Cigarette tax

Question A: An increase in the Ohio state cigarette tax from $1.60/pack to $2/pack would lead to significantly higher prices for  consumers.

Question B: An increase in the Ohio state cigarette tax from $1.60/pack to $2/pack would lead to a significant reduction in cigarette consumption.

Question C: An increase in the Ohio state cigarette tax from $1.60/pack to $2/pack would lead to a reduction in cigarette related health problems.

Question A: An increase in the Ohio state cigarette tax from $1.60/pack to $2/pack would lead to significantly higher prices for  consumers.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Strongly Agree	9
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Disagree	8
Jay Corrigan	Kenyon College	Strongly Agree	8
Kevin Egan	University of Toledo	Agree	10	Yes, most of the tax will be passed on to the consumers. That is the point of this corrective tax, to increase the price so that citizens choose to smoke less.
Kenneth Fah	Ohio Dominican University	Uncertain	9
Will Georgic	Ohio Wesleyan University	Uncertain	5	Even if the full tax increase is passed on to consumers, which doesn't seem likely for all segments/tiers of cigarettes, I'm not sure if I'd say that an $8.40 pack of cigarettes is significantly higher in price than an $8.00 pack.
Robert Gitter	Ohio Wesleyan University	Disagree	8	It depends on how you view what is a significantly higher price. My best guess is that the price would go up about 30 cents or 5 % as the consumer will pay the bulk of the tax.
Nancy Haskell	University of Dayton	Agree	7
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	Agree	8	Significantly' is in the eye of the beholder; but I'd expect most of this to be passed to consumers, so average prices probably rising close to 40c
Faria Huq	Lake Erie College	Agree	8
Michael Jones	University of Cincinnati	Agree	5
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Strongly Disagree	9	Even if the price increases by the whole 40 cents it will not deter smokers. Cigarettes are a very inelastic product.
Bill LaFayette	Regionomics	Disagree	8	Given the relatively low smoking rate, not a significant increase for consumers as a whole.
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Agree	5
Joe Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Agree	8
Curtis Reynolds	Kent State University	Strongly Agree	10	I don't know what "significantly" means but the research is clear that most of cigarette taxes are passed through to consumers in the form of higher prices (tax burden for consumers around 70 or 80 cents per dollar tax) since demand is very inelastic. There is an excellent recent review of the research on smoking regulation (including all questions in this survey): DeCicca, Philip, Donald Kenkel, and Michael F. Lovenheim. "The economics of tobacco regulation: a comprehensive review." Journal of economic literature 60.3 (2022): 883-970.
Kay Strong	Independent	Disagree	9	Cigarettes are a price inelastic good, meaning, raising the price by 40 cents to change behavior will have minimal impact on consumers. At best, it will only serve to raise revenue for state coffers.
Iryna Topolyan	University of Cincinnati	Strongly Disagree	9	Unless other factors are at play, the tax increase in question would increase prices by maximum $.40.
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Agree	8
Andy Welki	John Carroll University	Strongly Agree	8
Kathryn Wilson	Kent State University	Agree	7	I would expect most of the 40 cent per pack tax to be passed on to consumers.
Rachel Wilson	Wittenberg University	Agree	9

