Clicking on banner ads enables JWR to constantly improve
Jewish World Review Feb. 26, 2001 / 14 Adar, 5762

Amity Shlaes

Amity Shlaes
JWR's Pundits
World Editorial
Cartoon Showcase

Mallard Fillmore

Michael Barone
Mona Charen
Linda Chavez
Ann Coulter
Greg Crosby
Larry Elder
Don Feder
Suzanne Fields
Paul Greenberg
Bob Greene
Betsy Hart
Nat Hentoff
David Horowitz
Marianne Jennings
Michael Kelly
Mort Kondracke
Ch. Krauthammer
Lawrence Kudlow
Dr. Laura
John Leo
David Limbaugh
Michelle Malkin
Chris Matthews
Michael Medved
Kathleen Parker
Wes Pruden
Sam Schulman
Amity Shlaes
Tony Snow
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Ben Wattenberg
George Will
Bruce Williams
Walter Williams
Mort Zuckerman

Consumer Reports

States' smokescreen for tax hypocrisy -- How elastic is sin?

Not very, if you believe America's state governments. They are the ones wagering that citizens love a sin, cigarette smoking, so much that their desire for cigarettes will not change no matter the taxes levied on cigarettes. Or, to put the matter in economic terms, they think demand will be relatively inelastic. On the plane of common wisdom, the story also makes sense: addiction would not be addiction if you gave it up because it cost an extra dollar.

But it is important to remember that the states' wager on inelasticity is born of a nasty dependence of their own. The dependence on ever-increasing state budgets. For state finance types, watching those budgets go from surplus to deficit has been as painful as nicotine withdrawal. So many are now pushing their governors and legislatures to get them a quick cash fix by hiking cigarette excise taxes. Cigarettes are dirty, but not too dirty for states to make money from them.

Martin Feldman of Salomon Smith Barney found 45 bills proposed in 22 states to raise tobacco taxes. This, he says, comes on top of excise tax increases in five states last year.

And the trend to cigarette sin taxes is a global one: the European Union has proposed a tobacco tax increase worth more than a dollar per pack. Both the EU and US state budgets into which such tax increases would be written are static ones that assume a certain rate of tax revenues. They assume demand is inelastic.

But the evidence here is at least a little smoky. A body of economic literature suggests cigarette demand can be elastic, at least among the young. In the 1990s, two economists, Frank J. Chaloupka of the University of Illinois and Michael Grossman of the National Bureau of Economic Research looked at youth smoking following tobacco tax increases in a number of states. They found that "large increases in cigarette excise taxes would lead to sharp reductions in youth smoking".

Moreover, higher prices for cigarettes not only reduced the purchase of cigarettes by smokers but also deterred young non-smokers from taking up smoking. Older smokers were less responsive, especially, it seems, women.

This hopeful finding - at least hopeful for those concerned about health, and not state coffers - is conditioned on a few assumptions. The biggest is that young people are not "butt-legging" - cadging cigarettes in the black or grey markets or driving out of state for cigarettes.

But, as the authors note, youngsters' access to autos is more limited than that of adults, so the elasticity is likely a real phenomenon. We can therefore expect steep reductions in youth smoking in Alaska, Hawaii and New York - three states where the tax on a pack is $1 or more. Kids in Kentucky and Virginia (with taxes less than ten cents) will, by contrast, puff away.

All this makes sense given that a one dollar increase in the price of a pack of cigarettes represents a significant percentage of many a teenager's budget, especially during weak economic times.

Mr Chaloupka and his colleague John Tauras also did some research on nicotine replacement therapy, presumably a "better" behaviour than smoking. They found that demand for the patch, nicotine cigarettes and similar alternatives to smoking was also elastic.

Of course some nicotine gum chewers use the product to feed their addiction, rather than end it. Still, even the most avaricious states have steered away from taxing nicotine replacement, which is regarded as medicine.

But where does this leave our states? On the one hand, they say they abhor destructive behaviour, and have bitten a huge piece out of the side of the tobacco industry through anti-tobacco litigation. On the other, they are eager for revenue, and morally committed to obtaining it, even it means profiteering from bad behaviour.

This is troubling, especially when you consider that tobacco taxes, like liquor taxes, are regressive: they tend to weigh most heavily on the poorest and most vulnerable members of society. To make matters worse, the states not only tax but actually encourage another form of sin: gambling in government sponsored lotteries.

Thus, as Mr Feldman points out, citizens of Connecticut were last fall subjected to the spectacle of hearing their governor, John Rowland, intone on the virtues of fiscal solvency ("state government should strive to spend no more than it takes in") even as he prepared to push for higher tobacco taxes and increasing state revenues through the lottery. Then there is Mike Bloomberg, New York's mayor, who has proposed a tobacco tax increase of 1,700 per cent, bringing the price of a pack of cigarettes to $7.

Of course such revenue hounds defend themselves by claiming they are achieving two goals: balanced budgets in the short-run and reduced smoking in the long. Still, the most visible addiction in the saga of taxes and cigarettes is not smoking but public sector greed.

JWR contributor Amity Shlaes is a columnist for Financial Times . Her latest book is The Greedy Hand: How Taxes Drive Americans Crazy and What to Do About It. Send your comments by clicking here.


