Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37813440›Full record

ReviewBMJ global health2023

Taxation of tobacco, alcohol, and sugar-sweetened beverages: reviewing the evidence and dispelling the myths.

Guillermo R Paraje, Prabhat Jha, William Savedoff, Alan Fuchs

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ global health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
12.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Who pays and Who benefits? A distributional health-economic evaluation of strengthening the UK soft drinks industry levy.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026
    Article
  4. Why Adolescents Choose to Stop or Never Start Vaping: Evidence From South Africa.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2026
    Article
  5. A global commitment to addressing chronic liver disease.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Guillermo R ParajeEscuela de Negocios, Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez, Santiago de Chile, Chile guillermo.paraje@uai.cl.ORCID 0000-0002-7863-907X
Prabhat JhaCGHR, Centre for Global Health Research, St. Michael's Hospital and Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-7067-8341
William SavedoffSocial Insight, Washington, Maine, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5313-2013
Alan FuchsWorld Bank, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.
Adolfo Ibáñez University · CLSt. Michael's Hospital · CAWorld Bank · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The article reviews the large body of evidence on how taxation affects the consumption of tobacco, alcohol, and sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB). There is abundant evidence that demand for tobacco, alcohol, and SSB is price-responsive and that tax changes are quickly passed on to consumers. This suggests that taxes can be highly effective in changing consumption and reducing the burden of diseases associated with consuming these products. Tobacco, alcohol, and SSB industries oppose taxation on similar grounds, mostly on the regressivity of taxes since regressive taxes take a larger percentage of income from low income earners than from middle and high income earners; but also on the effects taxes might have on employment and economic activity; and, in the case of tobacco, the effects taxation has on illicit trade.Contrary to industry arguments, evidence shows that taxation may have short-term negative financial consequences for low-income households. However, medium and long-term financial benefits from reduced healthcare costs, better health, and welfare largely compensate for such consequences. Moreover, taxation does not negatively affect aggregate economic activity or employment, as consumers switch demand to other products that generate employment and may compensate for any employment loss in taxed sectors. Evidence also shows the revenues generated are generally spent on labour-intensive services. In the case of illicit trade in tobacco, evidence shows that illicit trade has not increased globally (rather the opposite) despite increases in tobacco taxes. Profit-maximising smugglers increase illicit cigarette prices along with the increases in licit cigarette prices. This implies that even when increased taxes divert some demand to the illicit market, they push prices up in the illicit market, discouraging consumption.

Indexed as

Sugar-Sweetened BeveragesTobacco ProductsHumansIncomeTaxesHealth economicsPublic HealthReview

Identifiers

PMID37813440
PMCPMC10565262
OpenAlexW4387460851

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.