Question B: An increase in the Ohio state cigarette tax from $1.60/pack to $2/pack would lead to a significant reduction in cigarette consumption.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Agree	8	There is only a small short-run effect of higher prices because they are addictive, but it has a big effect on teens who are deterred from starting and it helps motivate addicts to quit in the long run. The main problem is substitutes from illegal tobacco sales and I hope this is going to apply to vapes which is the main growing problem.
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Disagree	8	more effect on young people, who have lower purchasing power
Jay Corrigan	Kenyon College	Agree	6
Kevin Egan	University of Toledo	Agree	10	Yes, this is the law of demand: increasing the price of cigarettes will reduce the quantity demanded. Note that particularly young adults are sensitive to higher prices. Though, even older adults with tobacco addiction have been shown to smoke less as well when prices are higher. However, most importantly, with higher prices, less citizens in the future will have a tobacco addiction.
Kenneth Fah	Ohio Dominican University	Disagree	9
Will Georgic	Ohio Wesleyan University	Agree	8	The increase in the cigarette tax would lead to a statistically identifiable decrease in cigarette consumption, but the relative reduction in cigarette consumption would almost assuredly be in the low single digits.
Robert Gitter	Ohio Wesleyan University	Uncertain	8	Once again, what is meant by significant. I would imagine that sales would go down by 3-4 % and probably more so for younger smokers.
Nancy Haskell	University of Dayton	Agree	7
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	Uncertain	6	Older 'established' smokers probably would likely continue their smoking patterns. Younger people are probably a little less likely to take up smoking. But 40c is not large, especially in the context of current wages available to younger people, so I doubt much of an effect.
Faria Huq	Lake Erie College	Agree	6	The effects are likely to vary based on demographics. There will be some reduction in cigarette consumption although I am uncertain about whether the reduction will be significant.
Michael Jones	University of Cincinnati	Uncertain	5
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Disagree	9
Bill LaFayette	Regionomics	Disagree	7	A reduction, yes. Probably not significant given the addiction that develops.
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Uncertain	7
Joe Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Disagree	8
Curtis Reynolds	Kent State University	Disagree	10	Research is clear that demand for cigarettes is very inelastic, so increases in prices does not lower cigarette consumption much (an older literature suggested larger decreases for teenagers but more recent studies find smaller effects). Depending on which estimates you look at, this tax might reduce cigarette consumption by about 1-5%. And there is strong evidence of tax avoidance (casual smuggling from other states) which would further lower the effects towards zero.
Kay Strong	Independent	Disagree	9
Iryna Topolyan	University of Cincinnati	Disagree	7
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Disagree	8
Andy Welki	John Carroll University	Disagree	8
Kathryn Wilson	Kent State University	Agree	7	Studies have shown that higher cigarette prices reduce the likelihood that youth will begin smoking and reduce cigarette consumption among youth. The results for adults is generally not as strong. I agree that the tax would likely result in a reduction in cigarette consumption, particularly among youth, but I don't know that the tax increase would be enough to significantly reduce consumption overall.
Rachel Wilson	Wittenberg University	Uncertain	8	Studies have shown that cigarettes are inelastic. In other words, a 10% increase in prices would lead to a less than 10% decrease in quantity demanded. But, it would still lead to a decrease in quantity demanded.

Question C: An increase in the Ohio state cigarette tax from $1.60/pack to $2/pack would lead to a reduction in cigarette related health problems.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Agree	3	See above
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Disagree	8	existing users will continue to smoke and have health problems, but a few less young people will pick up smoking, reducing health problems a little in distant future (but making some switch to vaping, with whatever health problems it poses)
Jay Corrigan	Kenyon College	Agree	6
Kevin Egan	University of Toledo	Strongly Agree	10	Yes, that is the point of this corrective tax. Moreover, the new revenue from the higher corrective tax on cigarettes could be used to lower other taxes, ideally lowering taxes on lower income citizens to offset the regressive nature of any corrective sales taxes such as this. I would also advocate for banning advertising for any tobacco products.
Kenneth Fah	Ohio Dominican University	Disagree	9
Will Georgic	Ohio Wesleyan University	Strongly Agree	10	There is enough research to know that a 25% increase in the cigarette tax would decrease smoking frequency, participation, and initiation, which will in turn reduce cigarette related health problems. However, the magnitude of the reduction is hard to know and may not be detectable for up to a decade.
Robert Gitter	Ohio Wesleyan University	Strongly Agree	10	Any reduction in smoking, no matter how small, will lead the fewer health problems.
Nancy Haskell	University of Dayton	Agree	7
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	Agree	6	To the extent that it discourages smoking, there are clear public health benefits. But I suspect 40c per pack is not high enough to make a large change in smoking rates, which are really quite low anyway.
Faria Huq	Lake Erie College	Agree	8
Michael Jones	University of Cincinnati	Uncertain	5
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Strongly Disagree	9	The best ways to reduce smoking is education and banning smoking in public places.
Bill LaFayette	Regionomics	Agree	6	Some reduction but again, probably not significant. The impact would be somewhat greater if the increased revenue were used for smoking cessation and treatment programs.
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Disagree	8
Joe Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Agree	6
Curtis Reynolds	Kent State University	Disagree	6	This is harder to measure. Smoking is clearly harmful to smokers and people around them, but spillovers (externalities) to society from the health problems associated with smoking are substantial. But if the tax does not change smoking behavior much, it cannot change these outcomes much (although even a little bit would be good considering how large these effects are).
Kay Strong	Independent	Disagree	9
Iryna Topolyan	University of Cincinnati	Disagree	7
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Uncertain	7
Andy Welki	John Carroll University	Uncertain	6
Kathryn Wilson	Kent State University	Agree	7	The link between smoking an health problems is well established. To the extent that the tax reduces consumption (particularly for youth), it would be expected to also reduce cigarette related health problems.
Rachel Wilson	Wittenberg University	Agree	8	It depends on how much the quantity demand decreases. It also depends on how easily adults can purchase cigarettes in other states or online. Teens may have less options thus if this reduces teen smoking, it may have an even greater long term health benefits. A significant amount of smokers are lower income and this population also uses more public health resources. Thus in addition to tax revenue, the state could reap lower public health care costs.