S Korean government doubles cigarette prices

[Bulgar Rouge]

The South Korean government issued a proposal to double cigarette prices:

Under its plan, the average price per pack would go up to 4,500 won (£2.70, $4.35) by the start of next year. It is currently 2,500 won.

But the proposal may undergo changes in parliament as it is facing significant opposition, reports Yonhap news agency.

The government is hoping to cut the smoking rate among men, which is among the highest in the developed world.

About 41% of South Korean men smoke, according to 2012 figures from the Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development - higher than the 26% OECD average.

South Korea's overall smoking rate, at 23%, is also higher than the OECD average of 21%.

The last cigarette price hike was in 2004 when it went up by 500 won, prompting the smoking rate to slide by 15%, reported Yonhap.

The news agency also said the government was planning to introduce a pricing system pegging cigarette prices to other consumer prices.

Cigarette manufacturers would be required to print picture warnings on their products and some tobacco advertising would be banned, reports said.

The government hopes the price hike will generate an additional 2.8 trillion won in tax revenues.

The opposition has since called it a "deceitful move" which would end up costing low-income earners more, as their smoking rate is higher than other income groups.

The Korean Smoking Association also accused the government of scapegoating smokers to offset rising welfare costs, reported the AFP news agency.

Personally I fully approve of this measure. Coming from the country with the third highest smoking prevalence in the world at 36% (up to 2.5 mln out of a 7 mln population), I can say it's horrible - even those who don't have the pack in their pocket are exposed to tobacco smoke all the time, with all them corresponding health benefits. Taxing tobacco seems like a productive way to reduce consumption without interfering with personal choice.

Is this a fair proposal, NSG ? Do you think overtaxing tobacco would reduce the number of smokers and improve the overall health of a nation, or it's yet another government intervention into people's lives ?

[Lordieth]

..

Still cheaper than Britain.

[Calisu]

Good not only is smoking terrible for you but it's disgusting and makes you stink. Don't do it.

[The Victorian Empire]

Who cares?

[Bulgar Rouge]

..

Still cheaper than Britain.

Surprisingly, not much more expensive than here (high-class cigs cost up to around $4.00) and wages are pathetic. We still have more than a third of our population smoke.

[Chestaan]

The South Korean government issued a proposal to double cigarette prices:

Under its plan, the average price per pack would go up to 4,500 won (£2.70, $4.35) by the start of next year. It is currently 2,500 won.

But the proposal may undergo changes in parliament as it is facing significant opposition, reports Yonhap news agency.

The government is hoping to cut the smoking rate among men, which is among the highest in the developed world.

About 41% of South Korean men smoke, according to 2012 figures from the Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development - higher than the 26% OECD average.

South Korea's overall smoking rate, at 23%, is also higher than the OECD average of 21%.

The last cigarette price hike was in 2004 when it went up by 500 won, prompting the smoking rate to slide by 15%, reported Yonhap.

The news agency also said the government was planning to introduce a pricing system pegging cigarette prices to other consumer prices.

Cigarette manufacturers would be required to print picture warnings on their products and some tobacco advertising would be banned, reports said.

The government hopes the price hike will generate an additional 2.8 trillion won in tax revenues.

The opposition has since called it a "deceitful move" which would end up costing low-income earners more, as their smoking rate is higher than other income groups.

The Korean Smoking Association also accused the government of scapegoating smokers to offset rising welfare costs, reported the AFP news agency.

Personally I fully approve of this measure. Coming from the country with the third highest smoking prevalence in the world at 36% (up to 2.5 mln out of a 7 mln population), I can say it's horrible - even those who don't have the pack in their pocket are exposed to tobacco smoke all the time, with all them corresponding health benefits. Taxing tobacco seems like a productive way to reduce consumption without interfering with personal choice.

Is this a fair proposal, NSG ? Do you think overtaxing tobacco would reduce the number of smokers and improve the overall health of a nation, or it's yet another government intervention into people's lives ?

This seems like a good idea, any reduction in the number of smokers is a good thing.

To your question on whether this will reduce the number of smokers, the answer is yes, but not by a massive amount unfortunately. Cigarettes are highly addictive so it requires a large increase in price to cause even a small increase in the quantity consumed. Or, in economic terms, demand for cigarettes is very inelastic.

[Calisu]

The South Korean government issued a proposal to double cigarette prices:



Personally I fully approve of this measure. Coming from the country with the third highest smoking prevalence in the world at 36% (up to 2.5 mln out of a 7 mln population), I can say it's horrible - even those who don't have the pack in their pocket are exposed to tobacco smoke all the time, with all them corresponding health benefits. Taxing tobacco seems like a productive way to reduce consumption without interfering with personal choice.

Is this a fair proposal, NSG ? Do you think overtaxing tobacco would reduce the number of smokers and improve the overall health of a nation, or it's yet another government intervention into people's lives ?

This seems like a good idea, any reduction in the number of smokers is a good thing.

To your question on whether this will reduce the number of smokers, the answer is yes, but not by a massive amount unfortunately. Cigarettes are highly addictive so it requires a large increase in price to cause even a small increase in the quantity consumed. Or, in economic terms, demand for cigarettes is very inelastic.

