Promoting convergence and closing gaps: a blueprint for the revision of the European Union Tobacco Tax Directive

Promoting convergence and closing gaps using affordability-based minimum taxes: an illustration using the European Union Tobacco Tax Directive

BACKGROUND

The rules governing tobacco taxation in the European Union (EU) are currently under revision. Earlier research has proposed reforms aimed at stimulating price convergence across countries by linking national minimum taxes to a measure of average prices across the EU. This paper proposes that revised tax rules include an affordability criterion whereby minimum taxes are required to be no less than a common prespecified fraction of domestic average disposable income.

METHODS

Longitudinal data on prices and taxes on factory-made cigarettes and roll-your-own tobacco in 24 EU member states and the UK between 2011 and 2019 are used to estimate econometric models for their weighted average prices as a function of taxes. Two scenarios are simulated with the models' estimates: a baseline scenario for the actual tax stance pertaining to 2020 and a reform scenario implementing an additional affordability criterion.

RESULTS

The affordability criterion would significantly increase the price of both tobacco products, particularly in richer countries with relatively low tobacco prices that are often not affected by the increases in nominal minima mandated by the EU rules. There would also be some price convergence between the two tobacco products, both on average and in the majority of countries.

CONCLUSIONS

Such results show an affordability criterion could be a potentially fruitful complement to the tax reforms proposed in earlier research.

Addressing lower-priced cigarette products through three-pronged comprehensive regulation on excise taxes, minimum price policies and restrictions on price promotions

The prices that smokers pay out-of-pocket for their tobacco products ultimately influence their smoking behaviour. Although cigarette excise taxes are arguably the best and most used policy to increase cigarette prices, taxes are only one component of retail cigarette prices. The persistence of lower-priced products, disproportionately purchased by lower-income smokers, in jurisdictions with high excise taxes is an Achilles heel for tobacco tax policy. When governments raise excise taxes, the tobacco industry responds. The industry reduces tax pass-through to minimise the price increases for lower-priced brands and offers price discounts to retailers and coupons to consumers. In addition, smokers who do not quit after tax increases may downshift brands, purchase in bulk or substitute lower-priced tobacco product types. This may be particularly true for price-sensitive smokers, including those with lower incomes. We propose that raising excise taxes will be more effective in reducing the persistence of lower-priced products and income-based smoking disparities when taxes are designed to raise prices frequently and substantially for all products and are combined with (a) minimum price laws and (b) bans on coupons, discounts and other promotions. In combination, these three complementary policies restrict the tobacco industry's ability to undermine the impact of higher excise taxes upon consumer prices. Very few jurisdictions have implemented comprehensive three-pronged tobacco price regulation, but doing so would likely address many of the limitations that come with a sole focus on raising excise taxes.

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.