Cost of alcohol

better data will be justified if it is put to better use

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

The paper by Bhattacharya [1] is motivated, at least in part, by the misuse of alcohol cost data in discussions related to alcohol duty [2]. While it introduces some welcome clarity to this debate, there is a wider question of whether alcohol costs, however defined, are the sole issue in setting duty rates. Such an approach seems to be based on the notion that the only justification for levying duty on alcohol is to correct the market for these external costs.

In the United Kingdom, as in most countries, alcohol duty is not a hypothecated tax; i.e. the revenue raised is for general public spending and not reserved for the specific purpose of dealing with alcohol-related harms. If taxing alcohol is considered solely as a revenue-raising instrument then it is interesting to note that this would have the approval of that great, liberal icon John Stuart Mill on the basis that revenue-raising by the state is necessary, and it is better to tax those things that are least essential [3]. Moreover, the market for alcohol is characterized by so many departures from the idealized economic model that it raises doubts about why correcting for externalities should be given such priority.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)566
Number of pages1
JournalAddiction
Volume112
Issue number4
Early online date24 Jul 2016
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2017

Fingerprint

Alcohols
Costs and Cost Analysis
Economic Models

Keywords

  • alcohol duty
  • cost of alcohol
  • policy intervention

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Cost of alcohol : better data will be justified if it is put to better use. / Ludbrook, Anne.

In: Addiction, Vol. 112, No. 4, 04.2017, p. 566.

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

@article{1416b0bd106b4075a3c28a8f90397e8e,
title = "Cost of alcohol: better data will be justified if it is put to better use",
abstract = "The paper by Bhattacharya [1] is motivated, at least in part, by the misuse of alcohol cost data in discussions related to alcohol duty [2]. While it introduces some welcome clarity to this debate, there is a wider question of whether alcohol costs, however defined, are the sole issue in setting duty rates. Such an approach seems to be based on the notion that the only justification for levying duty on alcohol is to correct the market for these external costs.In the United Kingdom, as in most countries, alcohol duty is not a hypothecated tax; i.e. the revenue raised is for general public spending and not reserved for the specific purpose of dealing with alcohol-related harms. If taxing alcohol is considered solely as a revenue-raising instrument then it is interesting to note that this would have the approval of that great, liberal icon John Stuart Mill on the basis that revenue-raising by the state is necessary, and it is better to tax those things that are least essential [3]. Moreover, the market for alcohol is characterized by so many departures from the idealized economic model that it raises doubts about why correcting for externalities should be given such priority.",
keywords = "alcohol duty, cost of alcohol, policy intervention",
author = "Anne Ludbrook",
year = "2017",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1111/add.13459",
language = "English",
volume = "112",
pages = "566",
journal = "Addiction",
issn = "0965-2140",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost of alcohol

T2 - better data will be justified if it is put to better use

AU - Ludbrook, Anne

PY - 2017/4

Y1 - 2017/4

N2 - The paper by Bhattacharya [1] is motivated, at least in part, by the misuse of alcohol cost data in discussions related to alcohol duty [2]. While it introduces some welcome clarity to this debate, there is a wider question of whether alcohol costs, however defined, are the sole issue in setting duty rates. Such an approach seems to be based on the notion that the only justification for levying duty on alcohol is to correct the market for these external costs.In the United Kingdom, as in most countries, alcohol duty is not a hypothecated tax; i.e. the revenue raised is for general public spending and not reserved for the specific purpose of dealing with alcohol-related harms. If taxing alcohol is considered solely as a revenue-raising instrument then it is interesting to note that this would have the approval of that great, liberal icon John Stuart Mill on the basis that revenue-raising by the state is necessary, and it is better to tax those things that are least essential [3]. Moreover, the market for alcohol is characterized by so many departures from the idealized economic model that it raises doubts about why correcting for externalities should be given such priority.

AB - The paper by Bhattacharya [1] is motivated, at least in part, by the misuse of alcohol cost data in discussions related to alcohol duty [2]. While it introduces some welcome clarity to this debate, there is a wider question of whether alcohol costs, however defined, are the sole issue in setting duty rates. Such an approach seems to be based on the notion that the only justification for levying duty on alcohol is to correct the market for these external costs.In the United Kingdom, as in most countries, alcohol duty is not a hypothecated tax; i.e. the revenue raised is for general public spending and not reserved for the specific purpose of dealing with alcohol-related harms. If taxing alcohol is considered solely as a revenue-raising instrument then it is interesting to note that this would have the approval of that great, liberal icon John Stuart Mill on the basis that revenue-raising by the state is necessary, and it is better to tax those things that are least essential [3]. Moreover, the market for alcohol is characterized by so many departures from the idealized economic model that it raises doubts about why correcting for externalities should be given such priority.

KW - alcohol duty

KW - cost of alcohol

KW - policy intervention

U2 - 10.1111/add.13459

DO - 10.1111/add.13459

M3 - Comment/debate

VL - 112

SP - 566

JO - Addiction

JF - Addiction

SN - 0965-2140

IS - 4

ER -