Centre for Behavioural Research in Cancer, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Centre for Behavioural Research in Cancer, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Lancet Public Health. 2019 Dec;4(12):e618-e627. doi: 10.1016/S2468-2667(19)30203-8. Epub 2019 Nov 20.
Building on substantial tobacco control action over the previous decade, Australia increased the taxes on tobacco by 25% without forewarning on April 30, 2010. Australia then became one of a few countries to pre-announce a series of increases in tobacco taxes, with annual 12·5% increases starting from December, 2013. We aimed to examine the effects of both tax increases on smoking prevalence.
By use of survey data from Australians aged 14 years and older in five capital cities, we did an interrupted time-series analysis to model the monthly prevalence of smoking (overall, of factory-made cigarettes [FMC], and of roll-your-own tobacco [RYO]), in the total sample and stratified by socioeconomic status subgroups. We measured outcomes in May, 2001-April, 2010; May, 2010-November, 2013; and December, 2013-April, 2017.
The 25% tax increase was associated with immediate (-0·745 percentage points; 95% CI -1·378 to -0·112) and sustained reductions in prevalence (monthly trend -0·023 percentage points; -0·044 to -0·003), which were driven by reductions in the prevalence of smoking of FMC. The prevalence of smoking of RYO increased between May, 2010, and November, 2013, after the 25% tax increase. At the start of the pre-announced annual 12·5% increases, we observed an immediate reduction in smoking (-0·997 percentage points; -1·632 to -0·362), followed by decreasing overall prevalence (monthly trend -0·044 percentage points; -0·063 to -0·026) due to ongoing decreases in the prevalence of FMC smoking and a cessation of increases in the prevalence of smoking of RYO. Immediate decreases in smoking and changing trends in the prevalence of smoking of RYO were most evident among groups with a lower socioeconomic status.
Large tax increases are effective in reducing smoking prevalence, both as a single increase without forewarning and as a pre-announced series of increases. However, taxes on tobacco are best structured to apply equally to FMC and RYO products. Tobacco control policies should prohibit price marketing that otherwise erodes the full impact of such tax increases.
Cancer Council Victoria.
在过去十年中,澳大利亚在烟草控制方面采取了大量行动,于 2010 年 4 月 30 日未经预先警告将烟草税提高了 25%。此后,澳大利亚成为少数几个预先宣布一系列增税的国家之一,自 2013 年 12 月起,每年提高 12.5%。我们旨在研究这两次增税对吸烟率的影响。
利用五个首府城市中年龄在 14 岁及以上的澳大利亚人的调查数据,我们采用中断时间序列分析来模拟总体、工厂制造卷烟(FMC)和自卷烟草(RYO)的吸烟流行率(每月),在总样本和按社会经济地位亚组分层的样本中进行分析。我们在 2001 年 5 月至 2010 年 4 月、2010 年 5 月至 2013 年 11 月和 2013 年 12 月至 2017 年 4 月进行了调查。
25%的增税立即(-0.745 个百分点;95%CI-1.378 至-0.112)并持续降低了吸烟率(每月趋势-0.023 个百分点;-0.044 至-0.003),这主要是由于 FMC 吸烟率的下降。2010 年 5 月 25%增税后,RYO 的吸烟率增加。在预先公布的每年 12.5%增税开始时,我们观察到吸烟率立即下降(-0.997 个百分点;-1.632 至-0.362),随后由于 FMC 吸烟率持续下降和 RYO 吸烟率停止增加,整体吸烟率下降(每月趋势-0.044 个百分点;-0.063 至-0.026)。在社会经济地位较低的群体中,吸烟率的立即下降和 RYO 吸烟率变化趋势最为明显。
大幅提高烟草税可有效降低吸烟率,无论是作为没有预先警告的单次增加,还是作为预先公布的一系列增加。然而,烟草税的最佳结构是对 FMC 和 RYO 产品同样适用。烟草控制政策应禁止价格营销,否则会削弱这种增税的全部影响。
维多利亚癌症理事会。