Hubbry Logo
ExciseExciseMain
Open search
Excise
Community hub
Excise
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Excise
Excise
from Wikipedia

A 1892 beer duty stamp, noting the cost of the duty (one shilling and sixpence), the unit taxed (9 gallons), its target (malt and hops exclusively), and its source (inland revenue).

An excise, or excise tax, is any duty on a category of goods that is normally levied by a government at the moment of manufacture for domestic consumption. This makes excise different from a sales tax or value-added tax (which are levied at a point of sale) or from customs duties (which are levied on goods when they cross a designated border).

An excise is considered an indirect tax, meaning that the producer or seller who pays the levy to the government is expected to try to recover their loss by raising the price paid by the eventual buyer of the goods. Excise is thus a tax that relates to a quantity, not a value, as opposed to the value-added tax which concerns the value of a good or service. Excises are typically imposed in addition to an indirect tax such as a sales tax or value-added tax (VAT). Typically, an excise is distinguished from a sales tax or VAT in three ways:

  1. an excise is typically a per unit tax, costing a specific amount for a volume or unit of the item purchased, whereas a sales tax or value-added tax is an ad valorem tax and proportional to the price of the goods,
  2. an excise typically applies to a narrow range of products, and
  3. an excise is typically heavier, accounting for a higher fraction of the retail price of the targeted products.

Typical examples of excise duties are taxes on alcohol and alcoholic beverages ; alcohol tax, for example, may consist of a levy of n euros per hectolitre of alcohol sold ; manufactured tobacco (cigars, cigarettes, etc.), energy products (oil, gas, etc.), vehicles or so-called "luxury" products. The legislator's aim is to discourage the consumption of products it considers to have a negative externality (sometimes referred to as sin tax).

More recently, excise duty has been introduced on certain forms of transport considered to be polluting (such as air transport) or on the consumption of products that generate polluting waste that is little or not at all recycled or harmful to the environment (such as electronic products, certain plastic packaging, etc.).

These are the oldest sources of revenue for governments around the world. In 2020, consumption taxes accounted for 30% of total tax revenues in OECD countries on average, equivalent to 9.9% of GDP in these countries.

History and rationale

[edit]

Excise has existed in English since the late 15th century and was borrowed from Middle Dutch echijns and excijs, meaning 'excise on wine or beer', which was apparently altered from earlier (13th century) assise, assijs, which meant simply a tax on consumption and is related to Medieval Latin accisia, assisia, assisa 'tax, excise duty'. The exact derivation is unclear and is presumed to come from several roots.[1]

Excise was introduced to England from the Netherlands in the mid-17th century under the Puritan regime, as a tax, an excise duty, levied on drinks in 1650. In the British Isles, upon the Restoration of the Monarchy, many of the Puritan social restrictions were overturned, but excise was re-introduced, under the Tenures Abolition Act 1660, in lieu of rent, for tenancies of royally-owned land which had not already become socage. Although the affected tenancies were limited in number, the excise was levied more generally; at the time, there was thought to be a rough correspondence between the wealthy manufacturers of affected goods, and the wealthy tenants of royal land.

Excise duties or taxes continued to serve political as well as financial ends. Public safety and health, public morals, environmental protection, and national defense are all rationales for the imposition of an excise. In defense of excises on strong drink, Adam Smith wrote: "It has for some time past been the policy of Great Britain to discourage the consumption of spirituous liquors, on account of their supposed tendency to ruin the health and to corrupt the morals of the common people."[2] Samuel Johnson was less flattering in his 1755 dictionary:

EXCI'SE. n.s. ... A hateful tax levied upon commodities, and adjudged not by the common judges of property, but wretches hired by those to whom excise is paid.[3]

As a deterrent, excise is typically directed towards three broad categories of harm:

Revenue raised through excise may be earmarked for redress of specific social costs commonly associated with the product or service on which it is levied. Tobacco tax revenues, for example, might be spent on government anti-smoking campaigns, or healthcare for cancer, heart disease, vascular disease, lung disease, and so on.

In some countries, excise is also levied on some goods for purely punitive reasons. Many US states impose excise on illegal substances;[4] these places do not consider it to be a revenue source, but instead regard it as a means of imposing a greater level of punishment, by opening up convicted criminals to the charge of tax evasion.

Theoretical foundations on specific taxation

[edit]

The economic analysis of excise taxes has its beginnings with Atkinson and Stiglitz in 1976 stating that if income taxes were optimal there would be no need for specific taxes. But, "if income taxation is not optimal, excise have a role to play, because they are relatively efficient sources of revenue, improve resource allocation by internalizing the external costs associated with the consumption or production of excisable products, discourage the consumption of products considered harmful, serve as a proxy for charging road users for the cost of government-provided services, or promote progressivity in taxation.".[5] This is how Sijbren Cnossen sets out five main rationales for the use of excise duties:

  1. Revenue-raising efficiency aspects. This is based on the classic argument of the "Ramsey rule". This means that in certain cases it is optimal to differentiate tax rates on consumption according to the price elasticity of each taxed good or service.
  2. Externality-correcting issues. These are surcharges for the cost that consumers or producers of certain goods impose on society as a whole but which is not reflected in the price. In other words, there is a negative externality and, therefore, there must be a special tax that tries to correct it. Economically it means that "the marginal cost of an individual consumer or producer's action is less than the marginal cost of his action to society and, as a result, the individual engages in more of the activity than is socially optimal".[5] It has its basis in Pigou's theory, a Pigouvian tax is a method that tries to internalize negative externalities to achieve the Nash equilibrium and optimal Pareto efficiency. The tax is normally set by the government to correct an undesirable or inefficient market outcome and does so by being set equal to the external marginal cost of the negative externalities.
  3. Information failures and internality-correcting arguments. This refers to the fact that the lack of information or education about the consumption of certain harmful products has to be corrected by state intervention through the implementation of specific taxes. This is, for example, the case for alcohol, tobacco or sugary products. Because of the damage they cause to health and the illnesses they generate in people, it is decided to tax them specifically.
  4. Benefit-charging features. This refers to specific taxes derived from the use of public infrastructures to cover the costs of their construction and maintenance. The clearest example is that of roads, where we find the consumption of road infrastructure, the environmental costs of its use, congestion costs referring to the cost of the added time imposed on drivers and the costs of accidents. This will be financed by specific taxes such as vehicle licensing, road tax, fuel taxes, etc.
  5. Progressivity-enhancing aspects. Excise duties on high-value products, i.e. luxury goods, are included. In this way, the consumption of certain products that are only within the reach of high incomes is taxed, thus reinforcing a progressive tax system based on their consumption

Targets of taxation

[edit]

Tobacco, alcohol and gasoline

[edit]

These are the three main targets of excise taxation in most countries around the world. They are everyday items of mass usage (even, arguably, "necessity") which bring significant revenue for governments. The first two are considered to be legal drugs, which are a cause of many illnesses (e.g. lung cancer, cirrhosis of the liver), which are used by large swathes of the population, both being widely recognized as addictive. Gasoline (or petrol), as well as diesel and certain other fuels, meanwhile, have excise tax imposed on them mainly[citation needed] because they pollute the environment and to raise funds to support the transportation infrastructure. Revenue-raising depends on a low responsiveness of consumption (elasticity) to tax-induced price changes and externality-prevention depends on the price responsiveness of specific users.[6]

Cannabis

[edit]

Following the legalization of non-medical cannabis in the United States, states with implemented legal markets have imposed new excise taxes on sales of cannabis products. These taxes have been used to build support for legalization initiatives by raising revenue for general spending purposes.[7]

Narcotics

[edit]

Some U.S. states tax transactions involving illegal drugs.[4]

Gambling

[edit]

Gambling licences are subject to excise in many countries today. In 18th-century England, and for a brief time in British North America, gambling itself was for a time also subject to taxation, in the form of stamp duty, whereby a revenue stamp had to be placed on the ace of spades in every pack of cards to demonstrate that the duty had been paid (hence the elaborate designs that evolved on this card in many packs as a result). Since stamp duty was originally only meant to be applied to documents (and cards were categorized as such), the fact that dice were also subject to stamp duty (and were in fact the only non-paper item listed under the Stamp Act 1765) suggests that its implementation to cards and dice can be viewed as a type of excise duty on gambling.[8]

Profits of bookmakers are subject to General Betting Duty in the United Kingdom.

Prostitution

[edit]

Prostitution has been proposed to bear excise tax in a campaign proposal by an opposition party in Canada (2005), and in a bill proposed in the Nevada Legislature (2009) – proposed wordings:

  • "5.5 Implementation of an excise tax on prostitution, the brothel is taxed and passed it on." (Canada)[9]
  • "An excise tax is hereby imposed on each patron who uses the prostitution services of a prostitute in the amount of $5 for each calendar day or portion thereof that the patron uses the prostitution services of that prostitute." (Nevada)[10]

Unhealthy products

[edit]

Excise taxes on unhealthy products include specific taxes on calorie-dense and nutrient-poor food products that are harmful to health. As with environmental taxes, they are not intended to raise revenue but to modify consumer behaviour towards the consumption of food products that are healthy for human health. These include the taxation of specific products such as fast food or high-sugar beverages. For example, the World Health Organisation has indicated that the tax on sugary drinks would have to be at least 20% for this measure to have a real impact on obesity and cardiovascular disease. Countries that already have specific taxes on sugary drinks include Norway, Hungary, Finland and France. The introduction of these special taxes on unhealthy products not only has a short-term impact in terms of reducing consumption, but it is considered that in the long term it will also have positive effects on the welfare state of countries with public health. In other words, if society improves its consumption habits, it will be healthier in the future and diseases resulting from the consumption of unhealthy products will be prevented. This will reduce the need for medical services, which are financed by the state and therefore mean lower health care costs for governments.[11]

Environmentally harmful products

[edit]

In recent years, the creation or increase of excise taxes on certain existing consumer products whose production leads to environmental damage is being considered. The declaration of a climate emergency by international organisations such as the UN and the OECD warns that the current production model is and will have negative effects on life on the planet due to the current high level of pollution. This is why one way to internalise the negative externality derived from productive activity is the inclusion of special taxes on certain products that are the main cause. These include energy, hydrocarbons and certain means of transport. The aim is to reduce their consumption while at the same time generating revenue to mitigate the negative effects of their consumption. They are therefore excise taxes that serve purposes other than simply to raise revenue.[12]

Other types

[edit]

Salt, paper and coffee

[edit]

One of the most notorious taxes in the whole of history was France's gabelle of salt. Although that was a sales tax, rather than an excise, salt has been subject to excise in some countries, along with many other substances which would, in today's world, seem rather unusual, such as paper, and coffee. In fact, salt was taxed as early as the second century,[13][clarification needed] and as late as the twentieth.[14]

Many different reasons have been given for the taxation of such substances, but have usually – if not explicitly – revolved around the historical scarcity of the substance, and their correspondingly high value at the time; governments clearly felt entitled to a share of the profits that traders made on them.[15]

[edit]

Window tax was introduced as a form of income tax, that technically preserved the financial privacy of the individual, the rationale being that wealthier individuals would have grander homes, and hence would have more windows. Furthermore, unlike income, windows cannot be easily hidden. Taxes on the same principle include hearth tax, brick tax, and wallpaper tax. Excise is levied at the point of manufacture; in the case of hearth tax, and window tax, their status as excise therefore depends on whether the window/hearth can philosophically be said to truly exist before the hearth/window is installed in the property. Though technically excise, these taxes are really just substitutes for direct taxes, rather than being levied for the usual reasons for excise.

