Evaluations of compliance with California's first tobacco sales bans and tobacco marketing in restricted and cross-border stores.

INTRODUCTION: Beverly Hills and Manhattan Beach were the first California cities to end tobacco sales. Previous research assessed retailers' perceptions of the laws. This study is the first to evaluate compliance (Study 1), assess whether branded or unbranded tobacco cues remain, and examine cigarette price/discounts in cross-border stores (Study 2). METHODS: Each of four data collectors requested Marlboro or e-cigarettes (randomly assigned) in all restricted stores (n=33) until four attempts were exhausted or a violation occurred. Follow-up visits recorded whether former tobacco retailers advertised tobacco or contained unbranded cues. In a random sample of 126 cross-border stores (half within 1 mile of no-sales cities and half 2-4 miles away), data collectors recorded price of Marlboro and presence of cigarette discounts. Mixed models (stores within tracts), tested for differences between near and far stores, adjusting for store type and median household income. RESULTS: Compliance was 87.5%: three stores sold Marlboro ($8, $10, $10) and one sold Puff Bar ($16). Tobacco-branded items and unbranded tobacco cues remained in one store each. Mean Marlboro price was $10.61 (SD=1.92) at stores within 1 mile of no-sales cities, averaging y0.73 more than at stores farther away (p<0.05). However, odds of advertising cigarette discounts did not differ between stores nearby and farther from no-sales cities. CONCLUSION: Nearly all retailers complied with tobacco sales bans within 6 to 12 months of implementation. In addition, retail tobacco marketing was nearly eliminated in the two cities. There was no evidence of price gouging for Marlboro cigarettes in cross-border stores. IMPLICATIONS: Evidence from two early adopters of tobacco sales bans suggests that such local laws can be implemented effectively in California, although results from these high-income cities in a state with a strong tobacco control record limits generalizability. Enforcement involving routine purchase attempts rather than visual inspection for tobacco products is recommended. Although Beverly Hills and Manhattan Beach are each surrounded by communities where tobacco sales persist, there was no evidence of price gouging for cigarettes or greater presence of discounts in cross-border stores. Evaluations of the economic impacts and public health benefits of tobacco sales bans are much needed.

Online Purchase Attempts of Flavored E-Cigarettes to Minors in California Before and After Senate Bill 793.

This survey study assesses whether the online purchase attempt completion rate of e-cigarettes changed after passage of California Senate Bill 793.

"I think we can do without [tobacco]": support for policies to end the tobacco epidemic among California adolescents.

INTRODUCTION: The tobacco endgame, policies aiming to end the commercial tobacco epidemic, requires sustained public support, including among youth. We assessed endgame support among California (USA) adolescents, including their reasons and associated participant and policy-specific factors. METHODS: Teens, Nicotine and Tobacco Project online surveys (n=4827) and focus groups were conducted in 2021 and 2022 among California residents aged 12-17 years. Cross-sectional survey participants were asked their agreement level with eight policy statements related to tobacco and/or cannabis sales restrictions, use in public places and use in multiunit housing. Ordered logistic regression modelled level of agreement according to respondent characteristics, behaviours and statement content. Qualitative data were collected through focus groups (n=51 participants), which were analysed to provide insight into support for different policies. RESULTS: Most survey participants agreed or strongly agreed with tobacco product sales restrictions (72%-75%, depending on the policy), bans on use in public spaces (76%-82%) and smoke-free (79%) and vape-free (74%) apartment buildings. Support was stronger among younger, female, Asian and tobacco non-using participants and for policies directed at 'tobacco' (vs 'vapes' or cannabis), at flavoured tobacco (compared with all tobacco), and when statements featured 'should end' (vs 'not allowed'). Focus group participants who were supportive viewed policies as protecting children from harmful products, while those less supportive cited concerns about limiting adults' freedoms and unintended consequences. CONCLUSIONS: Most participants supported strong tobacco control policies. Public communication that promotes broader endgame benefits besides protecting youth and accelerates industry denormalisation may counter youth concerns and further bolster their support.

