Transnational Tobacco Company Influence on Tax Policy During Privatization of a State Monopoly: British American Tobacco and Uzbekistan
Open accessAbstract
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
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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”
From Seven-year tobacco tax plan in Ukraine: a case study of the actors, tactics and factors motivating policy passage (2022) · cites this paper as [29]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hiilamo, H., & Glantz, S. A. (2015) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.11.054 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
Weiger, C., Hoe, C., & Cohen, J. E. (2022) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-049833 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
- Authors
- Gilmore, A., Collin, J., & Townsend, J.
- Affiliations
- London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
- Venue
- American Journal of Public Health
- Publisher
- American Public Health Association
- Published
- 2007-11
- Volume
- 97
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 2001-2009
- ISSN
- 0090-0036 (ISSN-L)
- 1541-0048
- PMC
- PMC2040352
- 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
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- 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