Cited by 39Global Public Health Policies and EpidemiologySmoking Behavior and CessationEconomic and Fiscal Studies

Transnational Tobacco Company Influence on Tax Policy During Privatization of a State Monopoly: British American Tobacco and Uzbekistan

Open access
Gilmore, Anna, Collin, Jeff, Townsend, Joy·2007·American Journal of Public Health

Abstract

Objectives. The International Monetary Fund encourages privatization of state-owned tobacco industries. Privatization tends to lower cigarette prices, which encourages consumption. This could be countered with effective tax policies. We explored how investment by British American Tobacco (BAT) influenced tax policy in Uzbekistan during privatization there. Methods. We obtained internal documents from BAT and analyzed them using a hermeneutic process to create a chronology of events. Results. BAT thoroughly redesigned the tobacco taxation system in Uzbekistan. It secured (1) a reduction of approximately 50% in the excise tax on cigarettes, (2) an excise system to benefit its brands and disadvantage those of its competitors (particularly Philip Morris), and (3) a tax stamp system from which it hoped to be exempted, because this would likely facilitate its established practice of cigarette smuggling and further its competitive advantage.. Conclusions. Privatization can endanger effective tobacco excise policies. The International Monetary Fund should review its approach to privatization and differentiate the privatization of an industry whose product kills from privatization of other industries.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2105/ajph.2005.078378

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Existing studies on how tobacco control policy is passed at the national level focus more on tactics used by opponents rather than proponents.

    “Moreover, existing studies on how tobacco control policy is passed at the national level are focused more on tactics used by opponents (eg, lobbying, litigation, protests and other tactics to delay or subvert policy passage) rather than proponents,25–32 with few exceptions.33–36”

Authors
Gilmore, A., Collin, J., & Townsend, J.
Affiliations
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
Venue
American Journal of Public Health
Published
2007-11
Volume
97
Issue
11
Pages
2001-2009
ISSN
  • 0090-0036 (ISSN-L)
  • 1541-0048
OpenAlex
W2084351428
Cited by
39
References
0
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 7
FWCI
4.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Public Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust
  • Cancer Research UK
  • National Cancer Institute (R01 CA91021-01, R01CA091021)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic and Fiscal Studies
Keywords
British American Tobacco, tobacco industry, privatization, tobacco excise tax, tobacco taxation policy, tobacco smuggling, Philip Morris, International Monetary Fund, Uzbekistan, corporate influence on policy, tobacco control
MeSH terms
Commerce, United Kingdom, Humans, Privatization, Taxes, United States, Uzbekistan, Tobacco Industry, Internationality

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review