86th International Atlantic Economic Conference

October 11 - 14, 2018 | New York, USA

Tax evasion and illicit trade before and after a tobacco tax increase

Saturday, 13 October 2018: 9:00 AM
James E. Prieger, Ph.D , School of Public Policy, Pepperdine University, Malibu, CA
Jonathan Kulick, Ph.D , New York University, New York, NY
Objectives

Our study measures cigarette tax evasion, avoidance, and illicit trade before and after a large state tobacco tax increase. We investigate which economic, demographic, and behavioral factors are most strongly associated with such behavior.

Background

Demand-side responses to excise tax increases can include tax avoidance and evasion. Supply-side responses can include provision of untaxed or counterfeit (illicit) goods. In the case of tobacco taxes, such unexpected market responses can reduce the efficacy of increasing cigarette taxes toward reducing smoking and raising tax revenue.

Data/Methods

To investigate these issues, we commissioned surveys of California smokers before and after a large state tobacco tax increase in April 2017. We gathered information from respondents on their smoking habits and intended and actual responses to the tax increase. Particular responses we investigate include quitting or reducing smoking, purchasing cigarettes online, out of state, or from Native American reservations, and seeking out other licit and illicit ways to reduce expenditure on cigarettes. We also estimate the prevalence of counterfeit product in the market. For sensitive questions about tax evasion and avoidance we employ the item count technique, a method shown to improve the accuracy of self-reported behavior.

Methods include estimation of population means and proportions, hypothesis testing of changes in those, and logit regressions of tax evasion on demographics, economic factors such as cigarette prices, and behavioral factors.

Results/Expected Results

Before the tax, half of smokers intended to act in ways that undermine the public health rationale for raising tobacco taxes. We will compare these intentions with the actual (stated) behavior of smokers after the tax increase. Significant proportions of the smoking population engage in some measures of avoidance and evasion already before the tax (e.g., buying out of state, buying from sellers who did not pay required taxes).

We test several hypotheses from the tax evasion literature after the logit estimations. We find evidence that factors pertaining to behavioral considerations (social norms, guilt and shame, and perceptions of fairness) are associated with illegal behavior in some estimations.

Policy Implications

The intended tax-avoiding and –evading behavior by some consumers implies that the impact of the tax on smoking cannot be accurately determined by data from tax receipts in licit markets. Once our post-tax surveying is complete, our study will give a more complete picture of actual market responses to the tax increase and discuss implications for policy toward smoking and public health.