ke smoking zone

Tobacco Taxation in Kenya

key message icon

Kenya’s tobacco tax policies score low when compared to best practice. In 2021, Kenya scored 0.88 out of 5 on the Tobacconomics scorecard, where 5 is best practice.

key message icon

The industry-backed tiered tobacco tax policy adopted in 2017, which replaced the previous uniform tax structure introduced in 2015, largely minimized the effectiveness of taxes as a tobacco control tool in Kenya.

key message icon

The implementation of the Excise Goods Management System in 2014 has contributed to a decrease in illicit trade in tobacco products from 15% in 2003 to 5% in  2016.

As such, increased illicit trade can no longer be used as a counter argument against effective tobacco taxation in Kenya. 

The page provides insights on the tobacco taxation policy in Kenya and highlights its impact on prices of tobacco products, consumer habits, health, and government revenues. In addition, it demystifies the illicit trade arguments used by the tobacco industry to oppose tax increases. The key datasets for these analyses were sourced from the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) and the Kenya Global Adults Tobacco Survey 2014.

Increasing tobacco taxes is the most cost-effective method of reducing tobacco consumption. Higher taxes raise the retail price of tobacco products and make them less affordable. They also increase government revenue. In low and middle-income countries, studies have shown that increasing the price of cigarettes by 10% leads to an average 8% decrease in tobacco demand.

However, the structure of the tobacco tax regime greatly determines its effectiveness in achieving public health and revenue goals, with simple, uniform tax structures typically having a greater impact than more complicated tax structures.

Types of Tobacco Taxes

Excise taxes:

  • Ad valorem taxes are levied on the value of the product (e.g., a percentage of the cost, insurance, and freight (CIF) or the ex-factory price).
  • Specific taxes are charged based on quantity (e.g., KES 1,200 per 1,000 cigarettes).

Uniform or Tiered (Differential) tax

  • Uniform excise tax rates are applied to tobacco products at the same rate, regardless of the different characteristics that may apply to them (price level, size, type of packaging, with or without filter, etc.). Uniform taxes can be either specific or ad valorem taxes. 
  • A tiered excise tax varies based on factors such as price, cigarette length, presence of a filter, or a manufacturer’s productive capacity. A tiered tax can apply to both specific and ad valorem excise taxes.

Other tobacco taxes

  • Value-added taxes (VAT), general sales taxes, duties on tobacco product imports and/or exports, and/or other special taxes or levies.

To ensure that cigarettes become less affordable over time, some countries make regular adjustments to specific excise taxes. At a minimum, these adjustments should account for the effect of inflation. These tax adjustments may also take into account income trends, and at times, an additional exogenous tax increase, to raise the prices of tobacco products.

module subsection icon

Evolution of Tobacco Taxation in Kenya

Tobacco tax policy in Kenya has changed frequently over the years due to tobacco industry lobbying.

Four specific progressive tiers based on price


Excise Tax Rates (KES per Mille)









2008 - 2010
2019 - 2022
Four specific progressive tiers based on price
Kenya ratifies the WHO FCTC
Kenya enacts the Tobacco Control Act
Four specific progressive tiers based on price and packs’ physical features
Ad valorem tax with minimum specific floor
Kenya enacts the Excise Duty Act
Uniform specific
Two specific tiers based on physical features
Two specific tiers based on physical features; inflation adjustments
Adopts the Kenya Finance Act



Tax System

* Progressive tax tiers are tax rates that increase (or progress) as the cigarette price increases. Mille refers to 1000 cigarette sticks.

Section 12 of the Tobacco Control Act 2007 requires the Minister in charge of Finance to adopt tobacco taxation policies that contribute to reducing tobacco use in Kenya. The changes to Kenya’s tobacco taxation policy over the years have reduced its effectiveness as a tobacco control tool.

Between 2007 and 2015,  Kenya had a tiered tax system, where the tax rates for the various tiers were based on the physical characteristics of cigarettes as well as their retail selling price (RSP). 

In 2015, the tax policy changed to a uniform specific excise tax on all tobacco products and the taxes were adjusted annually for inflation.

This brought Kenya’s tobacco tax policy in line with the best practices recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO). As a result of this tax change, the prices of tobacco products increased. In addition, a tax on e-cigarettes was introduced. 

In April 2017,  the tax structure was once again changed to a tiered system, where the two tiers were based on the physical features of the cigarettes (i.e., filtered and unfiltered cigarettes).