All of these taxes led to avoidance behaviour that had a substantial impact on society and architecture. People deliberately bricked up windows to avoid window tax, used much larger bricks to reduce their liability for brick tax, or bought plain paper and had it filled in later to avoid wallpaper tax. Some poor people even forced themselves to live in cold dark rooms in order to avoid paying these taxes.[16][17] By contrast, extremely wealthy individuals would sometimes parade their ability to pay the tax, as a way of showing off their wealth, by flooding their properties with windows—even to the point of installing fake ones—using fine brickwork, covering their interiors with wallpaper, and having several fireplaces in each room.

Newspapers and advertising

[edit]

Newspapers were taxed in the United Kingdom from 1712 until 1853. The original tax was increased with the Stamps Act 1814, when it was stipulated at 4d per copy. Since this made it extremely expensive for working-class families (doubling the price of a newspaper), it was pejoratively referred to as a "tax on knowledge", with people forced to rent newspapers on a per-hour basis, or else pool money together in order to buy and share. This resulted in a situation where even out-of-date newspapers were widely sought after.[18][19]

Advertisement Duty was also stipulated in the same laws and was also charged on a "per unit" basis, irrespective of the size or nature of the advertisement. Until 1833 the cost was 3s 6d, after which it was reduced to 1s 6d.[20][21]

Machinery of implementation

[edit]
1828 "Old Frizzle"

An excise duty is often applied by the affixation of revenue stamps to the products being sold. In the case of tobacco or alcohol, for example, producers may be given (or required to buy) a certain bulk amount of excise stamps from the government and are then obliged to affix one to every packet of cigarettes or bottle of spirits produced.

One of the most noticeable examples of this is the development of the Ace of Spades as a particularly elaborate card, from the time when it was obliged to carry the stamp for playing card duty.

A government-owned monopoly—such as an alcohol monopoly—is another method of ensuring the excise is paid.

Around the world

[edit]
General government revenue, in % of GDP, from excises. For this data, the variance of GDP per capita with purchasing power parity (PPP) is explained in 2% by tax revenue.

Australia

[edit]

The Australian Taxation Office describes an excise as "a tax levied on certain types of goods produced or manufactured in Australia. These... include alcohol, tobacco and petroleum and alternative fuels".[22]

In Australia, the meaning of "excise" is not merely academic, but has been the subject of numerous court cases. The High Court of Australia has repeatedly held that a tax can be an "excise" regardless of whether the taxed goods are of domestic or foreign origin; most recently, in Ha v New South Wales (1997), the majority of the Court endorsed the view that an excise is "an inland tax on a step in production, manufacture, sale or distribution of goods", and took a wide view of the kind of "step" which, if subject to a tax, would make the tax an excise.

Canada

[edit]

Excise taxes in Canada are an important source of revenue for the federal government. They are used to raise revenue and discourage Canadian citizens to use or consume harmful goods like alcohol or tobacco. Excise taxes in Canada date back to the 17th century when the French colonial government imposed a tax on fur trading to raise revenue for building infrastructure. Later the British colonialist added taxes on tobacco, alcohol, sugar and tea. Today the types of taxes imposed by the federal government vary but most notable ones could be broken down in these three categories:

  • Alcohol Tax: There is an excise tax on beer ($37.01 per hectoliter), wine ($0.731 per liter) and spirits ($13.864 per liter of absolute ethyl alcohol)
  • Tobacco Tax: The federal excise tax on cigarettes is $0.79162 per 5 cigarettes. There are also excise duties on tobacco sticks, cigars, and cannabis (which is legalized in Canada).
  • Fuel Tax: There is a tax for certain petroleum products, fuel inefficient vehicles, and air conditioners. Most importantly tax for fuels like diesel fuel ($0.04 per liter), unleaded gasoline ($0.10) or aviation fuel ($0.04) [23]

However, there are small adjustments to these excise duties that vary from province to province.

Germany

[edit]

Excise taxes in Germany are an important source of government revenue. They are levied on a variety of goods and serve to improve public health, promote environmental protection and fund social programs. The rates of these taxes are often adjusted to ensure they are achieving their goals. In Germany, the following excise is charged:[citation needed]

  • energy:
    • gasoline: €0.6545 /l (c. €0.073 /kWh)
    • diesel: €0.4704 /l (c. €0.047 /kWh)
    • LPG: €0.166 /kg (c. €0.0896 /l or €0.0129 /kWh)
    • CNG: €0.1803 /kg (c. €0.0139 /kWh)
    • heating oil: €0.13 /kg (c. €0.0119 /kWh)
  • electricity:
    • default: €0.0205 /kWh
    • for trains, trams, etc.: €0.01142 /kWh
  • nuclear fuel:
    • €145 /g
  • intermediate products in production of alcoholic beverages:
    • default: €1.53 /l
    • alcoholic contents < 15%: €1.02 /l
    • intermediate products in champagne production: €1.36 /l
  • tobacco:
    • cigarettes: €0.0982 /cigarette + 21.69% of the retail price
    • pipe tobacco: €15.66 /kg + 13.13% of the gross price
    • cigars: €0.014 /cigar + 1.47% of the gross price
  • coffee:
    • roasted: €2.19 /kg
    • instant: €4.78 /kg
  • beer: c. €0.094 /l, depends on the type of beer
  • spirits
  • champagne:
    • alcoholic contents < 6%: €0.51 /l
    • alcoholic contents >= 6%: €1.36 /l
  • alcopops: €0.0555 /l pure alcohol


France

In France, the domestic consumption tax on energy products (TICPE) and the tax on tobacco and alcohol are excise duties. They are collected by customs, as is dock dues in overseas departments.

In France, the transport of alcohol (or tobacco and other products subject to this tax) in excess of a relatively small quantity, even by private individuals for their own consumption, is subject to this tax (also known as "excise duty") for example, for the transport of alcohol in casks (this tax may be levied when crossing a border, where the quantity of alcohol above a certain level will be paid to the customs authorities). It is this notion of a threshold on the quantity transported (and not the actual use to which it will be put) that makes it possible to presume and differentiate between personal possession and commercial use (and this tax must be paid before transport, even in the case of a purchase with invoice in a large retail outlet intended for private individuals, This tax must be paid before the vehicle is transported, even if the vehicle is purchased with an invoice from a large retail outlet for private use. Few people are aware of this, but it can be fined or seized if the "tax stamp" (represented by the tax capsule known as the "CRD" or "capsule représentative de droit") is not produced when the vehicle is inspected by a customs service anywhere in the country, not just at borders, or even if the vehicle is found to have been transported by a police or gendarmerie service during any official inspection or report in the event of a road traffic offence or an accident, whether at fault or not.) It is the driver of the vehicle who must justify this tax at the time of transport, or the company employing the driver if the vehicle is used for professional purposes.

Additional taxes (similar to excise duties) are levied in France:

  • on spirits with a high alcoholic strength (over 18 degrees), mixed drinks containing more than 1% alcohol ("premix") and on tobacco, for the direct benefit of health insurance funds,
  • on drinking water supplied by operators of public concessions (the excise duty is then paid by the operator to the public basin agency and/or the local authority),
  • on boreholes drilled by private individuals (digging wells for example) or certain installations requiring authorisation and regular monitoring (such as private wastewater treatment installations), the monitoring of which is the responsibility of the basin agencies for the preservation of drinking water resources, these taxes being collected by the tax authorities before the construction permit is issued,
  • on tree felling in private areas of protected forests (this tax may be offset by replanting programmes), or indirectly by the tax authorities on behalf of third parties:
  • on all electronic products or products that are difficult to reprocess because of their environmental toxicity and non-degradability (commonly known as the "ecotax"), for the benefit of a fund to finance their recycling and research in this field,
  • on passenger air transport, for the benefit of an international development fund,
  • on digital or analogue data carriers that allow replication (magnetic tapes, hard disks, physical recording media and all non-volatile memories) to a fund for artists and media producers (music publishing, films, books, software) intended to offset the legal right to private copying.

India

[edit]

In India, almost all products are subject to excise duty,[citation needed] provided the following four conditions are fulfilled:

  • There should be a manufacture
  • The manufacture was in India (excluding special economic zone)
  • The manufacture should result in goods
  • The goods thus manufactured must be excisable (means the goods must be specified in central excise tariff act, 1985)

The excise tax in India is imposed typically on production and manufacturing rather than on sale of goods and services. This means that the taxes are paid by the manufacturer, but it is the consumer who ultimately bears the burden of the tax. India has also incorporated a system which allows companies to pay this tax monthly using the online ACES (Automation of Central Excise and Service Tax) portal. Taxes here are mostly calculated as ad valorem taxes although there are some special cases where rates are applied. The first ever excise taxes were introduced during the British colonial era in mid-19th century to generate revenue by taxing commercial products. Then after gaining independence in 1947, it has undergone many changes and today it is using the Goods and Services tax (GST) system introduced in 2017. Excise taxes in India could be broken down into these main categories:

  • Basic Excise Duty (BED): This tax is calculated as a percentage of the estimated value of goods, and it is levied on production in India.
  • Additional Excise Duty (AED): This tax is also calculated as a percentage of the assessed value and it is levied on products such as tobacco, pan masala or aerated water.
  • Special Excise Duty (SED): This tax is levied on goods like alcohol, petroleum products or tobacco and it is also charged as a percentage of the goods value.[24]

There are also a few more categories like Service tax or education cess. However, a lot of these taxes have been subsumed in the Goods and services tax.

Indonesia

[edit]

In Indonesia, tobacco products (including electronic cigarettes) and alcoholic drinks are subject to excise duties.[25] Sweetened drinks and plastic bags will be subject to excise duties starting in 2024.[26]

China

[edit]

In China excise tax is levied both on production and on the sale of a certain goods or services. Excise taxes have been present in China since the Ming and Qing dynasties, but they were only imposed on goods like tea or silk which was considered to more of a luxury goods. In modern China this was largely expanded to excise duties on alcohol, tobacco, petroleum or telecommunication. Examples of China's excise taxes would be:

  • Alcohol Tax: The taxes for alcohol vary depending on the type of alcohol and its alcohol content.
  • Fuel Tax: In China tax on fuels differs for every type of fuel. For instance, the excise tax on gasoline is 1.52 yuan per liter and for diesel is 1.2 yuan per liter.
  • Tobacco Tax: The tax on tobacco is actually ad valorem tax meaning that it's based on the retail price of the item rather than quantity. For example, the tax on cigarettes ranges from 5-56 % depending on the cigarettes type. Other than that, there is also a VAT tax on cigarettes (13%). This could be explained by the efforts of the Chinese government to reduce smoking and increase public health.[27]

There are many more goods that are subject to excise taxes like cars, other motor vehicles and luxury goods. Excise taxes in general have been heavily criticized for being regressive (disproportionate on lower income citizens) so the government has undertaken steps to better the situation like increasing taxes on luxury cars.

