How cigarette excise tax pass-through to prices responds to the uptake and evolution of e-cigarettes (ECs)

How do users compare the costs between nicotine vaping products and cigarettes? Findings from the 2016-2020 International Tobacco Control United States surveys

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Nicotine vaping products (NVPs) can potentially help adult tobacco users quit smoking. This study evaluated how adult consumers compare the costs between NVPs and cigarettes.

METHOD

We used data from the US arm of the 2016-2020 International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping (ITC 4CV) surveys to perform a multinomial logit model with two-way fixed effects to measure how perceived cost comparisons are associated with NVP and cigarette taxes, use patterns, NVP device types and individual sociodemographic factors.

RESULTS

Higher cigarette taxes are associated with a greater likelihood of perceiving NVPs and cigarettes as costing the same for the overall population and among people who exclusively smoke, and a lower likelihood of perceiving NVPs as more expensive among people who exclusively vape, compared with lower cigarette taxes. Pre-filled cartridge and tank users are more likely to perceive NVPs as less expensive than cigarettes, compared with people who use other types of NVPs. The associations between taxes and perceived cost comparison were more pronounced among males, younger and low-income populations.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher cigarette taxes are associated with perceived financial incentives for nicotine vaping products (NVPs) over cigarettes, whereas NVP taxes are not associated with perceived cost comparison between NVPs and cigarettes.

How to Identify e-Cigarette Brands Available in the United States During 2020-2022: Development and Usability Study

BACKGROUND

Prior studies have demonstrated that the e-cigarette market contains a large number of brands. Identifying these existing e-cigarette brands is a key element of market surveillance, which will further assist in policy making and compliance checks.

OBJECTIVE

To facilitate the surveillance of the diverse product landscape in the e-cigarette market, we constructed a semantic database of e-cigarette brands that have appeared in the US market as of 2020-2022.

METHODS

In order to build the brand database, we searched and compiled e-cigarette brands from a comprehensive list of retail channels and sources, including (1) e-liquid and disposable brands sold in web-based stores, (2) e-cigarette brands sold in brick-and-mortar stores and collected by the Nielsen Retail Scanner Data, (3) e-cigarette brands compiled by Wikipedia, (4) self-reported e-cigarette brands from the 2020 International Tobacco Control Four-Country Smoking and Vaping (ITC 4CV) US survey, and (5) e-cigarette brands on Twitter. We also estimated the top 5 e-cigarette brands by sales volume in brick-and-mortar stores, by the frequency and variety of offerings in web-based shops, and by the frequency of self-reported brands from the 2020 ITC 4CV US survey.

RESULTS

As of 2020-2022, a total of 912 e-cigarette brands have been sold by various retail channels. During 2020-2022, the top 5 brands are JUUL, vuse, njoy, blu, and logic in brick-and-mortar stores; blu, king, monster, twist, and air factory for e-liquids in web-based stores; hyde, pod mesh, suorin, vaporlax, and xtra for disposables sold in web-based stores; and smok, aspire, vaporesso, innokin, and eleaf based on self-reported survey data.

CONCLUSIONS

As the US Food and Drug Administration enforces the premarket tobacco market authorization, many e-cigarette brands may become illegal in the US market. In this context, how e-cigarette brands evolve and consolidate in different retail channels will be critical for understanding the regulatory impacts on product availability. Our semantic database of e-cigarette brands can serve as a useful tool to monitor product and marketplace development, conduct compliance checks, assess manufacturers' marketing behaviors, and identify regulatory impacts.