7.4.1 Trends in retail prices, recommended and actual
Price lists containing recommended retail price of cigarettes sold in Australia have been published by the NSW Retail Tobacco Traders Asdsociation since at least 1948. A selection of prices are listed in Table 7.8.
|
|
|||||
| Year |
|
|
Year |
|
|
| 1948 | 1990 | Winield 25s | |||
| 1950 | 1991 |
|
|||
| 1955 | 1992 |
|
|||
| 1960 | 1993 |
|
|||
| 1965 | 1994 |
|
|||
| 1970 | 1995 | Winield 25s | |||
| 1975 |
|
1996 | Winield 25s | ||
| 1980 | Winield 25s | 1997 | Winield 25s | ||
| 1985 | Winield 25s | 1998 | Winield 25s | ||
Source: Australian Retail Tobacconist 46 |
|||||
Figure 7.3 Recommended retail price of leading cigarette brands in Australia, 1948 to 1998, $89-90
7.4.2 Effects of large pack sizes on retail prices
While the state licence fees had an impact on the brands popular until the 1970s, the tobacco industry fought back to retain its customers.
Cigarettes in the early part of the century were commonly sold in packets of ten or twenty or in tins of 50. These were similar in size to the tins in which loose tobacco was commonly sold. With the advent of plastic wrapping however, these tins disappeared and by 1960 the vast majority of cigaretees were sold in packets of 20. This remained the case until the advent of Windfield 25s "5 smokes ahead of the rest", in 1976.
7.4.3 Affordability of cigarettes - recommended retail prices compared to income
7.4.4 Recommended versus actual retail prices
While many retailers sell cigarettes at the recommended prices, the majority of cigarettes in Australia are sold at considerably lower prices. In its 1994 report on the cigarette industry, the Prices Surveillance Authority noted various forms of discounting common in the industry, including lower prices for stock bought in high volumes, and the phenomenon of "specialling" where manufacturers encourage high volume retailers (especially tobacconists and supermarkets) to discount one or two of the company's brands for a week or longer periods.
No data on the extent of discounting has ever been available to public health specialists until a study undertaken throughout 1997-98 by the Centre for Behavioural Research in Cancer.
Measured by international standards, Australia is a relatively low taxing country compared with many industrialised nations.
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
| Denmark |
|
|
|
| United Kingdom |
|
|
|
| Ireland |
|
|
|
| Finland |
|
|
|
| France |
|
|
|
| Sweden |
|
|
|
| Italy |
|
|
|
| Belgium |
|
|
|
| Germany |
|
|
|
| Canada (highest province) |
|
|
|
| New Zealand |
|
|
|
| Australia ß |
|
|
|
| Canada (lowest province) |
|
|
|
| US (highest state) |
|
|
|
| US (average) |
|
|
|
ø Estimated as of June 1998 Ý Based on exchange rates June 1998 ß At June 1998 Source: Canadian Non-Smokers Rights Association |
|||
Expressed as a percentage of final retail price of a packet of cigarettes, and in terms of tax per pack of 20 cigarettes sold, Australia ranks behind the UK and several other European countries, Canada and New Zealand(50,51) (Table 7.10). The low taxing status of the US has changed somewhat under the presidency of Mr Bill Clinton, who early in his first term, signalled an intention to increase tobacco taxes, probably as a means of helping meet the nation's healthcare costs.(52)