Sample Paper on Effects of Increases in Cigarette Taxes

Effects of Increases in Cigarette Taxes

Consumption of cigarettes led to many deaths among youths in the United States. Some states reported a significant decline in the number of young adults losing lives due to smoking after the prices of this product went up in some states in US. This followed a decision by many states such as Utah, Massachusetts, and Minnesota among others that increased the price of cigarettes to reduce the number of young smokers (Boonn 3). There are other nations such as Oklahoma, Michigan, Missouri, and Wyoming, which did not reduce their cigarette tax rates. This paper reports how decrease or increase of cigarette prices have affected the youths in the selected states. They hoped to reduce the number of youth dying because of cigarette use and increased amount of money incurred from the sales of the product.

The state of Wisconsin increased the prices of cigarettes by $1 between 2006 up to date. The prices have never gone up any further and Wisconsin is among few states whose cigarettes are relatively high. The prices of tobacco increased from 34 cents from2008 to $1.00 in 2012 in the state. They changed the prices with the aim of reducing the number of youths and adults who smoked in the states. The government intends to use the funds obtained from the increment on carrying out further abstinence campaigns and supporting patients with lung cancer problems (CDC, 2013).

States such as Michigan, Missouri, and Wyoming, which did not reduce their cigarette tax rates. The prices of cigarettes in these locations ranged between 34 to 60 cents between 2008 and 2012 (Riodern 5).

A research study by Tobacco-Free Kids/Riodern provides evidence that cigarette prices have major effects on the percentage of youths who continue to smoke and those who stop the habit. The table below shows the number of youths who smoked in Wisconsin, Michigan, Missouri, and Wyoming between 2008 and 2012

        Year

State

2008 2009

 

 

2010 2011 2012
Wisconsin 50.1 47.8 44.7 33.3 26.5
Michigan 5.1 5.9 6.2 6.2 6.4
Kentucky 7.8 18.1 18.9 19.6 21.2
Wyoming 6.8 7.2 7.9 8.1 8.5

 

 

The cigarette tax changes occurred in 2008 in all the above four states. Calculations below shows the changes in youth smoking rates from 2009 to 2012 for each state

Wisconsin 47.8 – 26.5/ 47.8 ×100 = 44.56

Michigan 5.9 – 6.5 /5.9 ×100 = – 10.2

Kentucky 18.1 – 21.2/18.1 ×100 = -17.1

Wyoming 7.2 – 8.5 /7.2 ×100 = – 18.1

The calculations above indicate that the state that increased its cigarette prices by $1.00 recorded a positive decline in the number of youths who smocked by 44%. The other states that did not increase their tax rates to $1 and above reported a negative change, which means that the number of youths who smoke in these regions went up by the indicated percentages.

Wisconsin 50.1 – 47.8 = 2.3

Michigan 5.1 – 5.9 = – 0.9

Kentucky 7.8 −18.1= -10.3

Wyoming 6.8 −7.2 = -0.4

The number of smocking youths in the states that did not change their taxes remained higher or increased compared to those in the states that changed their prices. The negative numbers show that the number of smoking youths increased in the nations whose cigarette prices did not change while the state that increased its prices decreased by 2.3.

Differences between Wisconsin and Michigan 2.3 – (-0.9) = 3.2, Wisconsin and Kentucky 2.3 – (-10.3) = 12.6, Wisconsin and Wyoming 2.3- (- 0.4) = 2.7

These responses have an almost similar index compared to those proposed by Carpenter and Cook. The slight difference is based on the different types of instruments used for collecting the data used in these calculations and those used by Carpenter and cook. It is based on errors that might have occurred during data collection. On the contrary, the near resemblance in the data indicates that the number of youths smoking reduced in the states that increased their taxes but remained constant or increased in those that did not change their taxes on cigarette prices (Randazzo, Malcom & Furtick 1). The information in my calculations may not indicate the right changes because of the different types of data used in my calculations. Different researchers who could have incurred different types of errors during the collection procedures collected the data.

Conclusion

The government of the United States proposed increases in cigarette taxes in order to reduce the number of people dying because of smoking. The government hoped to increase the number of people quitting cigarette smoking while reducing the number of those with lung cancer. The results showed an increase in the number of people ceasing the use of these products in the states that increased their prices. States that did not increase the amount recorded an increase in the number of youths who smoked. It is evident that the price of cigarette has an impact on the number of youths smoking because of their inability to acquire the product.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Works Cited

America Lung Association. Trends in tobacco use. Web 12 February 2013. <http://www.lung.org/finding-cures/our-research/trend-reports/Tobacco-Trend-Report.pdf>

Boon, Ann. Campaign for tobacco free kids. Web. October 2012 <http://www.tobaccofreekids.org/research/factsheets/pdf/0146.pdf>

CDC. Consumption of cigarettes and combustible tobacco — United States, 2000–2011. Web. August 2012< http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6130a1.htm>

Randazzo, Anthony, Malcom, Candice and Furtick, Katie. The effect of cigarette taxes on illicit trade. p1. Web. January 2014. < http://reason.org/files/cigarette_tax_illicit_trade.pdf>

Riodern, Meg. Campaign for tobacco free kids. Web. 4 January 2014. < http://www.tobaccofreekids.org/research/factsheets/pdf/0270.pdf>