bres96-1, October.
    14. Benjamin Hansen & Keaton Miller & Caroline Weber, 2017. "Getting into the Weeds of Tax Invariance," NBER Working Papers 23632, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. David Merriman, 2010. "The Micro-geography of Tax Avoidance: Evidence from Littered Cigarette Packs in Chicago," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 2(2), pages 61-84, May.
    16. Patrick Bajari & Denis Nekipelov & Stephen P. Ryan & Miaoyu Yang, 2015. "Machine Learning Methods for Demand Estimation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(5), pages 481-485, May.
    17. Walter Y. Oi, 1996. "The Welfare Implications of Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of New Goods, pages 109-142, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Michael J. Keen & Christos Kotsogiannis, 2002. "Does Federalism Lead to Excessively High Taxes?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(1), pages 363-370, March.
    19. Deaton, Angus S & Muellbauer, John, 1980. "An Almost Ideal Demand System," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 312-326, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Thanh Lu, 2021. "Marijuana legalization and household spending on food and alcohol," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(7), pages 1684-1696, July.
    2. Michelle Sovinsky & Liana Jacobi & Alessandra Allocca & Tao Sun, 2024. "More than Joints: Multi-Substance Use, Choice Limitations, and Policy Implications," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2024_501, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    3. Michelle Sovinsky & Liana Jacobi & Alessandra Allocca & Tao Sun, 2023. "More than Joints: Multi-Substance Use, Choice Limitations, and Policy Implications," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 487, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    4. Armstrong, Michael J., 2023. "Relationships between sales of legal medical cannabis and alcohol in Canada," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 28-33.
    5. Mir M. Ali & Chandler McClellan & Ryan Mutter & Daniel I. Rees, 2023. "Recreational marijuana laws and the misuse of prescription opioids: Evidence from National Survey on Drug Use and Health microdata," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(2), pages 277-301, February.
    6. Sabia, Joseph J. & Dave, Dhaval & Alotaibi, Fawaz & Rees, Daniel I., 2024. "The effects of recreational marijuana laws on drug use and crime," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    7. Briggs Depew & Jacob Meyer, 2023. "Legal access to alcohol and automobile accidents: Potential interactive effects of alcohol and drug consumption," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 41(2), pages 338-353, April.
    8. Cynthia Bansak & Jun Hyung Kim, 2024. "Medical marijuana legalization and parenting behaviors: An analysis of the time use of parents," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(7), pages 1245-1259, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hansen, Benjamin & Miller, Keaton & Weber, Caroline, 2020. "Federalism, partial prohibition, and cross-border sales: Evidence from recreational marijuana," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    2. Michelle Sovinsky & Liana Jacobi & Alessandra Allocca & Tao Sun, 2023. "More than Joints: Multi-Substance Use, Choice Limitations, and Policy Implications," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 487, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    3. Muhammad Salar Khan & Paul N. Thompson & Victor J. Tremblay, 2020. "Marijuana tax incidence, stockpiling, and cross-border substitution," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 27(1), pages 103-127, February.
    4. Michelle Sovinsky & Liana Jacobi & Alessandra Allocca & Tao Sun, 2024. "More than Joints: Multi-Substance Use, Choice Limitations, and Policy Implications," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2024_501, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    5. Lesley Chiou & Erich Muehlegger, 2014. "Consumer Response to Cigarette Excise Tax Changes," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 67(3), pages 621-650, September.
    6. Biondi, Beatrice & Cornelsen, Laura & Mazzocchi, Mario & Smith, Richard, 2020. "Between preferences and references: Asymmetric price elasticities and the simulation of fiscal policies," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 108-128.
    7. Benjamin Hansen & Keaton Miller & Caroline Weber, 2017. "Getting into the Weeds of Tax Invariance," NBER Working Papers 23632, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Huffman, Wallace, 2004. "Marketizing U.S. Production in the Post-War Era: Implications for Estimating CPI Bias and Real Income from a Complete-Household-Demand System," ISU General Staff Papers 200406010700001238, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    9. Alex Hollingsworth & Coady Wing & Ashley C. Bradford, 2022. "Comparative Effects of Recreational and Medical Marijuana Laws on Drug Use among Adults and Adolescents," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65(3), pages 515-554.
    10. Christos Genakos & Kai‐Uwe Kühn & John Van Reenen, 2018. "Leveraging Monopoly Power by Degrading Interoperability: Theory and Evidence from Computer Markets," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 85(340), pages 873-902, October.
    11. Nevo, Aviv, 2001. "Measuring Market Power in the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(2), pages 307-342, March.
    12. Lukasz Grzybowski & Frank Verboven, 2016. "Substitution between fixed-line and mobile access: the role of complementarities," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 113-151, April.
    13. Joao Macieira & Pedro Pereira & Joao Vareda, 2013. "Bundling Incentives in Markets with Product Complementarities: The Case of Triple-Play," Working Papers 13-15, NET Institute.
    14. McCullough, Ellen & Zhen, Chen & Shin, Soye & Lu, Meichen & Arsenault, Joanne, 2022. "The role of food preferences in determining diet quality for Tanzanian consumers," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    15. Agrawal, David R., 2014. "LOST in America: Evidence on local sales taxes from national panel data," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 147-163.
    16. Rojas, Christian & Peterson, Everett, 2005. "Estimating Demand for Differentiated Products: The Case of Beer in the U.S," Research Reports 149023, University of Connecticut, Food Marketing Policy Center.
    17. Richard Friberg & Frode Steen & Simen A. Ulsaker, 2022. "Hump-Shaped Cross-Price Effects and the Extensive Margin in Cross-Border Shopping," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(2), pages 408-438, May.
    18. Nevo, Aviv, 1997. "Mergers with Differentiated Products: The Case of Ready-to-Eat Cereal," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series qt1d53t6ts, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    19. Christos Genakos, 2004. "DIFFERENTIAL MERGER EFFECTS: The Case of the Personal Computer Industry," STICERD - Economics of Industry Papers 39, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    20. Rojas, Christian, 2005. "Does the King Use Its Power? Price Competition in U.S. Brewing," Research Reports 25172, University of Connecticut, Food Marketing Policy Center.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:nattax:doi:10.1086/712915. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/NTJ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.