To estimate the potential health benefits and cost savings of an alcohol tax rate that applies equally to all alcoholic beverages based on their alcohol content (volumetric tax) and to compare the cost savings with the cost of implementation.
Mathematical modelling of three scenarios of volumetric alcohol taxation for the population of Australia: (i) no change in deadweight loss, (ii) no change in tax revenue, and (iii) all alcoholic beverages taxed at the same rate as spirits.
Estimated change in alcohol consumption, tax revenue and health benefit.
The estimated cost of changing to a volumetric tax rate is $18 million. A volumetric tax that is deadweight loss-neutral would increase the cost of beer and wine and reduce the cost of spirits, resulting in an estimated annual increase in taxation revenue of $492 million and a 2.77% reduction in annual consumption of pure alcohol. The estimated net health gain would be 21 000 disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), with potential cost offsets of $110 million per annum. A tax revenue-neutral scenario would result in an 0.05% decrease in consumption, and a tax on all alcohol at a spirits rate would reduce consumption by 23.85% and increase revenue by $3094 million [corrected]. All volumetric tax scenarios would provide greater health benefits and cost savings to the health sector than the existing taxation system, based on current understandings of alcohol-related health effects.
An equalized volumetric tax that would reduce beer and wine consumption while increasing the consumption of spirits would need to be approached with caution. Further research is required to examine whether alcohol-related health effects vary by type of alcoholic beverage independent of the amount of alcohol consumed to provide a strong evidence platform for alcohol taxation policies.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 November 2023.
All research outputs
#6,814,063
of 31,814,824 outputs
Outputs from Medical Journal of Australia
#2,621
of 7,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,479
of 134,558 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Journal of Australia
#12
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 31,814,824 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,211 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 134,558 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
