January 15, 2010
		Pursuant to Elections Code Section 9005, we have 
		reviewed the proposed initiative (File No. 09‑0097). This measure would 
		increase excise taxes on cigarettes and use these revenues to fund 
		various health research and tobacco-related programs.
		Background
		Tobacco Taxes
		Existing Tax Rate. Current state 
		law imposes excise taxes on cigarettes and other tobacco products. The 
		state's cigarette tax is currently 87 cents per pack (with an equivalent 
		tax on other types of tobacco products) and is levied on cigarette 
		distributors who supply cigarettes to retail stores. The proceeds are 
		used for both General Fund and certain special fund purposes.
		The total 87 cents per pack tax is made up of the 
		following components:
		
			- 
			
Fifty cents per pack pursuant to the California 
			Children and Families First Act of 1998. This measure, enacted by 
			the voters that year as Proposition 10, supports early childhood 
			development programs.
 
			- 
			
Twenty-five cents per pack pursuant to the 
			Tobacco Tax and Health Protection Act. This initiative, enacted by 
			the voters as Proposition 99 in 1988, increased the cigarette tax by 
			25 cents per pack, and provided that the tax on other tobacco 
			products be raised commensurately with this and any future tax on 
			cigarettes. These revenues are allocated to tobacco education and 
			prevention efforts, tobacco-related disease research programs, and 
			health care services for low-income uninsured persons, as well as 
			for environmental protection and recreational resources.
 
			- 
			
Ten cents per pack for the state General Fund.
 
			- 
			
Two cents per pack enacted through a separate 
			measure approved by the Legislature and Governor in 1993 to create 
			the Breast Cancer Fund, which supports research efforts related to 
			breast cancer and of breast cancer screening programs for uninsured 
			women.
 
		
		Sales of cigarettes and other tobacco products 
		also are subject to the sales and use tax, which is imposed on their 
		price including excise taxes.
		Existing Backfill Provisions. Part 
		of the Proposition 10 revenues are used to "backfill" or offset any 
		revenue losses experienced by Proposition 99's health-related education 
		and research programs and the Breast Cancer Fund due to decreased 
		consumption of tobacco products resulting from Proposition 10's tax 
		increase. (Revenue reductions to Proposition 99 health care and 
		resources programs were not backfilled under the provisions of 
		Proposition 10.) The revenue reductions occur because an increase in the 
		price of cigarettes generally reduces cigarette consumption and results 
		in more sales for which taxes are not collected, such as smuggled 
		products and out-of-state sales.
		Proposal
		New State Tobacco Tax Revenues
		The average retail price of a pack of cigarettes 
		currently is roughly $5 in California, including all taxes. This measure 
		increases the existing excise tax on cigarettes by $1 per pack effective 
		90 days after its passage. Existing state law requires the Board of 
		Equalization (BOE) to increase taxes on other tobacco products—such as 
		loose tobacco and snuff—in an amount equivalent to any increase in the 
		tax on cigarettes. Thus, this measure would also result in a comparable 
		increase in the excise tax on other tobacco products. The measure does 
		not specify how revenues from increased excise taxes on other tobacco 
		products would be used. Under current law, those revenues would be 
		deposited in the Cigarette and Tobacco Products Surtax Fund and used to 
		support Proposition 99 programs.
		How Additional Tobacco Revenues Would Be Spent
		Receipts from the tobacco tax increases would be 
		deposited in a new special fund created by the measure called the 
		California Cancer Research and Life Sciences Innovation Trust Fund. 
		After compensating existing tobacco tax programs for any losses due to 
		the imposition of the new tax, the monies would be distributed from the 
		trust fund among five funds as follows:
		
			- 
			
Hope 2010 
			Research Fund. Sixty percent of the funds would be used to 
			provide grants and loans to support research on prevention, 
			diagnosis, treatment, and potential cures for tobacco-related 
			diseases such as cancer and heart disease.
 
			- 
			
Hope 2010 
			Facilities Fund. Fifteen percent would be used to provide 
			grants and loans to build and lease facilities and provide capital 
			equipment for research on tobacco-related diseases.
 
			- 
			
Hope 2010 
			Smoking Cessation Fund. Twenty percent would be used for 
			tobacco prevention and cessation programs administered by the 
			California Department of Public Health (DPH) and the California 
			Department of Education.
 
			- 
			
Hope 2010 Law 
			Enforcement Fund. Three percent would be allocated to state 
			agencies to support law enforcement efforts to reduce smuggling, 
			tobacco tax evasion, illegal sales of tobacco to minors, and to 
			otherwise improve enforcement of existing law.
 
			- 
			
Hope 2010 
			Committee Account. Two percent would be deposited into an 
			account that would be used to pay the costs of tax collection and 
			expenses of administering the measure.
 