This change came about due to heavy lobbying by the tobacco industry. 

In 2019, there was a 14.1% increase in the taxes levied on tobacco, with further inflationary adjustments of 4.94% in 2020

and 4.97% in 2021. Currently, the tax system is still based on two tiers (filtered and unfiltered cigarettes). Cigars, cheroots, cigarillos, and e-cigarettes are taxed at a separate rate. In July 2022, taxes were increased by 10% for filtered and non filtered cigarettes. In addition, an inflationary adjustment of 6.3% took effect on 1st October 2022.

module subsection icon

Ranking of Kenya’s Tobacco Tax Policies

Kenya’s tobacco tax policies score low when compared to best practices and other countries globally.

Tobacco Taxation Country Score

The lower the score, the weaker the tax structure

  • Tobacco Taxation Score|
  • 0 - 0.4
  • 0.5 - 0.99
  • 1 - 1.49
  • 1.5 - 1.99
  • 2 - 2.49
  • 2.5 - 2.99
  • 3 - 3.49
  • 3.5 - 3.99
  • 4 - 4.49
  • 4.5 - 5
  • No Data
    Kenya - Tax Score: 0.88
    Rep. of Congo
    Eq. G.
    Rep. of Congo
    Eq. G.

    Source: Tobacconomics, 2021

    In 2021, Kenya scored 0.88 out of 5 on the Tobacconomics Tax Scorecard.

    Kenya’s score is lower than the average score for middle-income (1.78) and lower-middle-income (1.42) countries as well as the African region (1.36). Within East Africa, Rwanda (1.63) and Burundi (1.38) performed better than Kenya in 2021.

    Based on WHO’s biannual ‘Report on the Global Tobacco Epidemic’, the Tobacconomics Tax Scorecard uses a five-point scale to score cigarette tax policy and outcomes. Four main indicators are measured, namely; i) cigarette price, ii) share of retail cigarette prices that are accounted for by taxes, iii) change in cigarette affordability, and iv) tax structure. The score ranges from 0-5, where a score of 0 indicates a very poor tobacco tax regime and a score of 5 indicates a tax regime that implements the best practices.

    Cigarette Tax Scorecard Key Components

    Cigarette Price (2014-2020)

    2014201620182020Years012345Cigarette Price

    Change in Affordability (2014-2020)

    2014201620182020Years012345Change in Affordability

    Share of Taxes (2014-2020)

    2014201620182020Years012345Share of Taxes

    Tax Structure (2014-2020)

    2014201620182020Years012345Tax Structure

    Source: Tobacconomics Cigarette Tax Scorecard

    The components of Kenya’s tobacco tax policy that have a low score and need improvement are change in affordability (score of 0 from 2014-2020), share of tax in RSP (dropped from 1.5 in 2018 to 0.5 in 2020), and tax structure (drastically declined from 4 in 2016 to 1 in 2020).

    This section analyses the impact of Kenya’s tobacco taxation policies on the price of cigarettes, their affordability over time, the demand for tobacco products, health outcomes from tobacco use, and government revenue from tobacco taxes. It compares the past with projections based on 2 scenarios drawn from the Tobacco Excise Tax Simulation Model (TETSiM) developed for Kenya.

    In both scenarios, we assume that the tobacco industry overshifts the excise tax by raising the retail selling prices (RSPs) by between 20% and 25%, a higher margin than the increase in the excise taxes. In effect, tobacco firms pass on the additional cost to consumers. We assume an overshift of the tax because overshifting is likely to occur in markets with a single company, or a limited number of companies

    as is the case in Kenya.

    Tobacco Excise Tax Simulation Model (TETSiM) Scenarios

    Scenario 1:

    • This is the status quo.
    • Assumption: tobacco excise taxes do not increase over the next five years (except to incorporate annual inflationary adjustments). 
    • Cigarettes become more affordable, tobacco consumption increases, and associated health burdens rise over the next five years.

    Scenario 2:

    • This is the recommended tax policy for Kenya. 
    • Assumption: the tobacco excise tax increases by the sum of the inflation rate, the gross domestic product (GDP) growth rate, and 10% each year. The aim is to reduce the affordability of tobacco over time. 
    • Tobacco consumption drops, prevalence rates decline, deaths are averted, and revenue increases if the recommended tax rates are adopted.

    Between 1990 and 2018, the real (inflation-adjusted) price of cigarettes in Kenya declined. The country’s tax policies did not have the desired impact on price.

