Australians have been generally supportive of the idea of taxing tobacco products, and levels of support have grown over time.
13.12.1 Results of early state-based public opinion surveys
A study by The University of Melbourne in 1985 examined public attitudes towards a variety of government taxes and expenditures 1 including income taxes, taxes on motor vehicles, sales taxes, company tax, import duty and customs and taxes on alcohol. The only tax for which a majority (51.8%) supported an increase was tax on tobacco products.
A number of subsequent statewide polls assessing public opinion about tobacco tax increases have been undertaken in successive decades. Findings of some of the early surveys are summarised in Table 13.12.1. In general, the surveys have shown broad and growing support for increased tobacco taxes, especially if revenue from the tax increases is used for health education among children. (Most of the earlier surveys also examined public attitudes towards tobacco advertising and sponsorship. This information is not included in Table 13.12.1.)
June 1987
|
December 1987
|
July 1988
|
August 1989
|
July 1990
|
May 1993
|
February 1998
|
Approve unconditional increase in tax (% of adults approving)
|
47
|
55
|
56
|
59
|
66
|
60
|
|
Approve tax inc. funds being used to discourage children from smoking (% of adults approving)
|
84
|
82
|
88
|
89
|
92
|
88*
|
96
|
A later study in Victoria in 2003 found that, even among daily smokers, almost half (48%) would support an increase in taxes if the money were directed to quit smoking efforts. 10 Of those who approved of a rise in cigarette tax, over half (51%) thought that the increases should be 50 cents or more per pack of 25 cigarettes (Table 13.12.2).
1 cent
|
9.9
|
10 cents
|
12.2
|
25 cents
|
13.3
|
50 cents
|
22.7
|
1 dollar
|
18.0
|
2 dollars or more
|
10.0
|
Another amount
|
4.6
|
Don't know / Can't say
|
9.3
|
In further studies in 2008 and 2009, more than 80% of Victorians approved of a tax increase on cigarettes if some of the money were to be used to fund services to help smokers quit (communicated by M McCarthy, Centre for Behavioural Research in Cancer to Quit Victoria, 2009 and 2010). Approval was significantly higher among former smokers and never smokers, compared with current smokers (83% and 88% compared to 61%, respectively (Table 13.12.3).
Approval for increasing the tax on cigarettes was also higher with higher with socio-economic status (Table 13.12.4).
Approve
|
65.0
|
84.4
|
89.9
|
83.6
|
Neither approve nor disapprove
|
2.4
|
2.0
|
1.6
|
1.8
|
Disapprove
|
32.0
|
12.8
|
7.3
|
13.5
|
Don't know / Can't say
|
0.6
|
0.8
|
1.2
|
1.0
|
Approve
|
81.2
|
77.5
|
82.0
|
84.8
|
Neither approve nor disapprove
|
2.9
|
3.7
|
2.6
|
2.2
|
Disapprove
|
14.3
|
16.9
|
13.7
|
11.6
|
Don't know / Can't say
|
1.7
|
1.9
|
1.7
|
1.4
|
13.12.2 Results of national surveys
The National Drug Strategy Household Survey has collected data on public opinion on tax increases in its three-yearly surveys since 1998.
Support for increasing the tax on tobacco products to pay for health education has risen steadily over time. Analysis of data by gender indicates that the increase in support has occurred among men and women (Table 13.12.6).
