What drives retailer compliance with menthol bans
This diagram explores factors affecting tobacco retailer compliance, emphasizing how policy support and enforcement may increase retailer compliance. It shows reinforcing loops where retailer compliance with a menthol ban results in lower availability of restricted menthol products. It also visualizes balancing loops where reduced availability causes frustration among menthol users due to perceived inconvenience, which may lower retailer compliance. By understanding these dynamics, policymakers can focus on strong city council support, leadership from impacted communities, community awareness-building campaigns, and understanding tobacco industry counter-tactics to enhance retailer compliance.
Cited references
Facilitators included strong city council support, leadership from impacted communities, community awareness-building campaigns, and understanding tobacco industry counter-tactics
Facilitators included strong city council support, leadership from impacted communities, community awareness-building campaigns, and understanding tobacco industry counter-tactics
Facilitators included strong city council support, leadership from impacted communities, community awareness-building campaigns, and understanding tobacco industry counter-tactics
During the follow-up period, 85.5% of retailers reported that educational visits and 62.2% reported that the MAHB flavoured product guidance list were the most helpful for achieving compliance.
Between the first and last rounds of compliance checks, violations for sale of tobacco to a minor decreased by 12 percentage points to 2%
Initially, smokers reacted negatively because they were frustrated with the inconvenience of having to travel to find menthol cigarettes.
There was also concern that cigarettes would cost more at tobacco shops. They’re already a dollar and something higher than… the [convenience] stores. So it’s like they’re trying to take advantage and I don’t like being taken advantage of. (Female, 43)
Some felt they were being unfairly treated and did not understand why restrictions singled out menthol and did not apply to non-menthol tobacco products. … if you take the menthol but you leave the regular that’s just stupid. ... and I ain’t gonna lie, it gave me an attitude. How are you gonna take the menthol but you gonna leave everybody else a cigarette? It just don’t make no sense. (Female, 45)
Point prevalence cessation rates were similar between groups
Further, we found a moderate negative correlation between the proportion of the menthol packs per census tract and the distance to exempt tobacco retailers (r = -0.66, p = .05). As the distance between census tracts and retailers increased, the proportion of menthol cigarettes decreased.
Menthol smokers were less likely to support a ban on menthol (aOR = 0.18, 95% CI: 0.08–0.43)
Menthol smokers were less likely to support a ban on menthol (aOR = 0.18, 95% CI: 0.08–0.43) and on all additives (aOR = 0.24, 0.12–0.49)
Under a menthol ban, the percent that would remain combustible users was expected to drop from 80.6% to 50.5% (40.3% nonmenthol cigarettes, 6.5% illicit menthol cigarettes, and 3.7% nonmenthol cigars), a 30.1 percentage point (pp) reduction.
Under a menthol ban, the percent that would remain combustible users was expected to drop from 80.6% to 50.5% (40.3% nonmenthol cigarettes, 6.5% illicit menthol cigarettes, and 3.7% nonmenthol cigars), a 30.1 percentage point (pp) reduction. About a quarter (a 15.6 pp increase) were expected to switch to NNDP use, while 3.7% would switch to smokeless tobacco and 21.7% would quit all tobacco use.
Under a ban, experts expected 55.1% to remain combustible users (45.7% nonmenthol cigarettes, 5.7% illicit menthol cigarettes, and 3.7% nonmenthol cigars), resulting in a reduction in combustible product use of 20.1 pp. One-fifth (20.0%) were expected to switch to NNDP use (a 10.3 pp increase from the Status Quo), while 2.4% would switch to smokeless tobacco (a 0.2 pp decrease) and 22.5% quit all tobacco use (10 pp increase).
. Menthol smokers were more likely than otherwise similar nonmenthol smokers to disagree with a menthol ban (50.5% vs 31.2%; P
Approximately one-third (30.7%) perceived that the menthol ban helped them with smoking cessation.
“males, older adults, Blacks and Hispanics, those with higher levels of educational attainment, those with lower levels of household income, those with a shorter history of smoking, those who used nonmenthol cigarettes or nonflavored cigars, those who smoked less than daily, those who had moderate or high levels of dependence on smoking, and those who did not obtain cigarettes or cigars solely from local retailers were all more likely to be supportive of both bans compared with their counterparts.”
All groups were predominantly supportive of a smoking ban in restaurants, with highest support reported by menthol smokers (73.5%), and lowest by other flavoured cigarette smokers (63.3%). Almost half of all smokers supported the ban on smoking in bars and pubs, with the support varying significantly by the type of cigarette smoked (56.1% among menthol, 45.4% among other flavoured cigarette smokers).
The most divisive issue between menthol smokers and other smokers was that of banning additives, including flavourings, in cigarettes, with only 25.1% of menthol smokers supporting such a law, compared to 49.9% of other flavoured cigarette smokers.