I agree and disagree. I think more people will either cut back or quit because of the price increase. Caffeine is highly addictive but if my morning coffee went from $1.50 to $3 I might not drink nearly as much coffee.

[Ifreann]

Holy shit, those are some cheap fags. That's about a third of the price of a pack of 20 in Ireland.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

Still cheaper than here, pack of my Newports cost me almost $5.40.

[Bulgar Rouge]

This seems like a good idea, any reduction in the number of smokers is a good thing.

To your question on whether this will reduce the number of smokers, the answer is yes, but not by a massive amount unfortunately. Cigarettes are highly addictive so it requires a large increase in price to cause even a small increase in the quantity consumed. Or, in economic terms, demand for cigarettes is very inelastic.

This lack of elasticity is what poses a problem, IMO. For lower income groups who are probably less likely to abandon smoking from a psychological point of view, this would mean more spending on cigarettes and less spending on other commodities. Maybe won't produce a significant economic effect, but still.

[Chestaan]

This seems like a good idea, any reduction in the number of smokers is a good thing.

To your question on whether this will reduce the number of smokers, the answer is yes, but not by a massive amount unfortunately. Cigarettes are highly addictive so it requires a large increase in price to cause even a small increase in the quantity consumed. Or, in economic terms, demand for cigarettes is very inelastic.

I agree and disagree. I think more people will either cut back or quit because of the price increase. Caffeine is highly addictive but if my morning coffee went from $1.50 to $3 I might not drink nearly as much coffee.

Coffee is addictive but not to the same extent that tobacco is. So, yes, there will be some people quitting and cutting down, but it won't be as massive an amount as we would hope. Maybe a 5-10% decrease.

[United Regions of Verona]

Holy shit, those are some cheap fags. That's about a third of the price of a pack of 20 in Ireland.

I know, they're fücking expensive in Ireland. Silk Cut is probably the priciest from what I can see

[The Scientific States]

Who cares?

I personally care a little. Such a hike in prices could negatively effect the lower class people of South Korea who smoke. I'm not pro smoking, and believe that the government should find some ways to curb usage, but this isn't the way to do it.

[Regenburg]

but from where they will smuggle cigarettes if their only land neighbour is north korea
south korean government think of the people ffs

[Napkiraly]

My god that's cheap. If I still smoked I'd want to buy SK cigs.

[Chestaan]

Who cares?

I personally care a little. Such a hike in prices could negatively effect the lower class people of South Korea who smoke. I'm not pro smoking, and believe that the government should find some ways to curb usage, but this isn't the way to do it.

Pigovian taxes such as this aren't perfect, but what other methods would you suggest? (Genuinely looking for an answer here and I'm not trying to be snarky. Just usually taxation is shown to be the most effective method of reducing the consumption of a good.)

[Immoren]

BRB. Flying to SK to by cheap cigs and resell them here for €€€.

[Kiruri]

wow! Soo expensive :S Where I live it is about $2,35, more or less and that's after a "heafty" tax was implemented. I'm not too sure I think this the right way to go, perhaps it is, but I don't know. I think this might increase illegal trade in cigarettes and that would be worse than the legal cigarettes considering they're not governed by any regulations whatsoever.

[Infected Mushroom]

Absolutely sickening.

South Korea's government should be outlawing tobacco, not trying to make even more money off addicts by charging more for smokes. Its disgusting that the government is making a profit through taxes from these sales.

But of course, its pretty normal for government to only care about money and not Justice.

Its easier to cooperate with Big Tobacco and get rich than to do the righteous thing and throw these unscrupulous profiteers behind bars.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

Absolutely sickening.

South Korea's government should be outlawing tobacco, not trying to make even more money off addicts by charging more for smokes. Its disgusting that the government is making a profit through taxes from these sales.

But of course, its pretty normal for government to only care about money and not Justice.

Yeah. Banning tobacco outright. That will go well. As well as banning alcohol.

[Lindenholt]

South Korea is only best Korea

[Ifreann]

Absolutely sickening.

South Korea's government should be outlawing tobacco, not trying to make even more money off addicts by charging more for smokes. Its disgusting that the government is making a profit through taxes from these sales.

But of course, its pretty normal for government to only care about money and not Justice.

Yeah. Banning tobacco outright. That will go well. As well as banning alcohol.

You're talking to the guy who wants to ban dogs.

[Calimera II]

That's cheap as hell.

[Chestaan]

Absolutely sickening.

South Korea's government should be outlawing tobacco, not trying to make even more money off addicts by charging more for smokes. Its disgusting that the government is making a profit through taxes from these sales.

But of course, its pretty normal for government to only care about money and not Justice.

Its easier to cooperate with Big Tobacco and get rich than to do the righteous thing and throw these unscrupulous profiteers behind bars.

This is a much more practical move and is likely to cause as many benefits, such as reducing tobacco consumption, as outright banning without any of the negatives.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

Yeah. Banning tobacco outright. That will go well. As well as banning alcohol.

You're talking to the guy who wants to ban dogs.

..... ....wait you're serious aren't you?