		
		Committee Established to Administer Trust Fund
		The trust fund would be overseen by a nine-member 
		Cancer Research Citizen's Oversight Committee established by the 
		measure. The committee would be composed of four members appointed by 
		the Governor, three of whom are directors of designated cancer centers; 
		two members appointed by DPH; and three chancellors from certain 
		University of California campuses where biomedical scientific research 
		is conducted.
		Authority Granted to the Committee. 
		The measure gives the committee the authority to develop a long-term 
		financial plan including an annual budget and to establish a process for 
		soliciting, reviewing, and awarding grants and loans for researchers and 
		facilities. The committee would have the authority to appoint a chief 
		executive officer and other employees. The committee also would have the 
		authority to make final decisions on awards of loans and grants and to 
		establish policies regarding intellectual property rights arising from 
		research funded by this measure.
		Tax Collection and Administrative Costs. 
		The committee would be authorized by this measure to reimburse BOE from 
		the Hope 2010 Committee Account for the cost of collecting the new tax 
		levy. This account would also be used to pay for any expenses of 
		administering the act, such as hiring employees.
		Accountability Measures. The 
		measure would require the committee to issue an annual report to the 
		public that included information on its administrative expenses, the 
		number and amount of grants and loans provided, and a summary of 
		research findings. The committee would also be required to commission an 
		independent financial audit that would be provided each year to the 
		State Controller, who would then review the audit and publicly report on 
		the review. The State Controller would also provide the committee with 
		reports that set forth the allowable costs for general administration of 
		the trust fund.
		The measure includes conflict-of-interest 
		provisions that govern the conduct of committee members, and includes 
		specific criminal penalties for anyone convicted for the misuse of trust 
		fund monies.
		Other Expenditure Rules
		Committee Administers Trust Fund. 
		Under this measure, the committee would be authorized to administer the 
		trust fund. The funds allocated under this measure would not be subject 
		to appropriation by the Legislature through the annual state budget act, 
		and thus, amounts would not be subject to change by actions of the 
		Legislature and Governor.
		Transfers Permitted From Facilities Fund. 
		In the event the committee determined that there was a surplus in the 
		Hope 2010 Facilities Fund, the measure authorizes the committee to 
		transfer those monies to the Hope 2010 Research Fund, the Hope 2010 
		Smoking Cessation Fund, or the Hope 2010 Law Enforcement Fund.
		New Backfill Provisions. The 
		measure requires the transfer of monies from the trust fund to backfill 
		any losses that occur to the Cigarette and Tobacco Products Surtax Fund 
		(Proposition 99), the California Children and Families First Fund 
		(Proposition 10), the Breast Cancer Fund, and the General Fund that 
		directly result from imposition of the additional tax.
		Fiscal Effects
		This measure is likely to have a number of fiscal 
		effects on state and local governments.
		Impacts on State and Local Revenues
		Revenues Will Be Affected by Consumer 
		Response. Our revenue estimates assume that the distributors of 
		tobacco products, who actually remit the excise tax, largely pass along 
		the excise tax increase of $1 per pack to consumers. In other words, we 
		assume that the prices of tobacco products would be raised to include 
		the excise tax increase. This would result in various consumer 
		responses. The price increase is likely to result in consumers reducing 
		the quantity of taxable tobacco products they purchase. Consumers could 
		also change the way they acquire tobacco products so that fewer 
		transactions are taxed, such as through Internet purchases or purchases 
		of out-of-state products.
		The magnitude of these consumer responses is 
		uncertain given the size of the proposed tax increase. There is 
		substantial evidence regarding the response of consumers to small and 
		moderate tax increases on tobacco products in terms of reduced tobacco 
		consumption. However, the increase in taxes proposed in this measure is 
		greater than experienced previously in the state. A reasonable 
		projection of consumer response is incorporated into our revenue 
		estimates, but these estimates are still subject to uncertainty given a 
		variety of factors, including the large tax change involved.
		New Excise Tax Revenues. Estimated 
		revenues from current excise taxes on cigarettes and other tobacco 
		products are about $850 million a year. We estimate that the increase in 
		excise taxes required by this measure would raise about $450 million in 
		2010‑11 (partial-year effect from January 1 through June 30, 2010) and 
		about $855 million in 2011‑12 (the first full-year impact). Our estimate 
		of the allocation of new excise tax revenues is shown in Figure 1 below. 
		The excise tax increase would raise somewhat less revenue each year 
		thereafter, due to the well-established trend of declining per capita 
		cigarette consumption in the state. The higher tax also would reduce 
		revenues from the existing excise tax, as discussed further below.
		