    Nominal and Real Prices of Sportsman Cigarettes (One Packet) in Kenya, (1990-2018)

    199019921994199619982000200220042006200820102012201420162018Years050100150200250300Price per pack (KES)

    Source – KNBS, 2022

    The nominal price (the retail selling price that does not take inflation into account) for a packet of cigarettes has been increasing since 1990. However, the real price (adjusted for inflation) has been decreasing over the same period. The lack of significant adjustments in the tax structure that accounted for inflation and GDP growth between 2000 and 2018 allowed tobacco products to become more affordable to consumers in Kenya.

    Effect of Tax Policy on Demand for Cigarettes in Kenya 

    Real Price Per Pack of the Most Sold Brand (2023-2028)

    202320242025202620272028Years150200250300350400450Real (2023) retail price of the MSB in KES267274282290299309267289316345378413

    Total Consumption (All Brands Including Illicit: 2023-2028)

    202320242025202620272028Years150200250300350400450Total Consumption (in million packs)192197203208213216192188185181177171

    Note: Scenario 1: Status quo (no tax increases except annual inflationary adjustment). Scenario 2: Recommended tax policy (annual excise tax increases by the sum of the inflation rate, the GDP growth rate, and 10%)

    Source: TETSiM, as at 19th April 2023.

    In Scenario 1 (current tax policy is maintained), the real (i.e., inflation-adjusted) retail price of the most sold brand in Kenya slightly increases from KES 267 in 2023 to KES 309 by 2028. Despite this slight increase in price, consumption would rise from 192 million packs in 2023 to 216 million packs by 2028 due to growth of disposable incomes. 

    In scenario 2, however, real retail prices would increase by a higher margin, rising from KES 267 to KES 413 over the same period. In addition, consumption would decline from 192 million packs in 2023 to 171 million packs by 2028. In both scenarios, the assumption is that the industry is likely to increase their retail prices by more than the percentage change in the tax rate. 

    The methods of taxing novel tobacco products have changed since their introduction in 2015, as highlighted in the timeline below.

    Excise Duty Act 2015


    Excise duty rate


    KES 3,000 per unit


    KES 2,000 per unit

    June 2021
    November 2021
    Excise Duty Act
    Legal Notice 239/2018
    Finance Act
    Finance Act
    Legal Notice 217/2021
    Finance Act

    Sources of the data in above timeline: Excise Duty Act 23 of 2015, Legal Notice 239 of 2018 (Excise Duty Act 2015); Finance Act 23 of 2019, Finance Act 2021/2022, Legal Notice 217 of 2021, Finance Act 2022/2023.

    In Kenya, the tax on the eliquid refers to liquid nicotine for e-cigarettes. A large proportion of adolescents start using e-cigarettes because of the flavours in e-liquids rather than the nicotine content. E-cigarette dealers can evade taxes on the eliquid by selling liquid solutions that contain only flavors or are described as nicotine free.

    The World Bank

    therefore recommends that:

    • All e-liquids used in e-cigarettes should be taxed irrespective of whether they contain nicotine or not.
    • The taxable products should be clearly defined to state what constitutes an e-cigarette product.
    • Batteries, chargers, and charging cords if they are sold together with an e-cigarette product or if they are packaged together as one saleable item should be taxed.
    • The tax should cover the various parts of the device, including the cartridges if sold separately.
    • Enforcement agencies should carry out compliance checks of retailers selling novel products to ensure applicable taxes have been paid and untaxed products are seized.

    To prevent tobacco traders from evading tax by misdeclaring e-devices and their accessories at ports of entry, Kenyan authorities should make use of the appropriate Harmonized System (HS) Codes outlined by the World Customs Organization. They should apply HS Code 2403 to classify e-devices (this code defines other manufactured tobacco and manufactured tobacco substitutes, homogenized or reconstituted tobacco, and tobacco extracts and essences). Conversely, the authorities should avoid using HS Code 3824 (which defines chemical products, including those consisting of natural ingredients) or HS Code 8543 (which defines electrical machines and other apparatus). 

    Illicit trade is the production, import, export, distribution, purchase, sale, or possession of a product that fails to comply with the law.

    Illicit trade poses a serious threat to public health because it increases access to – often cheaper – tobacco products, thus fueling the tobacco epidemic and undermining tobacco control policies. It also substantially lowers government revenues and may contribute to the funding of international criminal activities.

    module subsection icon

    Types of Illicit Tobacco Products in Kenya

    There are two components of illicit tobacco trade in Kenya: (1) the illegal import (i.e., smuggling) of products, and (2) the evasion of domestic taxes. To unlawfully move tobacco products into the country, traders may avoid customs officials at official exit and entry points, bribe customs officials, use illegal crossing points, under-declare or under-value goods at import points, or make  false declarations about the country of origin.