Japan

[edit]

Excise taxes in Japan are a type of consumption taxes that are imposed on certain goods and services at the time of purchase. The main goal of excise taxes in Japan is to discourage people from using harmful products or buying luxury items. Japan has been implementing excise taxes since the mid-19th century when it needed the money for their rapid modernizing and growth. For example, one of the earliest excise taxes on tobacco were imposed in 1898 and this helped to raise funds for the Russo-Japanese war. Today most of the excise taxes in Japan are replaced by the consumption tax. The consumption tax rate is at 10% since 2019, however it is imposed on variety of products and there are exceptions in the rates for goods like alcohol, tobacco or fuel.[28]

United Kingdom

[edit]

In the United Kingdom, the following forms of excise are levied on goods and services:

Excise tax is an indirect tax created in the United Kingdom during the First English Revolution, also known as "stamp duty", which has been applied to a wide range of products, particularly imports. Historically, it was collected by the Board of Excise, which was subsequently combined with the Inland Revenue (responsible for collecting direct taxes). In view of the higher likelihood of organised crime being involved in attempts at evading Excise, and its association with smuggling, compared with evasion attempts concerning direct taxation, the Board of Excise was later combined instead with the Board of Customs, to form HM Customs and Excise. In this combined form, Customs and Excise was responsible for managing the import and export of goods and services into the UK, and its officers wielded greater powers of access, arrest, and seizure, than the Police.

On 18 April 2005, Customs and Excise was merged once more with the Inland Revenue to form a new department, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC). The enormous contrast between the powers of officers of the Inland Revenue, and those of Customs and Excise, initially caused several difficulties in the early life of the new organisation. Many of the monitoring and inspection functions, and corresponding powers, were later split off to form a new UK Border Agency, while the residual organisation is now merely responsible for the financial aspects of collection.

United States

[edit]

In the United States, the term "excise" has at least two meanings: (A) any tax other than a property tax or capitation (i.e., an excise is an indirect tax in the constitutional law sense), or (B) a tax that is simply called an excise in the language of the statute imposing that tax (an excise in the statutory law sense, sometimes called a "miscellaneous excise"). An excise under definition (A) is not necessarily the same as an excise under definition (B).

An excise (under definition B) has been defined as '"a tax upon manufacture, sale or for a business license or charter, as distinguished from a tax on real property, income or estates."[29]

Both the federal and state governments levy excise taxes on goods such as alcohol, motor fuel, and tobacco products. The laws of the federal government and of some state governments impose excises[30][31] known as the income tax. Even though federal excise taxes are geographically uniform, state excise taxes vary considerably. Taxation constitutes a substantial proportion of the retail prices on alcohol and tobacco products.

Local governments may also impose an excise tax. For example, the city of Anchorage, Alaska charges a cigarette tax of $1.30 per pack, which is on top of the federal excise tax and the state excise tax. In 2011, the United States federal excise tax on gasoline was 18.4 cents per gallon (4.86 ¢/L) and 24.4 cents per gallon (6.45 ¢/L) for diesel fuel.[32]

European Union

[edit]

In the European Union, harmonisation of excise duties has been considered from the outset. However, the first obstacle was the great heterogeneity of these taxes in the different Member States. Excise duty was introduced in the European Union by the Council Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992 on the general arrangements for products subject to excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring of such products, which came into force on 1 January 1993 with the advent of the single market. This Directive was repealed and replaced on 1 April 2010 by the Council Directive 2008/118/EC of 16 December 2008 concerning the general arrangements for excise duty and repealing Directive 92/12/EEC. Under the Directive, the following products are subject to excise duty:

  • mineral oils ;
  • alcohol and alcoholic beverages ;
  • manufactured tobacco.

In addition, the Directive allows Member States to apply excise duties to products other than those mentioned above, provided that such taxation does not give rise to border-crossing formalities. Due to the differences between countries and the impossibility of reaching an agreement whereby the tax would be fixed and the same for all member countries, it was decided to intervene in excise duties in two ways. The first by establishing a minimum tax rate equal for all member countries and, secondly, by establishing a long-term objective to which all member countries should converge.

Excise duty does not become chargeable until the excisable products leave the tax warehouse and are removed from the associated suspension arrangements. However, to avoid excise duty being levied (and possibly reimbursed) each time goods are moved in the course of trade, the directive also provides for a system of movement under a suspension arrangement. Under this system, excisable goods can be dispatched from one tax warehouse to another without excise duty being charged. Products move between tax warehouses under cover of an accompanying administrative document (AAD), which is stamped by customs in the country of departure and by customs in the country of arrival, from where it is returned to the issuer. These days, movements are tracked electronically via the Community's electronic Excises Movements Control System (EMCS).

The directive also stipulates that private individuals may pay excise duty in the country in which they buy the products, provided that they transport them themselves. Furthermore, in order to prevent fraudulent trafficking, the directive also establishes that the holding of excisable products for commercial purposes in one country gives rise to the levying of excise duty there, even if the tax had already been paid in another country. To determine what is meant by commercial purposes, the directive sets out various criteria, including the quantity of products held.  Finally, the Directive clearly states that in the case of distance selling to private individuals, excise duty is payable in the country of arrival. In such cases, the vendor is in principle obliged to pay the tax in that country, even if he is not established there.

Lastly, the directive also provides for exemptions for products intended for delivery :

  • within the framework of diplomatic and consular relations (diplomatic allowances),
  • international organisations recognised by the host Member State,
  • NATO forces

On the understanding that Member States are free to set rates higher than the minimum rates, specific directives for each countries can be done on  :

  • energy products and electricity ;
  • alcohol and alcoholic beverages ;
  • manufactured tobacco.

According to Eurostat data from 2014, it is known that energy taxes represent on average 16% of the implicit rate on consumption and up to 50% of excise tax revenue. Alcohol and tobacco account for only 8% of the implicit rate on consumption. As a whole, excise duties account for around 3% of GDP as a weighted average for the countries that make up the European Union.[33]

Criticisms

[edit]

Critics of excise have interpreted and described it as simply being a way for government to levy further and unnecessary taxation on the population. The presence of refunds of duty under the UK's list of excisable activities has been used to support this argument,[according to whom?] as it results in taxation being implemented on persons even when they would normally be exempt from paying other types of taxes (the reason they qualify for the refund in the first place).[citation needed]

Furthermore, excise sometimes doubles up with other taxes, and in particular with customs duties (except, for duty-free items). If a good is purchased in one country and later exported to another, excise must be paid when it was manufactured, and customs then paid when it enters the second country; in a sense, the "creation" of the good has been taxed twice, although from the second country's point of view, it only came into existence as a taxable good at the border. [citation needed]

In some countries, such as the UK, excise has generally been limited to goods which are luxuries or a risk to health or morals, but this is not the case everywhere. Taxation on medicines, pharmaceuticals and medical equipment has been an issue of contention, especially in developing countries, due to the fact that this can cause the prices of medicines, and medical procedures, to become inflated, even when potentially lifesaving; this has sometimes forced healthcare providers to limit the number of operations performed.[34]

In some countries, goods which are illegal are nevertheless also subject to excise, and the ground of tax evasion has subsequently been used to prosecute criminal gang leaders, when it has not been possible to prosecute the criminal activity more directly. It has also been argued that, by taxing banned substances, some US states are able to gain additional revenues. In some cases, legislation creates an incentive for the state to turn a blind eye to certain criminal activity, by allowing dealers to preserve their anonymity, and thus enabling revenue to be collected without leading to the arrest of the perpetrator:

A dealer is not required to give his/her name or address when purchasing stamps and the Department is prohibited from sharing any information relating to the purchase of drug tax stamps with law enforcement or anyone else.[4]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia

An excise tax is an levied by governments on the manufacture, importation, or sale of specific or services, such as alcohol, , fuels, and certain activities like . These taxes are typically collected from producers or importers but economically passed through to consumers via higher prices, distinguishing them from general sales taxes by their targeted application to particular items rather than broad consumption. Excise duties can be structured as specific taxes per unit of quantity or ad valorem rates based on value, often aiming to generate while addressing perceived negative externalities associated with the taxed .
Historically, excise taxes trace back thousands of years to ancient civilizations but gained systematic use in before adoption in the United States, where the first federal excise on distilled spirits in 1791 funded debts from the Revolutionary War yet ignited the due to opposition from frontier distillers. In the U.S., they have funded wartime efforts, like highways via fuel taxes, and social programs, though their share of federal revenue has declined to about 1-2% in recent decades amid broader income and dominance. Globally, excise taxes on "sin goods" like and alcohol empirically reduce consumption volumes, particularly among price-sensitive groups, while providing stable revenue streams less volatile than income taxes. Key characteristics include their potential regressivity, as lower-income households spend a larger proportion of on taxed essentials like , though proponents highlight behavioral benefits in curbing excess consumption of harmful products. Controversies often arise over rate hikes, which can shift economic incidence to consumers or producers depending on demand elasticity, and their use in policy goals like via carbon or excises. Despite comprising a minor fiscal portion, excises remain integral for influencing market outcomes and funding targeted expenditures, such as trust funds for transportation.

Fundamentals of Excise Taxation

Definition and Distinctions

An excise tax constitutes an imposed on the production, manufacture, sale, or consumption of particular , services, or activities, rather than on general or broad retail transactions. In the United States, for instance, it applies to items such as , products, alcohol, and airline tickets, with liability falling on manufacturers, importers, wholesalers, retailers, or end consumers depending on the specific levy. These taxes are typically embedded in the price paid by the ultimate consumer, distinguishing them from taxes assessed on individuals' or assets. The of "excise" traces to the Latin excisus, the past participle of excidere meaning "to cut out" or "to remove," underscoring the tax's selective nature in extracting revenue from designated sectors rather than applying universally. This origin, transmitted through excijs and accise, highlights its historical role as a targeted levy on commodities, often administered internally within a . Excise taxes differ from ad valorem sales taxes or value-added taxes (VAT), which calculate liability as a of an item's retail value across diverse merchandise, by frequently using specific rates—a fixed monetary amount per unit of measure, such as $0.184 per of —applied only to enumerated categories. In opposition to customs duties or tariffs, which target imported goods at borders to regulate flows or generate protectionist , excises predominantly cover domestically produced or consumed items, though some overlap exists for imports treated as domestic equivalents post-entry. Unlike property taxes, which evaluate fixed assets or holdings for ongoing wealth-based assessments, or income taxes, which directly tax personal or corporate , excises operate as consumption-oriented indirect levies without regard to the taxpayer's overall financial capacity.

