Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Center for Research on Society and Health, Universidad Mayor, Santiago, Chile.
Addiction. 2019 Feb;114(2):236-247. doi: 10.1111/add.14470. Epub 2018 Nov 16.
To use simulation to estimate the impact of alcohol taxation on drinking, non-fatal violent victimization and homicide in New York City (NYC). We simulate the heterogeneous effects of alcohol price elasticities by income, level of consumption and beverage preferences, and examine whether taxation can reduce income inequalities in alcohol-related violence.
Agent-based modeling simulation.
NYC, USA.
Adult population aged 18-64 years in the year 2000 in the 59 community districts of NYC. The population of 256 500 agents approximates a 5% sample of the NYC population.
Agents were parameterized through a series of rules that governed alcohol consumption and engagement in violence. Six taxation interventions were implemented based on extensive reviews and meta-analyses, increasing universal alcohol tax by 1, 5 and 10%, and beer tax by 1, 5 and 10%.
Under no tax increase, approximately 12.2% [95% credible interval (prediction interval, PI) = 12.1-12.3%] were heavy drinkers. Taxation decreased the proportion of heavy drinkers; a 10% tax decreased heavy drinking to 9.6% (95% PI = 9.4-9.8). Beer taxes had the strongest effect on population consumption. Taxation influenced those in the lowest income groups more than the highest income groups. Alcohol-related homicide decreased from 3.22 per 100 000 (95% PI = 2.50-3.73) to 2.40 per 100 000 under a 10% universal tax (95% PI = 1.92-2.94). This translates into an anticipated benefit of ~1200 lives/year.
Reductions in alcohol consumption in a large urban environment such as New York City can be sustained with modest increases in universal taxation. Alcohol tax increases also have a modest effect on alcohol-related violent victimization. Taxation policies reduce income inequalities in alcohol-related violence.
利用模拟估计纽约市（NYC）的酒精税对饮酒、非致命性暴力受害和杀人的影响。我们通过收入、消费水平和饮料偏好模拟酒精价格弹性的异质性影响，并检验税收是否能减少与酒精相关的暴力的收入不平等。
基于代理的建模模拟。
美国纽约市。
2000 年，NYC 59 个社区区的 18-64 岁成年人。256500 名代理人的人口约为 NYC 人口的 5%。
代理人通过一系列规则来参数化，这些规则管理着酒精消费和参与暴力的行为。根据广泛的审查和荟萃分析，实施了六种税收干预措施，将普遍的酒精税提高 1%、5%和 10%，并将啤酒税提高 1%、5%和 10%。
在没有税收增加的情况下，大约有 12.2%（95%可信区间[预测区间，PI]=12.1-12.3%）的人是重度饮酒者。税收降低了重度饮酒者的比例；10%的税收将重度饮酒降低到 9.6%（95% PI=9.4-9.8）。啤酒税对人群消费的影响最大。税收对收入最低的群体的影响大于收入最高的群体。与酒精相关的杀人案从每 10 万人 3.22 例（95% PI=2.50-3.73）减少到每 10 万人 2.40 例，在实施 10%的普遍税收时（95% PI=1.92-2.94）。这意味着每年预计会有 1200 人受益。
在像纽约市这样的大型城市环境中，适度增加普遍税收可以维持饮酒量的减少。酒精税的增加也对与酒精相关的暴力受害有适度的影响。税收政策减少了与酒精相关的暴力的收入不平等。