    With respect to domestic tax evasion, traders may fraudulently declare cigarettes for export (only to sell the products tax free domestically), fail to declare the domestic production of cigarettes or the import of raw tobacco and finished products, misreport the value of products, or supply counterfeit cigarettes to the domestic market. All these methods are designed to avoid the payment of taxes.

    There are various types of illicit tobacco products:

    ref 22 ref 23 ref 24 Ref 23 Ref 24

    module subsection icon

    Prevalence and Sources of Illicit Trade within the East Africa Region

    Kenya, at 5%, has the lowest levels of illicit trade within the East African region. Uganda has the highest level at 20%.

    Prior to the implementation of Kenya’s track and trace system, the illicit cigarette trade caused an estimated annual loss of  KES 1 billion (US$11.3 million) in taxes.

    A different source estimated the cost of illicit cigarette trade at KES 70 billion (US$ 790 million), taking into account tax revenue and job and investment losses. More than 47.7 million counterfeit cigarette sticks valued at KES 239 million (with  an estimated lost tax revenue of KES  152 million) were seized by the KRA, Anti-Counterfeit Agency, and the Kenya Bureau of Standards between 2009 and 2013. Currently, most avenues of tax evasion, based on either imports or domestic production, have been sealed. The remaining 5% of illicit trade mainly occurs along Kenya’s western border with Uganda, and along Kenya’s southern border with Tanzania.

    The main sources and destinations of illicit trade within the East African region have evolved over time. The map shows the flow of illicit tobacco products within the region.

    Illicit Tobacco Trade Flows within Eastern and Central Africa


    World Bank Group, Confronting Illicit Tobacco Trade: A Global Review of Country experiences; Chapter on Kenya;

    orange source icon

    Unholy Alliance; links Between Extremism and Illicit trade in East Africa’ a report by the Counter Extremism Project –

    green source icon

    Titeca, Kristof, Luk Joossens, and Martin Raw. “Blood Cigarettes: Cigarette Smuggling and War Economies in Central and Eastern Africa.” Tobacco Control 20, no. 3 (2011): 226–32.

    red source icon

    Unholy Alliance; links Between Extremism and Illict trade in East Africa’ a report by the Counter Extremism Project –

    red source icon

    Global Initiative against Transnational Crime. Where there’s smoke, there’s fire: investigating the illicit cigarette trade from Tanzania to Kenya [Internet]. Global Initiative against Transnational Crime. 2021. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:

    Kenya is both a source and a destination for illicit tobacco products. According to Interpol, Kenya is one of the production sites for cheap whites which are exported to other countries.

    There have been press reports of Supermatch cigarettes sold in the Ugandan market with a ‘Made in Uganda’ label that were manufactured in Kenya but packed in Uganda. Further, these cigarettes are smuggled to the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and back to Uganda. Evidence suggests that the proceeds of these sales in DRC are used to fund rebel groups. In Kenya, most avenues of illicit trade (covering both imports and domestic production) have been sealed since 2014.

    module subsection icon

    Kenyan Policy Measures to Counter Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products

    Comprehensive interventions by the government of Kenya have been successful in reducing the levels of the illicit tobacco trade within the country. This paves way for increasing tobacco taxes to WHO-recommended levels to reduce affordability.

    In 2003, the Kenyan government audited the domestic tobacco industry and discovered the various ways tax evasion was occurring, including undeclared production, products falsely declared for export, undeclared imports, underreported values, and counterfeit production.

    The government adopted a series of measures, as shown in the timeline below:

    Paper Tax Stamps

    There was a 52% rise in legal cigarette and cigar sales from 2003 to 2004 and an increase in monthly excise tax revenue from KES  230 million (approximately US$ 2.1 million) to KES  350 million (approximately US$ 3.2 million) over the period.

    By 2005, tax evaders had begun to counterfeit tax stamps, causing a drop in revenue from the legal market and prompting the adoption of further reforms and closure of three domestic tobacco factories.