Evaluating the Impact of Strong and Weak California Flavored Tobacco Sales Restriction Policies on the Tobacco Retail Environment.

PURPOSE: Evaluate success of local flavored tobacco (FT) policies in reducing availability of FT products in California. DESIGN: Matched-jurisdiction cross-sectional design compared availability of FT at licensed tobacco retailers (LTR) in jurisdictions with and without such policies in 2013 and 2019. Flavor policy jurisdictions were split into strong and weak groups using Flavored Tobacco Policy Rating Rubric. SETTING: 32 local California jurisdictions. SUBJECTS: Final sample included 306 LTR in 2013 and 1441 LTR in 2019. LTR were classified as convenience store, liquor store, pharmacy, small market, supermarket, gas station booth, tobacco/vape product store, or other. MEASURES: Retail availability of menthol cigarettes and flavored non-cigarette tobacco. ANALYSIS: Logistic regression analysis including covariate (store type) determined whether differences existed in availability of FT in jurisdictions with and without FT policies. Percentage change assessed difference in proportion of retailers that sold FT in 2013 (i.e. before-policies-passed) and in 2019 (i.e. after-policies-became-effective). RESULTS: Strong flavor-policy jurisdictions significantly differed from matched no-policy jurisdictions in availability of menthol cigarettes (OR = .04, 95% CI: .02-.08) and flavored non-cigarette tobacco (OR = .07, 95% CI: .05-.11). From 2013 to 2019, these jurisdictions experienced significant declines in menthol cigarettes (87.9% to 35.4%) and flavored non-cigarette tobacco sales (63.8% to 37.0%). CONCLUSION: Strong FT sales restriction policies appear to be effective in reducing availability of FT, thereby creating a healthier retail environment in California.

Sources of flavoured e-cigarettes among California youth and young adults: associations with local flavoured tobacco sales restrictions.

PURPOSE: This study compares access to flavoured JUUL and other e-cigarettes from retail, online and social sources among underage and young adult e-cigarette users who live in California jurisdictions that restrict sales of flavoured tobacco with the rest of the state. METHODS: An online survey used social media advertisements to recruit participants (n=3075, ages 15-29) who lived in one of nine jurisdictions that restrict sales (n=1539) or in the rest of state, and oversampled flavoured tobacco users. Focusing on past-month e-cigarette users (n=908), multilevel models tested whether access to flavoured JUUL and other e-cigarettes from retail, online and social sources differed by local law (yes/no) and age group (15-20 or older), controlling for other individual characteristics. RESULTS: The percent of underage users who obtained flavoured JUUL and other e-cigarettes in the past month was 33.6% and 31.2% from retail, 11.6% and 12.7% online, and 76.0% and 70.9% from social sources, respectively. Compared with underage and young adult users in the rest of California, those in localities that restrict the sales of flavoured tobacco were less likely to obtain flavoured JUUL from retail sources (Adjusted OR=0.54, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.80), but more likely to obtain it from social sources (Adjusted OR=1.55, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.35). The same pattern was observed for other brands of flavoured e-cigarettes. CONCLUSION: Although local laws may reduce access to flavoured e-cigarettes from retail sources, more comprehensive state or federal restrictions are recommended to close the loopholes for online sources. Dedicated efforts to curtail access from social sources are needed.

Impact of Local Flavored Tobacco Sales Restrictions on Policy-Related Attitudes and Tobacco Product Access.

BACKGROUND: As of September 2020, more than 300 state and local jurisdictions restrict the sales of flavored tobacco, with some including menthol. AIMS: To evaluate the impact of local ordinances restricting the sale of flavored tobacco, we surveyed Californians regarding policy support and perceived access to flavored tobacco. METHODS: In 2019, we conducted an online survey of 3,075 California youth and young adults recruited via social media, about half of whom lived in a policy jurisdiction. Logistic regressions assessed differences on propensity score-weighted outcomes, policy support, and perceived access. RESULTS: Most respondents indicated agreement with almost all policy support statements. Although policy respondents were less likely than rest-of-California respondents to report perceived difficulty in buying flavored cigars, flavored vape users in policy jurisdictions were more likely than those in the rest of California to report perceived difficulty in buying flavored e-liquid. Regardless of jurisdiction, certain priority subgroups were significantly more likely to report perceived difficulty in accessing flavored cigars, flavored vaping products, flavored e-liquid, and menthol cigarettes. DISCUSSION: With some exceptions, these findings demonstrate that among vape users in policy jurisdictions and priority subgroups, there is a higher likelihood of reporting perceived difficulty to access flavored tobacco products. CONCLUSIONS: Findings might be an early indication of shifts in social norms about flavored tobacco products in California, which could gain traction as local sales restriction ordinances proliferate throughout the state and a statewide flavored-tobacco sales restriction goes into effect.

