Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Feb;106(2):374-80.
doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2015.302968. Epub 2015 Dec 21.

Independent and Interactive Effects of Smoking Bans and Tobacco Taxes on a Cohort of US Young Adults

Affiliations
Free PMC article

Independent and Interactive Effects of Smoking Bans and Tobacco Taxes on a Cohort of US Young Adults

Mike Vuolo et al. Am J Public Health. .
Free PMC article

Abstract

Objectives: We examined the mutual effects of smoking bans and taxes on smoking among a longitudinal cohort of young adults.

Methods: We combined a repository of US tobacco policies at the state and local level with the nationally representative geocoded National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 (2004-2011) from ages 19 to 31 years and Census data, to examine the impact of tobacco policies on any current and daily pack smoking. The analytic sample amounts to 19,668 observations among 4341 individuals within 487 cities.

Results: For current smoking, we found significant effects for comprehensive smoking bans, but not excise taxes. We also found an interaction effect, with bans being most effective in locales with no or low taxes. For daily pack smoking, we found significant effects for taxes, but limited support for bans.

Conclusions: Social smoking among young adults is primarily inhibited by smoking bans, but excise taxes only deter such smoking in the absence of a ban. Heavy smokers are primarily deterred by taxes. Although both policies have an impact on young adult smoking behaviors, their dual presence does not intensify each policy's efficacy.

Figures

FIGURE 1—
FIGURE 1—
Average Excise Tax and Percentage Subject to Comprehensive Clean Air Ban for US National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 (NLSY97) Respondents by Year (2004–2011)
FIGURE 2—
FIGURE 2—
Odds Ratios for Interaction Between City Comprehensive Smoking Ban and Tobacco Excise Lax on Any Tobacco Use in Past 30 Days: US National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 (2004–2011) Note. Tax effect represents the difference for a $1 increase. The reference group is no tax, no comprehensive smoking ban. The error bars represent the 95% confidence interval for the odds ratio.
FIGURE 3—
FIGURE 3—
Interaction Between City Comprehensive Smoking Ban and Tobacco Excise Tax: US National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 (2004–2011) Note. The length of the line for locales with no comprehensive smoking bans is shorter to avoid extrapolation resulting from the lower maximum for taxes in such places ($3.40), compared with locales with bans ($5.85). For interaction, P = .035.

Comment in

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 5 articles

Publication types

Feedback