    Paper Tax Stamps
    Electronic Cargo Tracking System
    Electronic Goods Management System
    New Customs Management System
    Introduction to Scanners
    Ratification of Illicit Trade Protocol

    This section addresses and counters the arguments the tobacco industry in Kenya uses to oppose tobacco tax increases. The industry’s arguments against tax increases are typically not supported by evidence or are greatly exaggerated.

    These arguments are also intended to secure support from non-tobacco industry actors, such as trade unions, other business associations, tobacco growers, organizations concerned about minority rights and poverty, and policymakers concerned about social justice and the economic impact of tobacco taxes.

    cargo containers
    thumbs down icon

    Myth: Increased tobacco taxes will increase illicit trade and erode any anticipated government revenue gains.

    thumbs up icon

    Fact: Taxes and prices of tobacco products have only a limited impact on the illicit cigarette market share at the country level.

    thumbs down icon

    Myth: Cigarette tax increases will hurt the economy by reducing cigarette sales, tobacco-related employment, and retailer revenues.

    thumbs up icon

    Fact: Individuals that stop consuming cigarettes generate employment and boost revenues across other sectors as they have more money to spend on other products.

    court scales
    thumbs down icon

    Myth: Regular increases in tobacco taxes that are pegged to inflation create an unpredictable regulatory environment and are a barrier to tobacco industry foreign direct investment.

    thumbs up icon

    Fact: The tobacco industry’s arguments are not intended to ensure steady government revenues. Rather, the industry aims to generate predictable sales volumes and profits.

    empty wallet
    thumbs down icon

    Myth: High tobacco taxes are retrogressive and will hurt the poor by making the products expensive.

    thumbs up icon

    Fact: Tobacco use especially harms the poor.

    thumbs down icon

    Myth: By increasing tobacco taxes, the government unduly interferes with personal choice by denying smokers their right to smoke (‘nanny state’ argument).

    thumbs up icon

    Fact: The tobacco industry uses the ‘nanny state’ to rationalize its harmful commercial practices and deflect attention from its responsibility for the harm caused by tobacco products.