The changing retail landscape for tobacco: dollar stores and the availability of cheap cigarettes among tobacco-related priority populations.

INTRODUCTION: Dollar stores are rapidly altering the retail landscape for tobacco. Two of the three largest chains sell tobacco products in more than 24 000 stores across the USA. We sought to examine whether dollar stores are more likely to be located in disadvantaged neighbourhoods and whether dollar stores charge less for cigarettes than other tobacco retailers. METHODS: Data were collected from a statewide random sample of licensed tobacco retailers in California (n=7678) in 2019. Logistic regression modelled odds of a census tract containing at least one dollar store as a function of tract demographics. Linear mixed models compared price of the cheapest cigarette pack by store type, controlling for tract demographics. RESULTS: Census tracts with lower median household income, rural status and higher proportions of school-age youth were more likely to contain at least one dollar store. The cheapest cigarette pack cost less in dollar stores compared with all store types examined except tobacco shops. Estimated price differences ranged from $0.32 (95% CI: 0.14 to 0.51) more in liquor stores and $0.39 (95% CI: 0.22 to 0.57) more in convenience stores, to $0.82 (95% CI: 0.64 to 1.01) more in small markets and $1.86 (95% CI: 1.61 to 2.11) more in stores classified as 'other'. CONCLUSIONS: Dollar stores may exacerbate smoking-related inequities by contributing to the availability of cheaper cigarettes in neighbourhoods that are lower income, rural and have greater proportions of youth. Pro-equity retail policies, such as minimum price laws and density reduction policies, could mitigate the health consequences of dollar stores' rapid expansion.

Impact of California's tobacco and cannabis policies on the retail availability of little cigars/cigarillos and blunt wraps.

BACKGROUND: Recent changes in California's tobacco and cannabis policies could impact the retail availability of little cigars/cigarillos (LCCs) and blunt wraps that are used for blunt smoking. This study was intended to test whether tobacco flavor bans and minimum pack sizes of LCCs have reduced tobacco availability in California jurisdictions, whereas, permissive policies on sales and marketing of cannabis increased availability. METHODS: Measures of retail availability of LCCs and blunt wraps were obtained from the 2016-2019 longitudinal sample of licensed tobacco retailers (LTRs, n = 4062) from California's Healthy Stores for Healthy Communities campaign. Additional data sources included the California Cannabis Local Laws database and geographic location of 1063 cannabis retailers used for constructing a spatial index of accessibility to the LTRs. Two-level generalized structural equation models were developed to assess effects of store- and jurisdiction-level predictors of change in tobacco availability (+, -, no change). RESULTS: Neither permissive cannabis policies nor accessibility to cannabis retailers were associated with an increase in retail availability of the tobacco products. Enactment of a tobacco flavor ban, however, was associated with reduced availability of LCCs and blunt wraps, which was more pronounced in jurisdictions that had permissive cannabis policies (i.e. policy interaction). CONCLUSIONS: A tobacco flavor ban may be an effective strategy to reduce retail availability of LCCs, blunt wraps and possibly other tobacco in California jurisdictions. This finding is of particular relevance as the tobacco industry has successfully petitioned for a referendum vote on California's statewide flavor ban in the 2022 election.