...pay for health education
|
61.6
|
64.3
|
64.5
|
67.1
|
68.7
|
...contribute to treatment costs
|
65.9
|
67.0
|
67.1
|
68.6
|
70.2
|
...discourage smoking
|
60.4
|
61.1
|
63.3
|
65.7
|
66.7
|
|
Support for increase in taxes on tobacco to: |
... pay for health education |
61.8 |
65.1 |
66.6 |
66.4 |
67.3 |
62.5# |
67 |
70.7 |
72.2 |
70.7 |
67.9# |
64.5 |
67.1 |
68.7 |
69.3 |
69 |
65.2# |
... contribute to treatment costs |
64.9 |
66.9 |
68.4 |
68.5 |
69.1 |
64.7# |
69.2 |
71.9 |
73.6 |
71.4 |
69.5# |
67.1 |
68.6 |
70.2 |
71.1 |
70.2 |
67.1# |
...discourage smoking |
60.3 |
63.7 |
64.6 |
64 |
65.3 |
60.9# |
66.1 |
68.7 |
70.3 |
68.9 |
66.2# |
63.3 |
65.7 |
66.7 |
67.2 |
67.2 |
63.5# |
13.12.3 Results of focus group research
Focus group research described by Carter and Chapman in 2006 indicated that Australian smokers were cynical about tax increases when revenue is not used for programs to discourage smoking. Without such investment in programs, smokers who participated in the study felt that governments did not have the moral authority to further raise taxes. 15
Relevant news and research
For recent news items and research on this topic, click here ( Last updated May 2021)
References
1. Heady B, Holmstrom E and Wearing A. Government taxes and expenditures: what does the public want? Melbourne, Australia: University of Melbourne, 1985.
2. Hill D. Public opinion on tobacco advertising, sports sponsorships and taxation prior to the Victorian Tobacco Act, 1987. Community Health Studies 1988;12(3):282–8. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-6405.1988.tb00588.x
3. Vernon-Roberts B. Morgan Gallup poll on smoking issues in South Australia [Media release] . Adelaide: 1988 [viewed January 1988] .
4. Steel K. 2.8 million electors approve of changes in law [Media release] . Sydney: 1988 [viewed August 1988] .
5. Gazette no. s317 2004. 4 August
6. ASH Australia. Results of Morgan research on support for tax increases, Unpublished data. Hobart: Tasmanian Cancer Committee. 1989.
7. Brien G. Queenslanders demand action on cigarettes [Media release] . Brisbane, Australia: 1990 [viewed July 1990] .
8. Woollard K and Walker N. Western Australian's support for tobacco control, Unpublished data. Perth: Australian Medical Association and Australian Council on Smoking and Health. Media release, 27 May 1993.
9. Borland R and Boulter J. Public Opinion about use of Tobacco Taxes for Tobacco Control and other issues. Melbourne, Australia: Centre for Behavioural Research in Cancer, Anti-Cancer Council of Victoria., 1998.
10. Centre for Behavioural Research in Cancer, The Cancer Council Victoria Melbourne, Australia. View about increasing the tax on cigarettes for increased funding for quit smoking resources (personal communication). Memorandum to Todd Harper and Jane Martin of the Victorian Smoking and Health Program, 2004.
11. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. 2001 National Drug Strategy Household Survey: detailed findings. Drug statistics series no. 11, AIHW cat. no. PHE 41. Canberra: AIHW, 2002. Available from: https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/alcohol-other-drug-treatment-services/2001-ndshs-detailed-findings/contents/table-of-contents
12. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. 2004 National Drug Strategy Household Survey: detailed findings. Drug strategy series no.16, AIHW cat. no. PHE 66. Canberra: AIHW, 2005. Available from: https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/illicit-use-of-drugs/2004-ndshs-detailed-findings/contents/table-of-contents
13. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. 2007 National Drug Strategy Household Survey: detailed findings. Drug statistics series no. 22, AIHW cat. no. PHE 107. Canberra: AIHW, 2008. Available from: https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/illicit-use-of-drugs/2007-nhsds-detailed-findings/contents/table-of-contents
14. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (2020). Data tables: National Drug Strategy Household Survey 2019 - 2. Tobacco smoking chapter, Supplementary data tables. Canberra, AIHW. https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/illicit-use-of-drugs/national-drug-strategy-household-survey-2019/data.
15. Carter SM and Chapman S. Smokers and non-smokers talk about regulatory options in tobacco control. Tobacco Control 2006;15(5):398-404. Available from: http://tc.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/5/398