RESEARCH PAPER

The wealth effects of smoking

J L Zagorsky

Center For Human Resource Research, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
Jay Zagorsky
Ohio State University, 921 Chatham Lane, Suite 100 Columbus, OH 43221 USA; zagorsky.1{at}osu.edu

Objective: To investigate the impact of smoking on the wealth of US young baby boomers.

Methodology: The research analyses self reported responses of both smoking habits and wealth holdings from a nationally representative sample of US individuals born between 1957 to 1964 (n = 8908). Data are from four waves (1984, 1992, 1994, 1998) of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 cohort, a random survey of individuals conducted by the US Department of Labor using a stratified multistage area sample design.

Results: Regression results show lower net worth is associated with smoking, after holding constant a variety of demographic factors. Respondents who were ever heavy smokers are associated with a reduction in net worth of over $8300 while light smokers are $2000 poorer compared to non-smokers. Beyond this reduction, each adult year of smoking is associated with a decrease in net worth of $410 or almost 4%.

Conclusions: While a causal relation cannot be proven, smokers appear to pay for tobacco expenditures out of income that is saved by non-smokers. Hence, reductions in smoking will boost wealth, especially among the poor.

Abbreviations: AFQT, Armed Forces Qualification Test; NLSY79, National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979

Keywords: debt; net worth; wealth

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Malone, R. E., Yerger, V. B., McGruder, C., Froelicher, E. (2006). "It's Like Tuskegee in Reverse": A Case Study of Ethical Tensions in Institutional Review Board Review of Community-Based Participatory Research. AJPH 96: 1914-1919 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Awofeso, N. (2005). Why fund smoking cessation programmes in prisons?. BMJ 330: 852-852 [Full Text]