Are California's Local Flavored Tobacco Sales Restrictions Effective in Reducing the Retail Availability of Flavored Tobacco Products? A Multicomponent Evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: Flavored tobacco appeals to new users. This paper describes evaluation results of California's early ordinances restricting flavored tobacco sales. METHODS: A multicomponent evaluation of proximal policy outcomes involved the following: (a) tracking the reach of local ordinances; (b) a retail observation survey; and (c) a statewide opinion poll of tobacco retailers. Change in the population covered by local ordinances was computed. Retail observations compared availability of flavored tobacco at retailers in jurisdictions with and without an ordinance. Mixed models compared ordinance and matched no-ordinance jurisdictions and adjusted for store type. An opinion poll assessed retailers' awareness and ease of compliance with local ordinances, comparing respondents in ordinance jurisdictions with the rest of California. RESULTS: The proportion of Californians living in a jurisdiction with an ordinance increased from 0.6% in April 2015 to 5.82% by January 1, 2019. Flavored tobacco availability was significantly lower in ordinance jurisdictions than in matched jurisdictions: menthol cigarettes (40.6% vs. 95.0%), cigarillos/cigar wraps with explicit flavor descriptors (56.4% vs. 85.0%), and vaping products with explicit flavor descriptors (6.1% vs. 56.9%). Over half of retailers felt compliance was easy; however, retailers in ordinance jurisdictions expressed lower support for flavor sales restrictions. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of California's population covered by a flavor ordinance increased nine-fold between April 2015 and January 2019. Fewer retailers in ordinance jurisdictions had flavored tobacco products available compared to matched jurisdictions without an ordinance, but many still advertised flavored products they could not sell. Comprehensive ordinances and retailer outreach may facilitate sales-restriction support and compliance.

Implementation of a comprehensive flavoured tobacco product sales restriction and retail tobacco sales.

OBJECTIVE: San Francisco's comprehensive restriction on flavoured tobacco sales applies to all flavours (including menthol), all products and all retailers (without exemptions). This study evaluates associations of policy implementation with changes in tobacco sales in San Francisco and in two California cities without any sales restriction. METHODS: Using weekly retail sales data (July 2015 through December 2019), we computed sales volume in equivalent units within product categories and the proportion of flavoured tobacco. An interrupted time series analysis estimated within-city changes associated with the policy's effective and enforcement dates, separately by product category for San Francisco and comparison cities, San Jose and San Diego. RESULTS: Predicted average weekly flavoured tobacco sales decreased by 96% from before the policy to after enforcement (p<0.05), and to very low levels across all products, including cigars with concept-flavour names (eg, Jazz). Average weekly flavoured tobacco sales did not change in San Jose and decreased by 10% in San Diego (p<0.05). Total tobacco sales decreased by 25% in San Francisco, 8% in San Jose and 17% in San Diego (each, p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: San Francisco's comprehensive restriction virtually eliminated flavoured tobacco sales and decreased total tobacco sales in mainstream retailers. Unlike other US flavoured tobacco policy evaluations, there was no evidence of substitution to concept-flavour named products. Results may be attributed to San Francisco Department of Health's self-education and rigorous retailer education, as well as the law's rebuttable presumption of a product as flavoured based on manufacturer communication.

Mind the Gap: Changes in Cigarette Prices After California's Tax Increase.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether California's 2017 cigarette tax increase was passed onto smokers equally. METHODS: Auditors recorded 4 cigarette prices in the same random sample of licensed tobacco retailers (N = 1049) before the tax increase (January-March 2017) and after (April-September 2018): Natural American Spirit (ultra-premium), Newport menthol (premium), and Pall Mall (value) all from the same manufacturer, and Marlboro (premium). Ordinary least squares regressions examined how the gap in prices (increase greater or less than $2.00 tax) varied by market segment and neighborhood demographics, controlling for store type and months since implementation. Paired t-tests assessed whether industry/retail revenue (price in excess of state and federal excise taxes) increased. RESULTS: Over-shifting (increase greater than tax) was evident for all 4 brands and was significantly greater for ultra-premium (Mean = $0.40, SD = 0.75) than premium (Mean = $0.25, SD = 0.78) and greater for premium than value brand (Mean = $0.16, SD = 0.67). However, under-shifting (increase less than tax) was evident for Newport in African-American neighborhoods and Pall Mall in Hispanic neighborhoods. After the tax increase, prices were significantly more likely to be discounted and significantly more stores advertised a discount on cigarettes. CONCLUSION: California's tax increase was not passed onto consumers equally. Non-tax mechanisms to increase price could support intended effects of tobacco taxes.

Evaluation of California's 'Tobacco 21' law.

INTRODUCTION: California's law raising the minimum tobacco sales age to 21 went into effect on 9 June 2016. This law, known as 'Tobacco 21' or 'T21', also expanded the definition of tobacco to include electronic smoking devices. This paper describes the T21 evaluation plan and initial evaluation results. METHODS: An evaluation plan and logic model were created to evaluate T21. A tobacco retailer poll was conducted 7 months after the law went into effect to assess awareness, support and implementation; an online survey of California adults was fielded to provide data on tobacco use and attitudinal changes before and after T21 implementation; and tobacco purchase surveys were conducted to assess the retailer violation rate (RVR). Multivariate models estimated the odds of RVR and odds of being aware, agreeing with and observing advertisements related to T21. RESULTS: Seven months after the T21 effective date, 98.6% of retailers were aware of the law and 60.6% supported the law. Furthermore, 66.2% of retailers agreed that people who start smoking before 21 would become addicted to tobacco products. The RVR using youth decoys under age 18 statistically decreased from 10.3% before T21 to 5.7% after T21 (P=0.002). Furthermore, the RVR using young adult decoys ages 18-19 was 14.2% (95% CI 9.3% to 19.1%) for traditional tobacco and 13.1% (95% CI 10.2% to 16.1%) for electronic smoking devices. CONCLUSIONS: Survey findings suggest that the high awareness and support for the law may have contributed to reducing illegal tobacco sales to youth under 18 and achieving widespread retailer conformity with the new law disallowing sales to young adults under 21.

Neighborhood Variation in the Price of Cheap Tobacco Products in California: Results From Healthy Stores for a Healthy Community.

BACKGROUND: Retail marketing surveillance research highlights concerns about lower priced cigarettes in neighborhoods with a higher proportion of racial/ethnic minorities but focuses almost exclusively on premium brands. To remedy this gap in the literature, the current study examines neighborhood variation in prices for the cheapest cigarettes and a popular brand of cigarillos in a large statewide sample of licensed tobacco retailers in a low-tax state. METHODS: All 61 local health departments in California trained data collectors to conduct observations in a census of eligible licensed tobacco retailers in randomly selected zip codes (n = 7393 stores, completion rate=91%). Data were collected in 2013, when California had a low and stagnant tobacco tax. Two prices were requested: the cheapest cigarette pack regardless of brand and a single, flavored Swisher Sweets cigarillo. Multilevel models (stores clustered in tracts) examined prices (before sales tax) as a function of neighborhood race/ethnicity and proportion of school-age youth (aged 5-17). Models adjusted for store type and median household income. RESULTS: Approximately 84% of stores sold cigarettes for less than $5 and a Swisher Sweets cigarillo was available for less than $1 in 74% of stores that sold the brand. The cheapest cigarettes cost even less in neighborhoods with a higher proportion of school-age residents and Asian/Pacific Islanders. CONCLUSIONS: Neighborhood disparities in the price of the cheapest combustible tobacco products are a public health threat. Policy changes that make all tobacco products, especially combustible products, less available and more costly may reduce disparities in their use and protect public health. IMPLICATIONS: Much of what is known about neighborhood variation in the price of combustible tobacco products focuses on premium brand cigarettes. The current study extends this literature in two ways, by studying prices for the cheapest cigarette pack regardless of brand and a popular brand of flavored cigarillos and by reporting data from the largest statewide sample of licensed tobacco retailers. Significantly lower prices in neighborhoods with a higher proportion of youth and of racial/ethnic groups with higher smoking prevalence are a cause of concern. The study results underscore the need for policies that reduce availability and increase price of combustible tobacco products, particularly in states with low, stagnant tobacco taxes.