The Challenges of Tobacco Fiscal Policy Implementation in Mexico From the Perspective of Key Actors

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Raising tobacco taxes is considered the most effective strategy to avoid smoking initiation and discourage its use, especially among vulnerable groups. However, few low- and middle-income countries have adopted high tobacco taxes. Raising taxes is, therefore, an opportunity to strengthen and accelerate tobacco control. The objective of this study is to analyze the barriers and facilitators to the tobacco tax increase in Mexico. Aims and Methods Based on the Governance Analytical Framework, data were generated through 17 in-depth interviews with key intersectoral actors for fiscal policy. The interviews were transcribed and coded according to Hufty’s theory of governance. Results Robust scientific evidence, intersectoral coordination, and the presence of “champions” boosted progress in tobacco control (facilitators). The main barriers were the incomplete implementation of the World Health Organization—Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO-FCTC) and MPOWER package and lack of commitment (“political will”) by government decision makers and legislators, misinformation about the effects of tobacco taxes, and strong tobacco industry interference. Conclusions Robust evidence is necessary but not sufficient to advance the implementation of the MPOWER (WHO-FCTC) actions. To achieve tobacco tax increases and public policies that protect people from unhealthy products in general, the implementation of policies or legal frameworks against industry interference in the development of public policies is imperative. Implications By analyzing the barriers and facilitators to increasing the tobacco tax in Mexico, this study identifies two key messages: (1) The need to sensitize legislators and the general population to the problem of smoking not only through epidemiological data but also through testimonies that highlight the life experiences and adversities faced by people who smoke. (2) The need for a regulatory framework to prevent industry interference in public affairs and conflicts of interest. The same framework could be very useful for public health policies to control the consumption of ultra-processed food products or alcohol.