Core Principles and Types

Excise taxes operate through distinct structural mechanisms designed to target specific goods at points of production, , or sale, with classifications primarily dividing them into specific and ad valorem types. Specific excises impose a fixed monetary amount per physical unit, such as per liter, , or package, which simplifies administration and reduces incentives for substitution toward higher-value variants of the same good. For instance, the federal excise on levies 18.4 cents per as of 2025, unchanged since its last adjustment in 1993. Ad valorem excises, by contrast, apply a of the good's value, aligning tax liability with price fluctuations but potentially encouraging shifts to premium products to minimize relative burden. In practice, hybrid approaches combine both, as seen in certain alcohol duties where a base specific rate supplements an ad valorem component to balance stability and proportionality. Core principles governing excise taxation emphasize mechanical efficiency and targeted impact. Internalization requires embedding unaccounted societal costs—such as or burdens—directly into the product's price, thereby incentivizing reduced consumption without relying on regulatory bans. Earmarking dedicates revenues to expenditures linked to the taxed activity, enhancing perceived fairness and fiscal discipline; for example, excises often fund transportation to offset usage-related wear. However, this practice demands alignment between revenue streams and spending needs, as mismatches can undermine . volatility arises from excises' sensitivity to consumption elasticity, where economic downturns or price-induced behavioral shifts—such as reduced amid —can sharply curtail yields, complicating budgetary compared to broader-based taxes. These features collectively ensure excises function as precise fiscal instruments, though their narrow bases amplify responsiveness to market dynamics.

Historical Development

Ancient and Pre-Modern Origins

In ancient civilizations, excise-like levies on specific commodities arose as practical mechanisms for revenue generation, capitalizing on observable production or trade chokepoints where verification was feasible amid rudimentary administrative tools. These taxes targeted high-value or staple goods, avoiding the challenges of assessing diffuse agricultural yields or personal incomes. In the , vectigalia encompassed indirect duties on goods such as salt from state-operated salinae (salt-works), which provided steady imperial revenue, alongside portoria—tolls on internal transport and sales of wine and , essential Mediterranean staples that facilitated control at ports or markets. Such impositions, often at rates like 2-5% of gross product empire-wide, reflected the era's fiscal realism: taxing verifiable flows rather than elusive wealth estimates. Parallel developments occurred in imperial China, where dynastic rulers imposed excises on luxury exports to fund vast bureaucracies and military campaigns. During the (618–907 CE), the quecha system established a state monopoly, classifying leaves by quality and levying a 10% that generated approximately 400,000 strings of cash annually, equivalent to significant imperial funding. , another prized , faced similar duties, often collected in-kind from producers, as seen in Ming-era (1368–1644) policies where households paid in silk bolts alongside grain, leveraging centralized production hubs for enforcement. These measures underscored causal priorities: commodities like and , concentrated in specific regions, allowed tolls at bottlenecks such as monopolized processing or export points, bypassing broader income proxies impractical in agrarian societies. In medieval , feudal fragmentation amplified localized excises, with lords extracting duties from ale —a ubiquitous activity—and , the era's economic linchpin. English manorial customs from the 12th–14th centuries included fees or "scot" on ale sales, enforceable at village breweries or markets due to the beverage's perishability and local production. exports, powering trade with and , incurred heavy staples duties (e.g., up to 40 shillings per sack by the 1340s), collected at designated ports like or to curb amid high demand. This structure privileged tangible tolls over feudal renders , as wool's enabled oversight at shearing or shipping stages. Under Islamic caliphates, revenue systems blended religious obligations with pragmatic levies on commerce, favoring specifics on movable luxuries over undifferentiated wealth assessments. Beyond —a 2.5% alms on categories like , , and trade goods—the Umayyad (661–750 CE) and Abbasid eras imposed ushr (10% on irrigated crops) and customs on imported luxuries such as or spices, collected at urban bazaars or caravan routes for caliphal treasuries. on non-Muslims supplemented these, but excise analogs targeted verifiable luxury flows, reflecting administrative realism: bottlenecks like markets allowed audits infeasible for nomadic or rural incomes. This approach sustained expansive empires by aligning taxation with observable economic nodes, prefiguring modern excise logic without relying on comprehensive censuses.

Industrial Era Expansions

The expansion of excise taxation during the 18th and early 19th centuries in Britain was driven by the fiscal demands of industrialization, colonial trade, and incessant warfare, shifting reliance from land-based levies to consumption duties that scaled with economic output and proved more resilient to evasion. The , enacted in 1696 under William III, imposed graduated rates on dwellings according to the number of windows—exempting those with fewer than ten—to target wealthier households while generating steady revenue; it endured until its repeal in 1851 amid widespread distortionary effects, such as property owners bricking up windows to minimize liability. High duties on salt similarly fueled rampant networks, with Irish white salt evading levies to undercut English coastal producers, illustrating how excise structures inadvertently spurred illicit trade that eroded intended revenues and strained enforcement. These measures supplanted feudal land taxes, which were politically contentious and administratively cumbersome, enabling centralized collection on mobile goods like , , and that aligned with burgeoning and commerce. Across the Atlantic, the nascent encountered similar frictions in establishing federal excises, as seen in the 1791 whiskey tax proposed by to service Revolutionary War debts through duties of 6 to 18 cents per gallon on distilled spirits—disproportionately burdening small western distillers who relied on whiskey as . This provoked the in 1794, when farmers violently resisted tax collectors, underscoring excise's role in asserting national authority over local economies and funding a standing military without direct property assessments; federal forces quelled the uprising, affirming the tax's constitutionality despite its regressive bite on frontier producers. Excise revenues proved pivotal during the (1793–1815), spiking to finance Britain's fiscal-military apparatus amid export booms and naval supremacy; pre-war annual tax intake neared £18 million, augmented by an average additional £12.6 million per year through excises on traded and domestic goods like spirits, , and , which comprised the bulk of indirect levies and underpinned borrowing for sustained armies and fleets. This evolution intertwined on imports—such as for mills—with inland excises on processed spirits and manufactures, funding imperial defense of routes while centralizing power by decoupling revenue from agrarian elites; the system's , rooted in professional bureaucracies, allowed warfare expenditures without feudal dependencies, though it amplified and economic distortions tied to global commodity flows.

Post-WWII and Contemporary Shifts

Following , excise taxes expanded beyond traditional goods to support infrastructure and reconstruction efforts, with fuel excises emerging as a key mechanism. In the United States, the was established by the , drawing revenue primarily from a 3-cent-per-gallon federal excise tax on and diesel, later adjusted upward, to finance the and related surface transportation projects. This user-pays approach linked excise revenues directly to highway maintenance and expansion, reflecting a emphasis on economic recovery through targeted infrastructure investment. Tobacco and alcohol excises, which had provided significant wartime revenue, persisted but were supplemented by these new levies amid rising automobile dependency. The 1970s oil crises accelerated shifts toward fuel-related excises with environmental undertones, as supply shocks and price surges prompted conservation measures. The 1973 Arab oil embargo quadrupled global oil prices, leading to U.S. proposals for increases—such as President Nixon's 1970 suggestion of 2-3 cents per gallon—to curb demand and fund initiatives. These events laid groundwork for excises aimed at internalizing energy externalities, though implementation focused more on stabilization than pure environmental correction, with taxes extended repeatedly to sustain trust funds amid diverging expenditures and s. In contemporary developments through 2025, declining consumption of traditional bases like and alcohol—driven by interventions and awareness—has eroded tax volumes, prompting diversification into "new sin" excises for revenue stability. Global use has dropped sharply since the , reducing excise yields in many jurisdictions despite rate hikes, as elasticity analyses show sustained demand suppression. Alcohol consumption trends similarly reflect health-driven declines, challenging fiscal reliance on these sources. Offsetting this, governments have imposed excises on sugar-sweetened beverages and emerging pollutants like plastics, with data indicating expanded behavioral excises across member states to influence consumption patterns while maintaining overall revenue shares. In the U.S., air transportation excises rose effective January 1, 2025, with the segment tax increasing to $5.50 for domestic flights under IRC section 4261, and proposed regulations for a tax on designated sales—targeting manufacturer transfers—were published January 2, 2025, to capture value in pharmaceuticals amid pricing debates. Empirical patterns show these adaptations preserve aggregate excise stability but underscore base erosion risks without broader reforms.

Theoretical Justifications

Revenue and Fiscal Efficiency

Excise taxes offer governments a relatively efficient source by concentrating collection at limited points in the , such as manufacturers or importers, thereby reducing administrative overhead compared to taxes that require processing returns from millions of individuals. Specific excise levies, applied per unit of good rather than as a of value, further enhance enforceability and curb evasion, as quantities are verifiable through production records or shipments, unlike value-based assessments prone to underreporting. In the United States, federal excise taxes collected $101.4 billion in fiscal year 2024, accounting for about 2% of total federal revenues totaling $4.9 trillion. This yield demonstrates scalability for fiscal needs, as rates can be adjusted upward to offset deficits without the compliance complexities of expanding bases or brackets. Moreover, excises align revenue with user-financed expenditures under the beneficiary-pays model; taxes, at 18.4 cents per for and 24.4 cents for diesel, produced roughly $35.8 billion in 2022, comprising 83% of inflows to the dedicated to road and transit infrastructure. Such mechanisms minimize economic distortions inherent in progressive income taxation, which can deter labor participation and through marginal rate effects, whereas targeted excises on discrete transactions preserve incentives for untaxed activities. This fiscal approach supports stable, predictable inflows from with inelastic , enabling governments to fund operations or without relying on volatile or distortionary broad-based levies.

Corrective and Externality-Based Rationales

Excise taxes serve as Pigouvian instruments when calibrated to approximate the marginal external cost of negative externalities, thereby aligning private decisions with social welfare by compelling producers or consumers to bear the full societal burden of harms such as or burdens. In theory, a excise reflecting the social cost of emissions—estimated at $50–$100 per ton in recent integrated assessment models—internalizes damages, while excises aim to capture externalities like and taxpayer-funded treatments for smoking-related illnesses, which totaled $300 billion annually in U.S. healthcare costs as of 2018. This approach requires precise empirical quantification of externalities, as assumptions of uniform harm across agents can distort incentives; for example, heterogeneous emission elasticities among firms undermine uniform tax efficacy, yielding suboptimal welfare gains compared to tailored alternatives. Evidence from fuel excises in nations demonstrates partial success in curbing emissions, with carbon pricing mechanisms—including implicit prices via excises—linked to long-run CO2 reductions through elasticities of -0.2 to -0.5, implying a 1% increase lowers emissions by up to 0.5% over time. A 2023 panel analysis of 38 countries confirmed environmental taxes, encompassing levies, inversely correlate with emissions, though causality weakens when controlling for GDP growth and energy efficiency gains independent of taxation. Critiques highlight overestimation risks, as models often neglect innovation offsets—such as accelerated renewable adoption—or leakage effects where emissions shift to untaxed jurisdictions, reducing net global internalization by 20–50% in border-adjusted scenarios. For health-related excises like those on alcohol or sugary products, empirical outcomes reveal challenges in fully internalizing externalities due to substitution toward untaxed substitutes with comparable risks, such as shifting from taxed sodas to untaxed energy drinks or alcohol variants evading volume-based levies. Post-tax studies in jurisdictions like and show targeted consumption drops of 10–20%, but negligible increases in healthier alternatives, with total caloric intake from sweetened beverages declining only modestly as consumers opt for unregulated options, potentially sustaining obesity-related costs estimated at 2–3% of GDP in affected populations. Mainstream economic models advocating expansive sin taxes, often from academia with documented left-leaning institutional biases, tend to overstate net benefits by underweighting these substitutions and private mitigations like voluntary cessation, leading to calls for supplementary evidence on long-term health trajectories rather than reliance on short-run demand curves.

