Cost Comparison and Spending on Tobacco Products: Evidence From A Nationally Representative Sample of Adult E-cigarette Users.

INTRODUCTION

Over 20 states and local jurisdictions in the United States have imposed e-cigarette taxes. It is important to evaluate how adult vapers, including those who also smoke respond to e-cigarette taxation. The purpose of this study is to examine factors associated with adult vapers' cost comparison between e-cigarettes and cigarettes (ie, which one is perceived to be more expensive) and expenditures (ie, dollars spent) on these two products.

AIMS AND METHODS

We recruited a nationally representative sample of 801 adult e-cigarette users in the United States., who participated in an online survey in April-May 2023. Nested-ordered logit and ordinary least squares regressions were used in the analysis.

RESULTS

On average, adult vapers spent $82.22 per month on e-cigarettes, and dual users spent $118.77 per month on cigarettes. More frequent e-cigarette use, lower state-level e-cigarette taxes, age, and exclusive use of rechargeable tank systems with e-liquids were associated with considering e-cigarettes as less expensive than cigarettes. Exclusive use of tank systems was associated with lower e-cigarette spending. Adults who used e-cigarettes more frequently preferred to report weekly (vs. monthly) spending on e-cigarettes; among dual users, everyday smokers were more likely to think of weekly (vs. monthly) spending on cigarettes compared to someday smokers.

CONCLUSIONS

Among U.S. adult vapers, tobacco use frequency, and e-cigarette device type are closely related to cost measures; e-cigarette taxes are associated with cost comparison between e-cigarettes and cigarettes, suggesting potential financial disincentive for vaping. Policymakers may consider imposing differential taxes on e-cigarette product types due to their different costs to consumers.

IMPLICATIONS

This study provides supportive evidence that e-cigarette taxes may impact how vapers compare the costs of e-cigarettes relative to cigarettes. Given different expenditures and cost comparisons by e-cigarette device types, tax, and policy design may need to be taken into consideration of e-cigarette device types. We also found that indoor tobacco use restrictions in shared housing may reduce vaping, and future research is needed. The associations between sociodemographics and cost comparison and expenditures reflect known patterns in price responsiveness and vaping prevalence. Cost comparison and expenditures are related measures, which may further reflect product affordability.