			
				
					| 
					    | 
				
				
					| 
					 Figure 1 
					Allocation of New 
					Tobacco Tax Revenues  | 
				
				
					| 
					 (Dollars in 
					Millions)  | 
				
				
					| 
					  Backfill  | 
					
					  Allocation  | 
					
					 
					2011-12 Funding (Full Year)  | 
				
				
					| 
					 Backfill of Proposition 99, 
					Proposition 10,  
					General Fund, and Breast Cancer Account  | 
					
					 To be determined by BOE  | 
					
					 $75  | 
				
				
					| 
					 Account/Fund  | 
					
					    | 
					
					    | 
				
				
					| 
					 Research Fund  | 
					
					 60 percent of remaining funds  | 
					
					 $468  | 
				
				
					| 
					 Facilities Fund  | 
					
					 15 percent of remaining funds  | 
					
					 117  | 
				
				
					| 
					 Smoking Cessation Fund  | 
					
					 20 percent of remaining funds  | 
					
					 156  | 
				
				
					| 
					 Law Enforcement Fund  | 
					
					 3 percent of remaining funds  | 
					
					 23  | 
				
				
					| 
					 Committee Account  | 
					
					 2 percent of remaining funds  | 
					
					 16  | 
				
				
					| 
					   Total Tobacco Tax Funding Allocations  | 
					
					    | 
					
					 $855  | 
				
				
					| 
					    | 
				
				
					| 
					 
					   BOE = Board 
					of Equalization.  | 
				
				
					| 
					    | 
				
			
		 
		Effects on Existing Tobacco Excise Tax 
		Revenues. The decline in consumption of tobacco products 
		caused by this measure would similarly reduce revenues from the existing 
		tobacco taxes. The measure ensures that revenues for the existing 
		tobacco taxes do not decline due to lower cigarette consumption caused 
		by the new excise tax. We estimate that this allocation of backfill 
		funding would initially amount to about $75 million annually.
		In addition to its allocation of backfill 
		funding, Proposition 99 programs would receive additional revenues 
		because of the existing provision in state law under which any cigarette 
		tax increase triggers an the automatic increase in the taxes collected 
		on other tobacco products. We estimate that this factor would result in 
		a revenue gain for Proposition 99 programs of about $45 million 
		annually.
		Effects on Excise Tax Collection. 
		As discussed above, the measure would deposit 3 percent of total 
		revenues into a Law Enforcement Fund to support law enforcement efforts. 
		These funds would be used to support increased enforcement efforts to 
		reduce tax evasion, counterfeiting, smuggling, and the unlicensed sales 
		of cigarette tobacco products; increased enforcement of existing laws; 
		and efforts to reduce sales of tobacco products to minors. These 
		activities would probably have a minor impact on the amount of revenues 
		collected through the excise tax.
		Effect on State Sales Tax Revenues. 
		Sales taxes are levied on the final price of cigarettes and other 
		tobacco products, including all excise taxes. The higher price of 
		cigarettes resulting from the new excise tax, therefore, would increase 
		state General Fund revenues. We estimate that the state's General Fund 
		sales tax revenues would increase by about $22 million annually.
		Effects on Local Revenues. Local 
		governments would likely experience an annual increase in sales tax 
		revenues of approximately $10 million.
		Impact on State and Local Government Costs
		The state and local governments incur costs for 
		providing (1) health care for low-income persons and (2) health 
		insurance coverage for state and local government employees. 
		Consequently, changes in state law that affect the health of the general 
		populace—and low-income persons and public employees in particular—would 
		affect publicly funded health care costs.
		The use of tobacco products has been linked to 
		various adverse health effects by federal health authorities and 
		numerous scientific studies. This measure is likely to result in a 
		decrease in the consumption of tobacco products because of its 
		provisions increasing the cost of these products and curbing tobacco 
		use. To the extent that these changes affect publicly funded health care 
		programs, they are likely to reduce state and local government health 
		care spending on tobacco-related diseases.
		However, this measure may have other fiscal 
		effects that may partially or fully offset these cost savings. For 
		example, the state and local governments may incur future costs for the 
		provision of health care and social services that may otherwise not have 
		occurred, such as long-term care for individuals who avoid 
		tobacco-related diseases and live longer. Thus, the net fiscal impact of 
		this measure on state and local government costs is unknown.
		Summary
		The measure would have the following major 
		impacts:
		
			- 
			
Increase in new 
			cigarette tax revenues of about $855 million annually by 2011‑12, 
			declining slightly annually thereafter, for various health research 
			and tobacco-related programs.
 
			- 
			
Increase of about 
			$45 million annually to existing health, natural resources, and 
			research programs funded by existing tobacco taxes.
 
			- 
			
Increase in state 
			and local sales taxes of about $32 million annually.
 
		
        
Return to Initiatives and Propositions 
Return to Legislative Analyst's Office Home Page