Behavioral and Sumptuary Arguments

Sumptuary arguments for excise taxation trace back to efforts to regulate consumption signaling or moral excess, often through duties on or vices to enforce class distinctions or curb perceived extravagance. In colonial , Puritan authorities imposed early sumptuary excises on items like fine clothing and imported foods to discourage ostentation and align spending with religious austerity, viewing such taxes as tools for moral governance rather than mere . These historical precedents evolved into modern sin taxes, where excises on goods like alcohol and are justified as mechanisms to deter socially disfavored behaviors by raising costs and signaling disapproval, independent of externalities like health costs. Empirical assessments of these behavioral interventions reveal varied elasticities, with addictive substances often exhibiting inelastic responses among habitual users, limiting the taxes' deterrent effect. For instance, studies on alcohol consumption find price elasticities typically ranging from -0.3 to -0.7, indicating that a 10% increase via excise reduces volume by only 3-7%, particularly among heavy drinkers whose habits resist price signals. demand similarly shows overall inelasticity, with elasticities below -0.5 in aggregate, though youth and occasional users display higher sensitivity, suggesting excises may influence initiation more than cessation among dependents. research further indicates that individuals with lower reduce purchases less in response to hikes, undermining the paternalistic goal of uniform conduct modification. High excises intended to suppress frequently engender black markets, shifting activity underground and amplifying associated risks rather than eliminating them. During U.S. (1920-1933), the outright ban—functionally an infinite excise—spawned vast illicit alcohol networks, fueling syndicates like those led by and contributing to thousands of alcohol-related deaths from adulterated products, as legal deterrence collapsed into enforcement failures. Contemporary cigarette excises demonstrate analogous dynamics, with interstate rates exceeding 50% in high-tax states like New York, correlating with tax differentials and sustaining criminal enterprises that evade behavioral controls while eroding intended revenue and compliance. Such outcomes highlight causal pathways where punitive pricing incentivizes substitution toward unregulated channels, often escalating enforcement costs and ancillary crimes without proportionally curbing overall consumption. These sumptuary rationales rest on assumptions of governmental insight into optimal individual choices, yet evidence prioritizes , as persistent inelasticities and evasion suggest excises serve more as symbolic nudges than reliable architects of restraint. Where behavioral shifts occur, they disproportionately affect marginal users, leaving core vices entrenched and prompting critiques of overreach into personal liberty, as taxes compel conformity without addressing underlying preferences or habits through non-coercive means.

Targeted Goods and Services

Traditional Sin Taxes (Tobacco, Alcohol, Fuel)

Traditional sin taxes on , alcohol, and represent longstanding excise levies applied to goods associated with personal consumption and perceived social costs, predating many modern regulatory frameworks. These taxes are typically structured as specific duties per unit volume or quantity, reflecting their origins in revenue generation from relatively inelastic . Empirical indicate that for products exhibits low price elasticity, with estimates ranging from -0.2 to -0.5 overall, though higher inelasticity among chronic users due to dynamics. Similarly, alcohol shows inelasticity, particularly for heavier consumers, while taxes benefit from essential usage patterns tied to transportation . Tobacco excises, among the earliest sin taxes, target cigarettes and related products through per-pack or per-unit rates. , the federal excise tax stands at $1.01 per pack of 20 cigarettes as of 2025, unchanged since its 2009 increase under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. Globally, tobacco consumption has declined amid rising taxes and other factors, with the reporting a drop from 1.38 billion users in 2000 to 1.2 billion in 2024, and prevalence falling from 32.7% to 21.7% among those aged 15 and older by 2020. However, sharp tax hikes correlate with increased smuggling; studies across U.S. states using 2021 data show a strong positive relationship between state tax differentials and smuggling inflows, with high-tax jurisdictions like New York experiencing net smuggling losses exceeding 50% of consumption. While smuggling partially offsets revenue gains—reducing projected increases by 10-20% in some models—it does not reverse net fiscal benefits due to tobacco's inelastic demand. Alcohol excises vary by beverage type and alcohol content, often calculated per liter of pure alcohol to account for potency. In the United Kingdom, spirits duty is levied at £32.79 per liter of pure alcohol for products exceeding 22% ABV as of 2025, with rates scaling downward for lower-strength categories like beer (£0.227 per liter of product for draught up to 2.8% ABV). These structures aim to equalize tax burdens across proofs, though empirical elasticity remains low (-0.3 to -0.7), implying limited consumption shifts from moderate increases. Revenue from such taxes funds public expenditures, but evasion via cross-border purchases rises with differentials, similar to tobacco patterns. Fuel excises, applied to and diesel, are per-gallon or per-liter levies earmarked for in many jurisdictions. The U.S. federal rate is 18.4 cents per gallon for and 24.4 cents for diesel as of 2025, supporting the . Despite electric vehicle adoption, which bypasses fuel taxes, aggregate revenue has shown short-term stability; studies indicate minimal impact to date, with EVs comprising less than 10% of U.S. through 2024 and total motor fuel tax collections holding steady around $30-35 billion annually federally. Demand inelasticity for essential mobility sustains yields, though long-term projections forecast erosion without alternatives like mileage-based fees, as fuel-efficient and zero-emission vehicles contribute less per mile traveled.

Vice and Regulated Activities (Gambling, Narcotics, Prostitution)

Excise taxes on typically apply to the gross amount wagered, known as the "," rather than net winnings, to capture at the source and simplify collection. In the United States, the federal excise on legal sports wagers stands at 0.25% of the total , with an additional annual occupational of $50 per agent accepting bets, a structure dating to the but retained amid expanded legalization post-2018 ruling on . State-level taxes vary widely, often as a of gross gaming (e.g., up to 51% in states like New York), funding public services while incentivizing licensed operators over underground markets; however, high rates can drive evasion, as evidenced by persistent illegal betting estimated at 20-30% of total U.S. volume despite regulation. This taxation balances generation—yielding billions annually—with enforcement challenges, where over-taxation risks expanding unregulated sectors that evade oversight and contribute to associated crimes like match-fixing. For narcotics, excise taxes emerge primarily in jurisdictions post-legalization, targeting as a proxy for broader controlled substances where previously dominated. Canada's federal excise duty on , implemented since 2018, combines a flat rate of C$1 per gram of THC equivalent (or C$10 per 100 grams for low-THC products) with a 10% ad valorem component on the greater of the two, yielding effective rates often between 10% and 25% depending on market prices; provinces add their own levies, pushing combined burdens higher. In the U.S., state-level excises average 15-20% of retail price, generating over $20 billion in combined across legal markets in 2024, with sales reaching $30 billion amid expansion to 24 states. These revenues have partially offset declining tobacco excise collections, which fell due to reduced consumption and vaping shifts, though black markets persist where es exceed 30-40% effective rates, undermining goals by favoring untaxed, untested products. considerations arise as such taxes, while funding , can deter formal participation and sustain prohibition-era enforcement costs. Prostitution-related excises remain exceptionally rare globally, with most regulated models relying on licensing fees rather than per-transaction levies, reflecting challenges in monitoring consensual exchanges without broader criminalization. In , the sole permitting licensed brothels in select counties, no specific excise tax applies to sex acts; operators pay county business fees (ranging from $100 quarterly to $20,000 annually) and state work permits ($50 per prostitute), alongside federal income taxes on earnings, generating local revenue but exempting the activity from state sales or excise duties. Empirical studies on effects show mixed causal outcomes: in places like (2003-2009) correlated with a 31% drop in reported rapes and lower STI incidence, suggesting reduced violence against sex workers via formal channels, yet cross-country analyses indicate legalized systems may increase inflows by 20-30% due to expanded demand without proportional supply safeguards. Introducing excises could further deter benefits by raising costs, potentially sustaining underground markets prone to and evasion, while infringing individual in private transactions—a where empirical revenue gains (minimal in existing models) often fail to justify heightened regulatory intrusion.

Health and Environmental Levies (Sugar, Plastics, Emissions)

implemented a 10% on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) in January 2014, resulting in an initial 6% reduction in purchases of taxed beverages compared to pre-tax trends, with effects strengthening to nearly 10% by the second year. However, longer-term evaluations showed diminishing impacts, with only a 4.4% sustained reduction in SSB purchases four years post-implementation, alongside increased consumption of untaxed alternatives like and unsweetened beverages. Empirical studies on SSB taxes reveal frequent substitution effects, where consumers shift to untaxed caloric sources such as juices, , or other high-sugar foods, potentially undermining net benefits. A of global SSB taxes estimated a 10% increase correlates with a 10% drop in SSB intake, but this often fails to translate to overall caloric or reductions due to such offsets, with public -oriented sometimes overstating by underemphasizing behavioral adaptations. In the environmental domain, the introduced a levy in 2021 on non-recycled at €0.80 per , aimed at reducing and funding EU initiatives, with member states required to report and contribute based on national waste generation. Complementary measures, such as charges or bans across EU countries since Directive 2015/720, have cut lightweight bag consumption by over 90% in some nations like , though evidence indicates substitution toward thicker plastics or paper alternatives, which may not yield proportional environmental gains when lifecycle emissions are considered. Carbon pricing mechanisms, including excise-style taxes, target emissions externalities; as of 2025, 23 European countries impose carbon taxes ranging from under €1 per metric in to over €125 in , often hybridizing with the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) to cover non-ETS sectors like transport and buildings. These hybrids provide price floors or taxes alongside cap-and-trade allowances, as seen in systems like Alberta's pre-2019 model, aiming to balance certainty and flexibility, though empirical reductions in covered emissions are partially offset by . In the United States, the excise tax on under Section 4121—levied at rates up to $1.10 per for underground-mined —funds the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund and implicitly discourages high-emission fuels, with provisions extended through ongoing authorizations as of 2025 amid debates. Critically, environmental levies' efficacy is constrained by and leakage: unilateral carbon taxes prompt firms to relocate production to low-regulation jurisdictions, with from trade-open economies showing emissions outsourcing that negates 20-50% of domestic reductions, as territorial masks global impacts. Such patterns underscore causal limits of isolated interventions, where purported gains from modeled scenarios often exceed real-world outcomes due to unaddressed international spillovers.

Other and Emerging Categories

The British , introduced in 1696 under William III to offset revenue losses from coin clipping and repealed in 1851, levied charges on dwellings proportional to the number of windows, incentivizing behavioral distortions such as bricking up openings to reduce tax liability and thereby altering housing architecture. Salt excises, applied in 18th-century Britain as duties on essential commodities alongside items like soap and leather, exemplified early fiscal reliance on basic goods but generated administrative burdens due to widespread and evasion. Newspaper stamp duties, originating with the 1712 under Queen Anne, imposed escalating taxes on printed sheets and advertisements—reaching 4d per copy by 1815—disproportionately burdening lower-cost publications and prompting evasion through unstamped or reduced-size papers, which suppressed circulation and fueled campaigns against "taxes on knowledge." These historical measures often stemmed from wartime revenue needs but eroded over time amid public resistance to their perceived arbitrariness and interference with daily life or information access. In contemporary contexts, the U.S. imposed a 1% on corporate stock repurchases under the of 2022, applicable to publicly traded domestic corporations for buybacks exceeding issuances after December 31, 2022, with final regulations issued in 2024 requiring reporting via Form 7208 by October 31 of the following year. Proposals in January 2025 sought to raise this rate to 2% or 4% to further curb shareholder returns via buybacks, reflecting debates over capital allocation efficiency. The U.S. excise tax on designated drugs, codified in IRC Section 5000D as part of Medicare Drug Price Negotiation reforms, targets sales by manufacturers of high-cost pharmaceuticals selected for price caps, with proposed regulations released on January 2, 2025, outlining calculation methods based on negotiated maximum fair prices effective from 2026. Digital services taxes in jurisdictions such as France (3% on qualifying revenues since 2019) and the UK (2% on digital marketplaces, search, and social media) levy charges on gross receipts from user data and advertising, often exceeding €750 million in global turnover, though these face challenges from international trade disputes and OECD Pillar One reallocations. Such categories frequently arise from targeted policy agendas, like addressing perceived corporate excesses or healthcare costs, yet exhibit volatility; for instance, the , sweetened beverage of 2017 was repealed after four months amid sharp sales drops, cross-border shopping evasion, and industry , yielding far less revenue than projected ($200 million vs. actual $3.8 million shortfall). This pattern underscores causal links between narrow excises and behavioral responses, including evasion or , limiting their fiscal longevity absent broad enforcement.

Implementation and Administration

Structural Mechanisms (Specific vs. Ad Valorem)

Excise taxes are structured either as specific taxes, levied as a fixed monetary amount per unit of (e.g., per liter, pack, or proof-adjusted volume), or as ad valorem taxes, imposed as a of the good's value or . Specific taxes provide administrative simplicity by avoiding valuation disputes and ensure uniform burden across product variants differing in quality or branding, while ad valorem taxes automatically scale with changes, including or quality upgrades, thereby maintaining real revenue without legislative adjustments. From an economic perspective, specific taxes exhibit greater stability for goods with inelastic , as quantity consumed varies little with hikes, yielding predictable collections tied primarily to volume rather than fluctuating producer prices or margins. In contrast, ad valorem taxes introduce volatility, as depends on value, which can shift due to market conditions, costs, or strategic pricing by producers under ; this can amplify fiscal uncertainty, particularly for elastic goods where quantity responses exacerbate swings. Specific structures also tend to minimize substitution toward premium or untaxed alternatives, enhancing effectiveness in curbing consumption of targeted inelastic vices like , where empirical analyses show stronger impacts and reduced compared to ad valorem equivalents. However, unindexed specific taxes in real terms over time due to ; for instance, the U.S. federal cigarette excise tax has remained fixed at $1.01 per pack since April 1, 2009, losing approximately 25-30% of its by 2025 amid cumulative exceeding 40%. Ad valorem taxes offer progressivity advantages for luxury or differentiated , imposing higher absolute burdens on expensive variants and aligning with equity goals by taxing value-added components like branding, though this can incentivize downshifting to cheaper substitutes, diluting behavioral impacts. Under oligopolistic markets common in excisable sectors, specific taxes often achieve more complete pass-through to consumers with less over-shifting—where prices rise disproportionately to the —compared to ad valorem forms, which interact with nonlinear pricing strategies and yield uneven incidence. analyses confirm that specific excises reduce such over-shifting variability, stabilizing consumer prices relative to intent and minimizing windfalls to producers. For inelastic demands, first-principles incidence holds that specifics dominate by insulating revenue from markup manipulations, whereas ad valorem reliance on value exposes collections to upstream cost pressures or evasion via underreporting. Hybrid approaches combine elements of both, such as volume-based specifics adjusted for attributes like alongside value percentages, to balance stability and adaptability; these are prevalent in alcohol taxation, where European systems often layer category-specific rates (e.g., per hectoliter of pure alcohol) with ad valorem components to address strength variations without full volatility. U.S. federal alcohol excises remain predominantly specific (e.g., $13.50 per proof for distilled spirits as of 2024), but state-level hybrids emerge in jurisdictions blending per-unit levies with sales-value surcharges to mitigate erosion while targeting potency. Empirically, hybrids mitigate specific taxes' vulnerability for durable goods like beverages, though they complicate administration and may dilute the inelastic revenue predictability of pure specifics. Overall, design choice hinges on demand elasticity and fiscal priorities: specifics prevail for corrective aims on staples, ad valorem for value-sensitive luxuries, with causal evidence favoring the former to curb distortions in concentrated markets.

Collection Processes and Enforcement

Excise taxes are imposed and collected primarily at the stage of production or ation, with liability assigned to manufacturers, producers, or importers who must remit payment on behalf of the taxing authority. These entities typically file periodic returns, such as quarterly filings, detailing taxable activities and quantities, followed by direct payment to the revenue agency. To secure deferred payments or ensure compliance during import processes, requirements are often mandated, obligating taxpayers to post financial guarantees against potential non-payment. Physical mechanisms like excise tax stamps are affixed to goods, particularly high-risk items such as alcohol and , to verify payment and enable tracking through the . These stamps serve as evidence of tax discharge and deter diversion by providing a tangible record of fiscal obligation. Modern enforcement incorporates digital tracking systems to monitor movements of excisable goods, especially under duty-suspension arrangements where taxes are deferred until release for consumption. For instance, computerized platforms facilitate real-time reporting of intra-jurisdictional transfers, reducing manual verification needs. Enforcement relies on audits of filed returns and records to detect underreporting or misuse, with penalties applied for failures in timely payment or accurate disclosure. Late payments incur interest and escalating fines, often calculated as a of unpaid amounts per period of delinquency, while substantive violations like improper use of goods trigger additional excise liabilities treated as sales. Administrative costs for excise collection remain low relative to yield—generally under those of income taxes due to the concentrated collection points and simpler verification—facilitating efficient recovery with minimal overhead.

Compliance Challenges and Evasion

Excise taxes on high-mobility goods like and alcohol face significant compliance hurdles due to incentives for evasion, including , counterfeiting, and illicit production, which erode intended and foster underground economies. High tax differentials across borders exacerbate cross-border , as consumers and traffickers exploit price gaps; for instance, states or countries with excise rates exceeding 15-20% of retail price often see illicit shares rise disproportionately, driven by demand elasticity rather than fixed enforcement costs. Empirical studies link such elevated rates to expanded black markets, where evasion correlates with burdens, potentially offsetting fiscal gains and correlating with broader criminal activity. In tobacco markets, evasion manifests prominently through and counterfeit operations. In the , illicit cigarette consumption reached 38.9 billion sticks in 2024, equating to 9.2% of total volume—the highest since 2015—fueled by cross-border flows from low-tax regions like and . an countries experience varying illicit rates, with at 18% despite lower absolute taxes, while higher-tax Western markets like and the saw surges in 2024 due to organized networks. In the United States, states with stringent excise taxes, such as New York, reported over 54% of cigarettes consumed as smuggled in recent estimates, with inbound flows from lower-tax neighbors like dominating; followed at 46.7%, highlighting interstate differentials as a key driver. Alcohol evasion often involves home distillation or informal production, known as , particularly in jurisdictions with prohibitive rates. U.S. federal data from the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau show persistent seizures of illicit spirits, though volumes have declined from peaks like 5,228 cases in to under 100 annually in recent decades, indicating underground persistence amid high compliance costs for small producers. Elevated excise duties, such as successive increases in countries like (125% rise since 2009), have demonstrably boosted and parallel markets, where evasion thrives on weak and consumer preference for untaxed alternatives. Overall, excessive rates not only invite among officials but undermine legal compliance, as the marginal revenue from hikes diminishes against rising illicit substitution, per analyses of elasticity in excisable goods.

Global and Regional Practices

United States

In the United States, excise taxes are levied at both federal and state levels on select goods and services, with federal taxes primarily targeting fuel, alcohol, tobacco, and air transportation. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) administers key federal excises, such as those on motor fuels, via quarterly filings on Form 720, while the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) oversees taxes on distilled spirits, beer, wine, and tobacco products including cigarettes at rates of $1.01 per pack federally. Federal fuel excises include 18.4 cents per gallon on gasoline and 24.4 cents on diesel, deposited into the Highway Trust Fund to support infrastructure. The origins of U.S. federal excises trace to the Excise Whiskey Tax Act of 1791, which imposed rates of 6 to 18 cents per gallon on distilled spirits and provoked the of 1794—a uprising suppressed by federal forces under President , affirming central authority over indirect taxation. States impose supplementary excises with significant variation; for instance, California's gasoline excise stands at 70.9 cents per gallon in 2025, the nation's highest, funding state transportation amid debates over revenue diversion to general funds. Other states like maintain minimal rates, such as 17 cents per pack on cigarettes. Federal excise revenue totaled $101 billion in 2024, comprising about 2% of total federal receipts and primarily financing highways, infrastructure, and deficit reduction rather than dedicated mitigation. For 2025, air transportation excises rose, with the rate on domestic flights increasing to 7.5% of the amount paid plus segment fees, and international departures to $23.30 per amount paid, aimed at bolstering FAA funding. Proposals for new federal excises on certain pharmaceuticals under section 5000D target manufacturer sales of designated drugs, though broader narcotic levies remain state-domain amid debates. Enforcement challenges persist, including cross-border evasion and underreporting, with IRS audits focusing on high-volume producers.

European Union

The 's excise duty framework seeks to harmonize structures and establish minimum rates across member states to minimize distortions in the , primarily through Council Directive 2008/118/EC on general arrangements for excise duties and sector-specific directives. For manufactured , Council Directive 2011/64/EU mandates a minimum excise of €1.80 per 20-cigarette pack alongside a duty comprising at least 60% of the weighted average retail price, with member states required to apply combined rates exceeding these thresholds. Alcohol excises, governed by Directive 92/84/EEC, impose minimum specific rates (e.g., €0.55 per hectolitre of pure alcohol for spirits as of recent alignments), though states retain flexibility to exceed them via ad valorem or specific structures. products fall under Directive 2003/96/EC, setting minimum tax levels based on volume or energy content to approximate environmental costs, but exemptions for sectors like persist, prompting ongoing debates over fiscal equity. Despite these minima, significant rate variations persist, reflecting national priorities and cultural differences, with like and imposing among the highest excises—e.g., rates over €4 per pack and alcohol duties exceeding €50 per of pure alcohol—compared to lower Mediterranean levels in or , where excises hover near the €2 minimum. These disparities, documented in data, fuel of cross-border evasion, including tourist shopping and , with intra-EU flows estimated to cost €10-12 billion annually in lost revenue due to opportunities. Harmonization efforts, such as proposed directive revisions in July 2025 to extend minima to novel products like heated , highlight tensions: while the Commission pushes for uniform health and environmental objectives, member states defend autonomy in rate-setting above floors, citing principles and domestic fiscal needs. Post-2020 developments, amid energy crises triggered by geopolitical events, have accelerated revisions to the Energy Taxation Directive, with a 2021 proposal under the package aiming to raise minima for fossil fuels (e.g., aligning petrol taxes to €0.34 per equivalent) and introduce levies on plastics and emissions to incentivize decarbonization, though progress stalls over resistance from high-energy-import dependent states. Empirical analyses indicate these "green excises" could reduce emissions by 5-10% if adopted, but implementation varies, underscoring the EU's challenge in balancing supranational climate goals against national sovereignty in revenue tools. Overall, while directives curb extreme competition, persistent autonomy allows tailored applications, occasionally exacerbating evasion without fuller convergence.

United Kingdom

In the , excise duties are levied by (HMRC) on goods such as fuel, alcohol, , and emerging categories like vaping products, generating substantial while allowing post-Brexit policy flexibility unbound by EU requirements. Following the UK's exit from the on 1 January 2021, excise administration treats intra-UK movements without prior EU-derived suspensions, enabling deviations such as independent rate adjustments for alcohol and new duties on non-traditional products, diverging from the EU's more uniform structure for items like spirits and . In the 2023-24 year, the theoretical liability for excise duties (covering alcohol, , and oils) stood at approximately £53.4 billion, with an estimated tax gap of £3.1 billion or 5.8% due to evasion and noncompliance. Fuel duties, a major component, have remained frozen at 57.95 pence per since 2011, a policy extended through multiple budgets to mitigate motoring costs amid fluctuating oil prices and post-Brexit supply dynamics. A temporary 5 pence per reduction, first enacted in the 2022 Spring Statement, was prolonged annually thereafter and extended further to 31 2026, forgoing potential inflationary uplifts that would align with pre-Brexit norms. This contrasts with member states' adherence to energy taxation minima under Directive 2003/96/EC, from which the is now exempt. Alcohol excise duties underwent a comprehensive overhaul effective 1 August 2023, shifting to a strength-based banding system calculated per litre of pure alcohol, independent of EU volumetric alignments for certain categories. Rates include £21.78 for , £16.10 for wine and (up to 22% ABV), and £25.67 for spirits, with finer gradations for products exceeding 22% ABV or in draught form to support on-trade sectors; this reform increased duties on stronger wines while reducing them on lower-strength beers, reflecting UK-specific consumption patterns post-separation from -wide structures. Concurrently, the Alcohol Duty Stamps Scheme, inherited from anti-fraud measures and applied to spirits since 2006, was discontinued from 1 May 2025, eliminating mandatory stamping on retail containers to streamline compliance. Tobacco duties maintain high rates with annual adjustments, including hand-rolling tobacco facing an additional escalator beyond retail price index inflation, as legislated in the 2024 Finance Bill to curb consumption without EU-mandated minimums. Historically, excise evolution includes the abolition of the window tax—a levy on glazing introduced in 1696—on 24 July 1851 amid public health concerns over reduced natural light, and progressive phasing out of legacy stamp duties on succession and probate by the late 19th century. Emerging vaping excises mark a post-Brexit innovation, with the Vaping Products Duty set for 1 October 2026 at tiered rates (£1.00 per 10ml nicotine-free, up to £3.00 for higher nicotine liquids), accompanied by mandatory duty stamps from April 2027 to align fiscal treatment with traditional excisables absent EU precedents.

India and Developing Economies

In , central excise duties prior to the implementation of the Tax (GST) on July 1, 2017, were levied under the Central Excise Act of 1944 on domestically manufactured goods, with rates varying by product category but often reaching up to 12-15% ad valorem for many items, while states imposed additional variations through value-added taxes (VAT), entry taxes, and that differed significantly across regions, leading to cascading effects and compliance complexities. Post-GST, most excises were subsumed into the GST framework, but specific excises persist on products, alcohol for human consumption, and , with products subject to a 28% GST rate plus compensation (often exceeding 100% on cigarettes), national calamity contingent , and residual excise elements to maintain high effective tax burdens aimed at curbing consumption. Recent GST Council decisions in September 2025 introduced a 40% slab for sin goods including , pan masala, and aerated drinks, integrating higher levies to offset potential revenue shortfalls while emphasizing deterrence against harmful products. Administrative hurdles in include fragmented enforcement between central GST authorities and state bodies for non-GST excises, compounded by widespread informality where small-scale producers evade registration, resulting in estimated losses of 20-30% of potential collections from and alcohol sectors. Post-GST revenue from integrated excisable goods has grown robustly, with overall GST collections surging 12.6% year-on-year to ₹2.36 crore in April 2025, driven by formalization efforts like matching and e-way bills, yet this growth masks regressivity as lower-income households allocate a higher proportion of expenditure to taxed essentials and sin goods. In broader developing economies, excises form a of fiscal revenue, often comprising 20-40% of collections due to limited bases, but high informality—where 50-70% of economic activity evades formal tracking—facilitates evasion through underreporting production or , as seen in and sectors across and . For instance, Indonesia's 2022 fuel cuts, which raised effective prices by 30% for subsidized fuels amid global energy shocks, indirectly bolstered excise-equivalent revenues by reducing fiscal outlays from Rp 700 trillion ($46 billion) while exposing administrative challenges like black-market diversions and protests, amplifying regressivity in low-income contexts where fuel comprises 10-15% of budgets. indicates excise revenue expansion in these settings supports growth—correlating with 1-2% GDP boosts via formalization—but heightens inequality, as uniform rates burden the poor disproportionately without robust exemptions or compensatory transfers.

Other Notable Systems (Australia, Canada, China)

's excise regime emphasizes automatic adjustments to counter and consumption trends. duties undergo biannual to average weekly ordinary time earnings in March and September, with an additional annual 5% increase imposed from 1 September 2023 through 1 September 2026 to accelerate revenue and deter use. excises, applicable to petrol and diesel, receive quarterly adjustments, yielding a rate of 49.2 cents per litre effective from February 2025 following prior temporary rebates. Canada maintains federal excises on vice goods alongside provincial sales taxes. Following legalization on 17 October 2018, the regime levies the greater of $1 per gram of dried flower or 10% of the producer's selling price, extended proportionally to THC equivalents in extracts and edibles, with revenue shared 75% to provinces. Alcohol and face specific volume-based or ad valorem rates under the Excise Act, 2001, with duties elevated post-February 2018 hikes. China's serves as the primary excise equivalent, targeting 15 categories including , alcohol, , and high-energy vehicles at ad valorem rates from 1% to 56%, collected at production or import stages. These taxes precede the 13% , with no input crediting for consumption tax itself, embedding costs into supply chains and exports, where rebates have been curtailed—for instance, reduced to 9% for refined oils and batteries in December 2024, and eliminated for aluminum and from that date—potentially raising effective export burdens. Environmental excises are expanding, with proposals for specific carbon levies to internalize emissions costs amid reforms. Across these systems, 2024-2025 trends reflect reductions on fuels, reinstating upward excise pressures post-relief periods.

Economic Impacts

Market Distortions and Price Effects

Excise taxes introduce a between the price paid by consumers and the price received by producers, altering relative prices and incentivizing a shift away from the taxed good toward untaxed substitutes, thereby generating through reduced transactions that would have occurred absent the tax. This distortion is particularly pronounced for selective excises on narrow bases, as they amplify inefficiencies compared to broad-based taxes by disproportionately affecting specific markets. The magnitude of depends on the elasticity of and supply; for inelastic goods like and alcohol, quantity reductions are smaller, mitigating but not eliminating the efficiency cost. Empirical studies consistently demonstrate high pass-through of excise taxes to consumer prices, often exceeding 100% in cases of overshifting, where producers raise prices by more than the tax increment to exploit inelastic . For products, analyses of excise hikes reveal full pass-through to prices and overshifting to higher percentiles, with absorption remaining minimal even under varying market conditions. Similar patterns hold for alcohol, as evidenced by a 2002 tax increase in yielding an average pass-through rate of 200%, driven by limited consumer substitution due to formation. Overshifting reflects strategic by firms in oligopolistic markets, further distorting incentives and potentially exacerbating beyond simple models. From a first-principles perspective, excise taxes inherently reduce relative to lump-sum taxes, which impose no behavioral distortions since they cannot be avoided through substitution. Selective excises on inelastic goods, while generating with comparatively lower per dollar raised, still favor broad-based alternatives like value-added taxes to minimize overall economic inefficiency, as the latter spread distortions across more elastic margins without targeting specific sectors. This causal chain underscores why excises, despite their fiscal , elevate production costs and consumer prices in ways that lump-sum equivalents would not, leading to persistent market inefficiencies absent compensatory policy adjustments.

Revenue Dynamics and Fiscal Role

Excise taxes contribute significantly to global fiscal revenues, generating over $2 trillion annually across countries, primarily from levies on tobacco, alcohol, fuels, and vehicles. This figure underscores their role as a supplementary revenue source, often applied to "sin" goods or externalities without necessitating increases in broader income or sales taxes. However, revenue dynamics exhibit cyclical sensitivity, declining during economic recessions as consumption of taxed goods like fuels and vehicles falls with reduced economic activity, though levies on inelastic items such as tobacco maintain relative stability. In the United States, federal excise tax collections are projected to interact with broader fiscal offsets, with income and adjustments mitigating 24.5% of excise revenue changes in 2024, rising to 26.4% by 2034 according to Joint Committee on Taxation estimates. These offsets reflect macroeconomic feedbacks where excise hikes may dampen consumption and thus , limiting net fiscal gains. Globally, earmarking excise proceeds—such as fuel taxes for —remains a common but often illusory practice, as revenues frequently divert to general funds without dedicated linkage, undermining claims of direct funding for specific programs. Base erosion poses ongoing challenges to long-term stability, particularly for fuel excises, where shifts to electric reduce taxable consumption; analysis indicates potential multi-billion-dollar shortfalls in transport revenues as decarbonization advances. For inelastic goods like , however, demand insensitivity to price changes ensures more predictable yields, supporting their use in fiscal planning despite narrower bases. Overall, excises serve as a volatile yet targeted fiscal tool, best positioned to address externalities rather than as a primary stable pillar.

Employment and Growth Consequences

Empirical analyses of excise taxes on , alcohol, and sugar-sweetened beverages consistently indicate minimal net employment effects, countering industry assertions of substantial job losses. Studies across multiple jurisdictions, including the , , and the , have found no significant aggregate employment reductions following tax implementations, with some evidence of net gains from reallocation of and revenues toward labor-intensive sectors. For instance, simulations of alcohol tax increases in U.S. states projected job gains ranging from 621 to 4,583 positions per state, attributable to fiscal expenditures offsetting any contraction in taxed industries. Substitution effects further mitigate losses, as reduced demand in taxed sectors prompts shifts to untaxed alternatives without broader labor market disruption. High excise tax rates, however, impose distortions that elevate production costs and alter , potentially impairing wages and job creation economy-wide. By incentivizing inefficient substitutions away from higher-value uses, excessive rates reduce overall per dollar raised compared to broader-based taxes, leading to contractions in output and employment in affected supply chains. Causal mechanisms include heightened prices curbing elasticity, which contracts capital investment and labor in elastic sectors, though the macroeconomic impact remains limited given the narrow scope of most excise applications. Long-term growth suffers as these distortions compound, diverting resources from productive activities and lowering potential GDP expansion, with from cross-country patterns underscoring that overly punitive rates hinder competitiveness and .

