MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060661427 · doi:10.2105/ajph.2004.042697

A Major State Tobacco Tax Increase, the Master Settlement Agreement, and Cigarette Consumption: The California Experience

2005· article· en· W2060661427 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hai‐Yen Sung, Teh-wei Hu, Michael Ong, Theodore E. Keeler, Meei‐Ling Sheu

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Public Health · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPer capitaConsumption (sociology)Tobacco controlTax revenueExciseRevenueQuarter (Canadian coin)Settlement (finance)Smoking banTobacco industryDemographyEconomicsMedicineEnvironmental healthAgricultural economicsPaymentDemographic economicsPublic healthGeographyPopulationPublic economicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the combined effects on California cigarette consumption of an additional 50 cent per pack state tax imposed by Proposition 10 of January 1999 and a 45 cent per pack increase in cigarette prices stemming from the Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) of November 1998. METHODS: We used quarterly cigarette sales data for the period 1984-2002 to estimate a time-series intervention model adjusting for seasonal variations and time trend. RESULTS: Over the period 1999 through 2002, the combined effect was to reduce cigarette consumption by 2.4 packs per capita per quarter (1.3 billion packs total over the 4-year period) and to raise state tax revenues by $2.1 billion. These effects were similar to the effects of a 25 cent per pack tax increase enacted by Proposition 99 a decade earlier, although with decreased relative effectiveness as measured by percentage of reduction in cigarette consumption divided by percentage of increase in taxation (-0.44 vs -0.60). CONCLUSIONS: A major increase in price through taxation and the MSA provided a strong economic disincentive for smokers in a state with a low smoking prevalence. This effect could be reinforced if part of the MSA payments were devoted to tobacco control programs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.345
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations55
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Public HealthSame topicSmoking Behavior and CessationFrench-language works237,207