02/20/02: Echoes of leadership against a global threat
02/13/02: Jackson Vanik May be a Useful Analogy When Thinking About the Middle East
02/07/02: Budgeting for victory: Requiem for a peace dividend
02/05/02: The detectives of 1930s pulp fiction had a nose for clients bearing gifts. Sadly, those consulted by Enron did not
01/22/02: Allow all American children a decent chance
01/15/02: Do not disturb the profit-sharing revolution
01/09/02: It is dangerous to elevate a currency as a political emblem if the need for other economic reforms is obscured
01/03/02: There is only one way for a free thinker to bring up children
12/20/01: Why America's economy always bounces back
12/18/01: When it comes to taxes, Washington lawmakers can learn a thing or two from The Honeymooners
12/13/01: Bush opens a new era
12/12/01: A flamboyant reversal for the Democratic party
12/06/01: Threat of an oil embargo on the U.S. is a bluff
11/29/01: Which is more important--the war or diplomatic comity?
11/20/01: Unbalanced by a wealth of oil and diamonds
10/17/01: Afghanistan Needs a General MacArthur
09/27/01: The US has gained an understanding of the costs of war for which its European allies have hitherto wished in vain
09/13/01: War against terrorism will rise from the ashes
08/15/01: Geography is no excuse for the state's economic stagnation. Its policymakers should take a leaf from Ireland's book
08/07/01: Teamsters may pay a heavy price for winning its batle in Congress
07/25/01: Towards a patent-free nirvana?
07/17/01: History proves the lasting value of tax cuts
07/10/01: Stem cell research has awakened a bitter debate in Washington but voters care more about other electoral issues
07/03/01: America foots the bill for Europe's largesse
06/26/01: America the litigious, land of the lawyer's fee
06/20/01: Five reasons for gloom about global growth 06/18/01: Show pity for Alice in Tax Wonderland
06/13/01: America must take a French lesson in trade
06/11/01: Time to dream the impossible dream for Iraq
06/07/01: Whatever happened to simple?
06/04/01: When the relationship between companies becomes as close as a marriage, the eventual break-up is often very painful
06/01/01: Loving and hating the Bush tax bill
05/30/01: Will Grisham soon be unemployed? In America's courts these days, there's no room left over for legal fiction
05/22/01: Republicans sample the rhetoric of confidence
05/16/01: Boeing has been promised $60m to site its headquarters in Illinois. The deal looks a poor one for taxpayers
05/14/01: Adam Smith in love
05/09/01: Those rotten Russian capitalists
05/07/01: Why tax havens provide shelter for everyone
05/04/01: Middle classes pay for get-the-rich folly
05/01/01: Money can't buy happiness? Think again.
04/26/01: Calling America's rogues and entrepreneurs
04/19/01: High earners right to feel lonely at the top
04/11/01: The right must learn the comfort of strangers
04/04/01: When domestic law arrives by the back door
03/30/01: A Lexus tax cut suits the jalopy driver
03/27/01: The unchallenged dominance of King Dollar
03/20/01: Natural selection of an intellectual aristocracy
03/16/01: The hidden danger of a regulatory recession
03/14/01: Is the American condition that boring? Why so many Oscar nominated movies aren't set in America
03/07/01: Trampling on the theory of path dependence
03/05/01: Fighting the good fight
03/01/01: It is time for Fannie and Freddie to grow up
02/27/01: IT's important
02/22/01: The guilty conscience of America's millionaires
02/14/01: The benefits of helping the 'rich'
02/09/01: The Danger and Promise of the Bush Schools Plan
02/05/01: Crack and Compassion
01/31/01: Debt is good
01/29/01: Clueless
01/24/01: A gloomy end for a half-hearted undertaking
01/17/01: The challenge of an ally with its own mind
01/15/01: An unexpected American family portrait
01/10/01: A fitting legacy for America's beloved dictator
01/08/01: The trick of tax 'convenience'
01/03/01: Time to stop blaming Greenspan over taxes
12/11/00: So smart they're dumb
12/06/00: How economic bad news came good for Bush
12/04/00: The Boies factor
11/30/00: "The inevitable demands for recounts erupted like acne…"
11/28/00: Fair play and the rules of the electoral game
11/23/00: The shining prospect beyond a cloudy election
11/21/00: Try the Cleveland model
11/16/00: A surprising winner emerges in the US election
11/09/00: Those powerful expats
11/07/00: What's right for America versus what works
11/02/00: Time to turn off big government's autopilot
10/30/00: Canada beating America in financial sensibility
10/26/00: When progressiveness leads to backwardness
10/24/00: The most accurate poll
10/19/00: The Middle East tells us the hawks were right
10/17/00: The split personalities of America's super rich
10/10/00: 'Equity Rights' or Wake up and Smell the Starbucks
10/04/00: Trapped in the basement of global capitalism
09/21/00: The final act of a grand presidential tragedy
09/21/00: Europeans strike back at the fuel tax monster. Should Americans follow?
09/18/00: First steps to success
09/13/00: America rejects the human rights transplant
09/07/00: Minimum wage, maximum cost
09/05/00: Prudent Al Gore plans some serious spending
08/31/00: A revolution fails to bring power to the people
08/28/00: A reali$tic poll
08/21/00: "I Goofed"
08/16/00: Part of the union, but not part of the party
08/09/00: Silicon Alley Secrets
08/02/00: Radical Republicans warm up for Philadelphia
07/31/00: I'll Cry if I Want To
07/27/00: Cold warrior of the new world
07/25/00: The Estate Tax will drop dead
07/18/00: Shooting down the anti-missile defence myths
07/14/00: A convenient punchbag for America's leaders
07/07/00: How to destroy the pharmaceutical industry
07/05/00: Patriots and bleeding hearts
06/30/00: Candidates beware: New Washington consensus on robust growth stands the old wisdom on its head
06/28/00: White America's flight to educational quality
06/26/00: How Hillary inspired the feminist infobabes

© 2001, Financial Times