Social and Behavioral Effects

Consumption and Health Outcomes

Excise taxes on products demonstrate a averaging approximately -0.4 in high-income countries, such that a 10% increase typically yields a 4% decline in consumption. For alcohol, elasticities are similarly inelastic overall, but heavy drinkers exhibit reduced responsiveness to tax-induced hikes compared to moderate consumers, limiting the policy's reach among high-risk groups. This pattern holds across multiple studies, where addicted or habitual users prioritize consumption despite elevated costs, often sustaining intake through budgeting adjustments or sourcing cheaper alternatives. Health outcomes from these taxes show partial deterrence, with tobacco excises linked to modest reductions in prevalence—such as 3-5% drops per 10% hike—but minimal long-term cessation among entrenched smokers without complementary interventions. For sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs), taxes correlate with 10-15% sales declines in taxed categories, yet substitution toward untaxed drinks, including artificially sweetened variants, often offsets potential caloric or health benefits, yielding inconsistent impacts on or metrics. Alcohol variations globally reveal further mixed evidence, as consumption dips post-hike but downstream health indicators like rates fluctuate due to behavioral adaptations, , and uneven enforcement, challenging causal claims of uniform gains. Black markets exacerbate these limitations, particularly for high-excise goods like cigarettes, where illicit trade surges with tax differentials, eroding intended consumption curbs and diverting revenue while exposing users to unregulated products of unknown potency. Empirical reviews underscore that while taxes deter initiation among and light users, entrenched patterns persist, rendering deterrence efficacy partial and context-dependent rather than transformative.

Regressivity and Equity Implications

Excise taxes on commodities such as , alcohol, and impose a disproportionately higher burden on lower-income households, as these groups allocate a larger share of their expenditures to such relative to their . Empirical analyses consistently classify excise taxes as regressive, with the effective rate exceeding 9% of for the bottom income quintile in the United States, compared to far lower rates for higher earners. This pattern arises because consumption of taxed "sin goods" like cigarettes and alcohol is more prevalent among low-income populations, amplifying the tax's incidence on those with limited financial flexibility. The equity implications are stark for vulnerable subgroups, including low-income smokers and drinkers, who face elevated effective rates without commensurate behavioral adjustments. Studies indicate that cigarette excise taxes, for instance, extract a greater proportional toll from poor consumers, who exhibit lower quit rates due to factors like persistence and fewer cessation resources, thereby sustaining the regressive impact over time. Similar dynamics apply to alcohol excises, where lower socioeconomic groups bear a heavier relative load, as their consumption patterns do not diminish proportionally with price hikes. This regressivity undermines broader system progressivity, as excises counteract the redistributive effects of income-based levies. Proponents of excise taxes often argue that associated improvements—such as reduced smoking-related illnesses—offset the regressive financial strain by enhancing long-term welfare for low-income groups. However, does not substantiate net positive equity gains, as among heavy, low-income users remains inelastic, leading to sustained consumption and tax payments without proportional health benefits realization. Analyses of and alcohol taxation reveal that while aggregate metrics may improve, the distributional costs fall disproportionately on the poor, who experience neither full cessation nor equivalent access to mitigating substitutes, rendering claims of welfare offset unsubstantiated for affected subgroups. This highlights excise taxes' role in exacerbating income inequality rather than alleviating it through purported secondary effects.

Unintended Consequences (Black Markets, Substitution)

High excise tax rates on goods like and alcohol often exceed consumer price elasticity, prompting evasion through black markets when legal prices become prohibitively expensive relative to demand. In the United States, states collectively lose approximately $5 billion annually in due to smuggling induced by disparate excise rates across jurisdictions, with high-tax areas like New York experiencing inflows from low-tax neighbors or foreign sources. Similarly, in the , the illicit trade results in an estimated €19.4 billion annual tax shortfall, exacerbated by minimum excise floors that widen price gaps and incentivize cross-border and counterfeiting. These markets not only erode intended revenue but foster , violence, and product adulteration, as seen historically during U.S. alcohol (1920–1933), where outright bans—functionally akin to infinite excise rates—spawned bootlegging networks that supplied impure, high-potency , contributing to thousands of annual deaths. Substitution effects arise as consumers pivot to less-taxed or untaxed alternatives, often yielding equivalent or amplified harms without reducing overall vice consumption. For tobacco, elevated cigarette excises drive shifts to roll-your-own tobacco or pipe tobacco, which face lower effective rates in some regimes; U.S. federal taxes on small cigars and roll-your-own were equalized with cigarettes in 2009, yet pipe tobacco and large cigars remain under-taxed, capturing market share and undermining cessation goals. Cross-product elasticity is evident in e-cigarette taxation: higher e-cigarette excises correlate with increased traditional cigarette use among adults, as the relative cost advantage reverses, potentially prolonging nicotine dependence. In alcohol markets, specific excise hikes on distilled spirits—such as Illinois's 2009 increase from $4.50 to $8.55 per gallon—prompted substitution toward lower-taxed beer, with no net decline in overall consumption volume but a reallocation to beverages with different risk profiles, like higher-volume drinking. Modern parallels in excise systems, post-legalization in regions like U.S. states since the , illustrate persistent substitution and persistence: high potency-based taxes (e.g., 15–37% ad valorem plus per-milligram levies) sustain illicit sales at 40–60% of the market in places like as of 2023, where consumers opt for unregulated, higher-THC products evading compliance costs. Such dynamics reveal a core causal mechanism: when taxes distort relative prices beyond elasticity thresholds, demand reallocates to unregulated channels or substitutes, amplifying enforcement burdens and risks like contaminated products or intensified use patterns, without proportionally curbing underlying behaviors.

Criticisms and Debates

Paternalism and Liberty Infringements

Excise taxes on commodities like alcohol, , and sugary beverages are often rationalized through rationales, positing that governments can better safeguard individuals' long-term welfare than the individuals themselves by elevating consumption costs to curb perceived self-destructive behaviors. This framework treats such levies as a form of "soft prohibition," where the state intervenes not merely to internalize externalities like or but to override personal valuations of immediate gratification against future health risks. Critics, drawing from classical liberal principles, reject this presumption of governmental omniscience, arguing that autonomous adults bear the primary responsibility for their choices absent direct harm to non-consenting others, as articulated in John Stuart Mill's which limits interference to cases of interpersonal injury rather than intrapersonal folly. Such taxes inherently infringe upon individual by distorting voluntary exchanges and imposing coercive penalties on lawful transactions between consenting parties, effectively penalizing the exercise of property rights over one's labor and purchases. Historical precedents underscore this tension: the of 1794 arose from frontier farmers' armed opposition to the U.S. federal excise on distilled spirits enacted in 1791, which they decried as an illegitimate intrusion into their distilling practices and a betrayal of revolutionary ideals against arbitrary taxation without representation. The uprising, suppressed by a 13,000-strong militia under President , highlighted excise impositions as flashpoints for assertions of economic sovereignty, with protesters tarring revenue officers and erecting liberty poles to symbolize resistance against centralized fiscal overreach. Philosophically, right-leaning and libertarian perspectives prioritize personal autonomy and market-driven self-correction over state-directed behavioral engineering, viewing paternalistic excises as an erosion of the foundational to pursue as subjectively defined, even if risky. In opposition, health-oriented advocates, frequently aligned with progressive institutions, endorse these taxes as mandates for societal well-being, yet empirical analyses reveal their inefficacy in fundamentally altering consumer —reducing quantities demanded through price elasticity but failing to reprogram underlying preferences or time-inconsistent impulses, as modeled in frameworks that still hinge on unverifiable assumptions about rational deviation. This normative divide persists amid source biases, with academic literature often tilting toward interventionist justifications reflective of prevailing institutional leanings, while independent analyses emphasize the of substituting collective judgment for individual agency.

Regressive Burden and Class Impacts

Excise taxes impose a disproportionate burden on lower- households because these groups allocate a larger share of their to consumption of taxed goods and services, such as , , and alcohol, resulting in effective s that decline as rises. According to analyses of U.S. federal taxes, excise levies are regressive across quintiles, with the lowest- households facing effective rates up to several times higher than those in the top quintile; for instance, low- families devote approximately 7 percent of their to sales and excise taxes combined, compared to about 1 percent for the highest earners. This pattern holds empirically even after increases, as lower- consumers exhibit inelastic demand for essentials like , sustaining the relative burden without significant substitution away from taxed items. The regressive structure erodes disposable income among working-class households without delivering commensurately higher benefits, as public expenditures funded by excises—such as infrastructure from gasoline taxes—are often provided on a per-capita basis rather than scaled to contributions. In contrast to flat-rate income taxes, which distribute burden proportionally to earnings, excises function as ad valorem or specific levies on units consumed, amplifying inequity for those with constrained budgets who cannot easily reduce usage of necessities. Empirical distributional models confirm that this dynamic persists across federal excise categories, with the bottom income quintile bearing around 5-6 percent of total excise liability despite comprising a smaller share of aggregate consumption. Historically, excise taxes emerged as sumptuary measures targeting luxury consumables to signal and restrain upper-class excess, but their modern application to broad-based necessities has inverted this intent, shifting the load onto vulnerable populations who lack alternatives. This evolution overlooks the original class-distinguishing rationale, as contemporary excises on items like —essential for in lower-wage jobs—fail to exempt or rebate for levels, thereby exacerbating rather than mitigating class disparities.

Political Manipulation and Inefficiency

Excise taxes facilitate political manipulation by allowing governments to extract with reduced public scrutiny, as these indirect levies are embedded in product prices and less salient to consumers than direct taxes like or general taxes. This opacity enables policymakers to pursue increases or fiscal adjustments without the political resistance associated with broader tax reforms, often framing hikes as behavioral nudges against "" goods while diverting funds to general budgets. For instance, federal excise taxes on alcohol and , initially tied to sumptuary goals, have historically funded unrelated expenditures, with revenues subject to for earmarks that favor special interests over efficient allocation. Special interest groups exacerbate manipulation through , for exemptions, rate adjustments, or revenue hypothecation that distorts policy toward narrow benefits rather than public welfare. Industries affected by excises, such as producers, employ strategies like product reformulation or legal challenges to minimize liabilities, influencing and undermining intended fiscal or regulatory aims. Empirical of U.S. state-level from 1970 to 2019 reveals limited partisan ideological divergence in excise rates on cigarettes, spirits, and , attributed to interstate and base mobility, suggesting manipulation arises more from competitive fiscal pressures than overt . These taxes exhibit structural inefficiencies, generating high deadweight losses per dollar of due to their discriminatory application on narrow bases, which amplifies behavioral distortions and misallocation compared to broader levies. Volatility stems from consumption elasticity—e.g., declining has eroded U.S. excise revenues despite rate hikes—rendering them unreliable for sustained funding and prompting repeated political interventions that compound fiscal unpredictability. Administrative burdens further erode efficiency; for alcohol excises, disparate rates based on ingredients rather than alcohol content impose compliance costs and collection complexities, with special occupational taxes yielding minimal relative to expenses. Overall, such features incentivize governments to over-rely on excises for short-term gains, fostering cycles of rate escalation and evasion that diminish net fiscal productivity.

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.