ArticleTobacco induced diseases2024
Analyzing arguments on tobacco tax increases. Focus on French parliamentary questions and responses, 2000-2020.
Article in Tobacco induced diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Political arguments for and against tobacco tax increases in the Swiss Parliament (2010-2025).European journal of public health · 2026Article
- Understanding political perceptions of tobacco policies and stakeholders in France: A qualitative study with parliamentarians.Tobacco prevention & cessation · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTax increases are the most effective but still the least-used tobacco control measure. The tobacco industry (TI) employs lobbying strategies to oppose the implementation of tax policies on its products. Over the past two decades, French tobacco tax policies have been characterized by a relative inconsistency. This research aims to understand why, by analyzing the arguments of French policymakers (MPs and government) between 2000 and 2020 in favor or against tax increases.
methodsTo capture parliamentary debates, we performed an advanced term search on the French National Assembly website, using the keyword 'tobacco'. The search returned 5126 available documents out of which 1106 (12.6%, 645 questions, 461 responses) covered price and taxation and were included. They were analyzed using descriptive statistics and thematic content analysis (NVivo) and were compared, when relevant, to arguments raised in the international literature on TI lobbying against taxation increases.
resultsWe found 3176 arguments on tobacco taxation: 77.2% were against tobacco tax increases and 22.7% were in favor of tax policies. Arguments varied depending on the source: 92.4% of MPs' arguments were against tax increases, while 52.1% of arguments from government responses were in favor. The anti-tax arguments were similar to those identified in the international literature that singled out negative economic and social consequences (illicit trade, penalizing tobacconists). Other arguments that were more specific to the French context, highlighted the key economic and social role played by tobacconists in France. Pro-tax arguments highlighted the health, economic and social benefits of tax policies.
conclusionsThis is the first French tobacco research on parliamentary documents, although Parliament is a place of direct TI lobbying. It will enable public health actors to better understand the arguments used by the TI in order to counter them in front of MPs, and to better monitor debates in Parliament.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.