    Chaloupka FJ, Drope J, Siu E, Vulovic V, Stoklosa M, Mirza M, et al. Cigarette tax scorecard [Internet]. Tobacconomics. 2020. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Ross H. A global review of country experiences. Kenya - Confronting illicit cigarette trade. In: Dutta S, editor. World Bank Group [Internet]. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    World Health Organization. World No Tobacco Day 2014 - Raise taxes on tobacco [Internet]. World Health Organization. 2014. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    World Health Organization. WHO technical manual on tobacco tax policy and administration [Internet]. World Health Organization, editor. World Health Organization; 2021. 306 p. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Chaloupka FJ, Yurekli A, Fong GT. Tobacco taxes as a tobacco control strategy. Tob Control [Internet]. 2012 Mar; 21(2):172–80. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Kenya Revenue Authority. Excise Duty Act 2015: Section 10 [Internet]. Kenya Revenue Authority. 2021. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    National Taxpayers Association. Study on effects of tobacco taxation on tobacco consumption in Kenya [Internet]. National Taxpayers Association. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    HKTDC Research. Kenya: KRA raises excise rates on 31 goods [Internet]. HKTDC Research. 2020. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Kenya Revenue Authority. Inflation adjustment on specific rates of excise duty - November 2021 [Internet]. Kenya Revenue Authority. 2021. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Kenya Government. The Finance Act, 2022 [Internet]. Kenya Revenue Authority. 2022. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Kenya Revenue Authority. The excise duty act, 2015 (No. 23 of 2015): Adjustment of rates of excise duty for inflation [Internet]. Kenya Revenue Authority. 2022. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    TETSiM is a tax simulation model designed by researchers at the University of Cape Town’s Research Unit on the Economics of Excisable Products (REEP), to predict the fiscal and health outcomes if a country’s current tobacco excise tax structure is changed.
    Ross H, Tesche J. Undermining government tax policies: Common strategies employed by the tobacco industry in response to increases in tobacco taxes Updated, April 2016 [Internet]. Tobacconomics. 2016. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Nargis N, Stoklosa M, Drope J, Ikamari L, Rahedi Ongango J, Fong GT, et al. Cigarette taxation in Kenya at the crossroads: evidence and policy implications. Waterloo, ON: University of Waterloo [Internet]. 2015. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    World Health Organization. WHO Report on the Global Tobacco Epidemic 2015: Raising Taxes on Tobacco [Internet]. World Health Organization; 2015. 198 p. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    International Institute for Legislative Affairs. Making tobacco taxes work for Kenya: Proposals for the national budget 2019/2020 [Internet]. International Institute for Legislative Affairs. 2019. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    World Bank Group. Reducing Tobacco Use through Taxation: The Experience of the Republic of Korea [Internet]. World Bank Group. 2018. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    World Bank Group. Working note: Ecigarette use and taxation [Internet]. World Bank Group. 2019. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Wanyonyi E, Kidiya R. Focus on Kenya: Wiping out illicit trade [Internet]. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    World Health Organization. Protocol to eliminate illicit trade in tobacco products [Internet]. World Health Organization. 2013. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Eastern and Southern Africa Anti-Money Laundering Group. Smuggling of cigarettes and associated money laundering in the ESAAMLG region [Internet]. 2018. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    OECD. Illicit Trade: Converging Criminal Networks [Internet]. OECD; 2016. 262 p. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Drope J, Schluger N, Cahn Z, Drope J, Hamill S, Islami F, et al. The Tobacco Atlas [Internet]. The Tobacco Atlas. 2018. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Ross H, Vellios N, Smith KC, Ferguson J. A closer look at “Cheap White”cigarettes. Tobacco [Internet]. 2016. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Roberts I. An unholy alliance: links between extremism and illicit trade in East Africa [Internet]. Counter Extremism. 2021. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Dutta S. Confronting illicit tobacco trade: a global review of country experiences. Washington, DC: The World Bank [Internet]. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Muchangi J. Kenya: cigarette smuggling in country [Internet]. All Africa. 2012. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Kieyah J, Shibia AG, Gitonga A. Situational analysis of illicit trade in tobacco products in Kenya. Nairobi: ILA [Internet]. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Global Initiative against Transnational Crime. Where there’s smoke, there’s fire: investigating the illicit cigarette trade from Tanzania to Kenya [Internet]. Global Initiative against Transnational Crime. 2021. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Interpol. Countering illicit trade in tobacco products: A guide for policy makers [Internet]. 2014. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Titeca K, Joossens L, Raw M. Blood cigarettes: cigarette smuggling and war economies in central and eastern Africa. Tobacco Control [Internet]. 2011 May ;20(3):226–32. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Ngeywo CM. Control of supply chain, tax stamps and other tracking technology, and enforcement: the experience of Kenya and relevance for SADC countries. 3-5 June 2012; Gaborone.
    Muthaura EK. Tobacco tax administration country experiences in Kenya. Workshop on Tobacco Tax Administration and Collection in Benin and Togo; 06-07 August 2013; Togo.
    World Health Organization. Tobacco industry tactics: tax policies [Internet]. World Health Organization. 2019 [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Ross H. Tobacco industry strategies to reduce tax liability [Internet]. 2018. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Petit P, Nagy MJ. How to design and enforce tobacco excises? [Internet]. International Monetary Fund; 2016. 17 p. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    National Research Council, Committee on the Illicit Tobacco Market: Collection and Analysis of the International Experience, Reuter P, Majmundar M. Understanding the US illicit tobacco market: characteristics, policy context, and lessons from international experiences [Internet]. National Academies Press; 2015. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    World Health Organization. Guidelines for Implementation of Article 6 of the FCTC [Internet]. World Health Organization. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Warner KE. The economics of tobacco: myths and realities. Tobacco Control [Internet]. 2000 Mar; 9(1):78–89. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Huang J, Chaloupka FJ. The economic impact of state cigarette taxes and smoke-free air policies on convenience stores. Tob Control [Internet]. 2013 Mar; 22(2):91–6. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Efroymson D, Ahmed S, Townsend J, et al. Hungry for tobacco: an analysis of the economic impact of tobacco consumption on the poor in Bangladesh. Tobacco Control [Internet]. 2001 Sep ;10(3):212–7. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Donfouet HPP, Mohamed SF, Malin E. Socioeconomic inequality in tobacco use in Kenya: a concentration analysis. International Journal of Health Economics and Management [Internet]. 2021 Jun; 21(2):247–69. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Ciapponi A. Systematic review of the link between tobacco and poverty [Internet]. World Health Organization. 2011 [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Tobacconomics. Tobacco & poverty policy brief [Internet]. Tobacconomics. 2018. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    The Union. Tobacco and poverty factsheet [Internet]. The Union. 2015. [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from:
    Coggon J, Middleton J, Tahzib F, Viens AM. Crying “nanny state” is a way of crushing sensible public discussion [Internet]. BMJ. 2018 [Cited 17 January 2023]. Available from: