DOCSLIB.ORG

Alcohol in the Shadow Economy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Alcohol in the Shadow Economy Alcohol in the Shadow Economy Unregulated, Untaxed, and Potentially Toxic Figures provided by Euromonitor International JUNE 2018 1 UNRECORDED ALCOHOL Alcohol in the Shadow Economy Alcohol in the Shadow Economy Taxonomy of Unregulated It is in everyone’s interest to bring unregulated and Unrecorded Alcohol alcohol into the legal, regulated sphere. Alcohol production and trade exist both within and by adulterated alcohol serve as a reminder outside of government regulation; the relative size of that unregulated alcohol can cost lives 3. Regulated RECORDED ALCOHOL each depends on the region of the world and social, cultural, and economic factors. Both segments are SOCIETAL COST: Unregulated and illicit Licit beverage alcohol products produced and sold within a regulatory framework and reflected in official statistics of well established and people often – knowingly and alcohol has the greatest impact on the poorest either the country where they are produced, the country where they are consumed, or both. Thus, in some cases, alcohol unknowingly – interact fluidly with both of them. and most vulnerable in society, whether in the considered recorded in the country of production may not be recorded in the country of consumption, and vice versa. world’s poorer or wealthier nations. Therefore, The regulated alcohol market is recorded in bringing unregulated alcohol into the regulated government statistics; unregulated alcohol, which sector can contribute to breaking the cycle of UNRECORDED ALCOHOL is largely illegal, is more difficult to assess and falls ill health and to reducing health inequalities. into the “unrecorded” sphere (see Taxonomy of LEGAL CROSS-BORDER TRADE OR SHOPPING Unregulated and Unrecorded Alcohol). This segment ECONOMIC COST: Illicit alcohol is responsible Beverage alcohol licitly purchased outside of, and brought into, is complex and diverse and includes everything for significant fiscal loss to government. The a market for the personal use of the consumer. from high-quality artisanal homebrew to illicit combined fiscal loss in just 18 of the countries drinks that may contain methanol or other toxic included in this report adds up to more than USD Shared ingredients. In 2014, the World Health Organization $1.8 billion. Illegal alcohol, particularly counterfeit Unregulated INFORMAL ALCOHOL Objective: (WHO) issued its Global Status Report on Alcohol and smuggled products, can erode confidence Beverage alcohol produced outside of a regulatory framework and whose production and Bring Unregulated and Health and estimated, based on 2010 figures, in government standards, enforcement, and in consumption tend to follow cultural and artisanal practices. Includes home production. Alcohol into the that unrecorded alcohol made up an average the integrity of legitimate, regulated brands. May be licit or illicit, depending on the laws governing a particular jurisdiction. Regulated Fold 25% of all alcohol consumed worldwide [2]. Tackling the unregulated market is everyone’s CONTRABAND/SMUGGLED ALCOHOL Alcohol produced and sold illegally outside of business; governments, communities, and legitimate Shared Alcohol with original branding that has been illegally imported/smuggled into a jurisdiction producers share a commitment to reducing harmful Objective: government regulation is the most problematic part and sold, evading tariffs/customs. Includes beverages brought across the border either drinking and to common objectives: bringing Tackle of unrecorded alcohol; it is untaxed, circumvents in excess of the applicable traveler’s allowance regulation or via smuggling. Illicit Alcohol restrictions around availability, is of inconsistent unregulated alcohol into the regulated fold and quality, and, depending on the ingredients used putting a stop to illegal production and trade. These COUNTERFEIT ALCOHOL to make it, is even potentially toxic. This report objectives can only be achieved where there is an Fraudulent imitations of legitimate branded products, including refilling, falsification, and considers these wide-reaching implications and enabling regulatory framework that allows legitimate tampering. These beverages infringe the intellectual property rights of legitimate producers. brings together recent data on the illicit market, businesses to thrive and does not encourage a shadow economy. Partnerships between government, TAX LEAKAGE compiled by the global market research firm Euromonitor International. While illicit alcohol is also the private sector, and civil society in a whole-of- Illicit Legally produced alcohol beverages on which the required excise widespread across Asia and parts of Europe, this society approach can help promote a virtuous circle tax was not paid in the jurisdiction of production. report focuses on data from Africa and Latin America. of growth and health that is in everyone’s interest. NON-CONFORMING ALCOHOL Unregulated alcohol is more widespread in lower- Products that are not compliant with production processes, guidelines, or labeling legislation. % income countries than in more affluent ones. Yet, Low Income 45 Includes products produced with denatured alcohol or ilicit industrial alcohol. whether in mature or emerging economies, it is Lower-Middle Income 41% SURROGATE ALCOHOL largely consumed in some of the world’s poorest Upper-Middle Income 25% Alcohol or alcohol-containing products not meant or sold for human consumption but that are communities and, because it lacks quality and High Income 8% consumed as substitutes for beverage alcohol. May be regulated and legal for different purposes. production standards, may contribute to an already significant problem of ill health. While home-produced artisanal alcohol may be part of cultural heritage UNREGULATED ALCOHOL Adapted from IARD Taxonomy of Unrecorded Alcohol[1]. and largely unproblematic, the illicit sector is not IS DISPROPORTIONATELY The International Alliance for Responsible Drinking (IARD) is a not-for-profit organization dedicated to addressing harmful drinking worldwide and only large but also comes at a significant cost. PREVALENT IN LOWER- promoting responsible drinking, amongst those who choose to drink. IARD is supported by its member companies from all sectors of the regulated INCOME COUNTRIES [2,4] alcohol industry – beer, wine, and spirits – in their common purpose of being part of the solution to reducing the harmful use of alcohol. For more HUMAN COST: The deaths in early 2018 of information on our membership and what we do, please visit www.iard.org. almost 150 people in Indonesia from poisoning 2 3 Alcohol in the Shadow Economy Alcohol in the Shadow Economy Illicit alcohol accounts for a sizeable proportion of total alcohol, particularly in low- and middle- income countries. Honduras (2015) Nicaragua (2011) Czech Republic (2014) Russia (2014) Illicit alcohol: 20% Illicit alcohol: 4.6% Illicit Alcohol: 7% Illicit Alcohol: 38% ▶ 15% Distilled, 3% Fermented, 82% Other ▶ 91% Distilled, 2% Fermented, 7% Other ▶ 26% Distilled, 66% Fermented, ▶ 73% Distilled, 16% Fermented, > 91% Contraband 8% Other 11% Other 9% Counterfeit & illegal > 47% Counterfeit & illegal > 27% Tax leakage Fiscal Loss : $6 MM 46% Contraband 23% Counterfeit & illegal Dominican Republic (2016) Fiscal Loss: $99 MM Mexico (2013) Illicit Alcohol: 29% ▶ (69% Distilled, 0.1% Fermented, Illicit alcohol: 34% 30% Other) ▶ 76% Distilled, 24% Fermented > 50% Contraband > 52% Tax evasion 33% Tax leakage 18% Contraband Fiscal Loss: $262 MM Uganda (2015) Fiscal Loss: $7 MM Illicit Alcohol: 61% Venezuela (2011) ▶ 72% Distilled, El Salvador (2015) Cameroon (2014) 24% Fermented Illicit alcohol: 16% 4% Other Illicit alcohol: 22% ▶ 97% Distilled, 3% Fermented Illicit Alcohol: 56% > 53% Illegal artisanal 33% Counterfeit & illegal ▶ 60% Distilled, 40% Other ▶ 90% Distilled, Fiscal Loss: $172 MM > 50% Counterfeit & illegal 10% Fermented Key 47% Surrogate Trinidad and Tobago (2013) Fiscal Loss: $112 MM Fiscal Loss: $16 MM Tanzania (2015) Illicit Alcohol: 5% ▶ 98% Distilled, 1% Fermented, Illicit Alcohol: 51% Costa Rica (2014) 1% Other ▶ 75% Distilled, Illicit alcohol: Illicit pure alcohol as > 98% Contraband 25% Fermented percentage of total pure alcohol Illicit alcohol: 19% 0.9% Surrogate > 83% Illegal artisanal ▶ 67% Distilled, 17% Fermented, 16% Other Fiscal Loss: $9 MM Fiscal Loss: $110 MM ▶ Types of illicit alcohol as a > 91% Contraband, 4% Counterfeit & illegal percentage of the total illicit alcohol Fiscal Loss: $75 MM Suriname (2016) Zambia (2014) Illicit Alcohol: 18% Illicit Alcohol: 39% (Distilled, Fermented, Other) Panama (2015) ▶ 98% Distilled, ▶ 23% Distilled, 65% 2% Fermented Fermented, 13% Other > Categories of illicit alcohol as Illicit alcohol: 2% > 95% Contraband > 58% Tax leakage 38% Contraband percentage of total illicit alcohol ▶ (87% Distilled, 4% Fermented, 7% Other) 3% Counterfeit & illegal Fiscal Loss: $51 MM > 68% Contraband Fiscal Loss: $9 MM 24% Illegal artisanal (Contraband, Counterfeit & illegal, Fiscal Loss: $6 MM Brazil (2011) Illegal artisanal, Illegal informal, Malawi (2015) Surrogate, Tax evasion) Colombia (2015) Illicit Alcohol: 28% Illicit Alcohol: 61% Illicit alcohol: 22% ▶ 86% Distilled, ▶ 76% Distilled, Fiscal Loss: USD $ million (MM) 13% Fermented, 24% Fermented ▶ 72% Distilled, 5% Fermented, 23% Other 0.2% Other > 52% Counterfeit & illegal, > 44% Tax leakage 29% Contraband 37% Illegal artisanal NOTES: Fiscal Loss: $406 MM Mozambique (2014) ‘Other’ includes surrogate alcohol Bolivia (2013) Illicit Alcohol: 66% Ecuador (2015) ▶ 81% Distilled,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Black Market Peso Exchange As a Mechanism to Place Substantial Amounts of Currency from U.S
    United States Department of the Treasury Financial Crimes Enforcement Network FinCEN Advisory Subject: This advisory is provided to alert banks and other depository institutions Colombian to a large-scale, complex money laundering system being used extensively by Black Market Colombian drug cartels to launder the proceeds of narcotics sales. This Peso Exchange system is affecting both U.S. financial depository institutions and many U.S. businesses. The information contained in this advisory is intended to help explain how this money laundering system works so that U.S. financial institutions and businesses can take steps to help law enforcement counter it. Overview Date: November Drug sales in the United States are estimated by the Office of National 1997 Drug Control Policy to generate $57.3 billion annually, and most of these transactions are in cash. Through concerted efforts by the Congress and the Executive branch, laws and regulatory actions have made the movement of this cash a significant problem for the drug cartels. America’s banks have effective systems to report large cash transactions and report suspicious or Advisory: unusual activity to appropriate authorities. As a result of these successes, the Issue 9 placement of large amounts of cash into U.S. financial institutions has created vulnerabilities for the drug organizations and cartels. Efforts to avoid report- ing requirements by structuring transactions at levels well below the $10,000 limit or camouflage the proceeds in otherwise legitimate activity are continu- ing. Drug cartels are also being forced to devise creative ways to smuggle the cash out of the country. This advisory discusses a primary money laundering system used by Colombian drug cartels.
    [Show full text]
  • An Examination of the Legal Marijuana Use Age and Its Enforcement in California, a State Where Recreational Marijuana Is Legal
    An examination of the legal marijuana use age and its enforcement in California, a state where recreational marijuana is legal March 2021 James C. Fell NORC at the University of Chicago Traci Toomey University of Minnesota Angela H. Eichelberger Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Julie Kubelka NORC at the University of Chicago Daniel Schriemer Darin Erickson University of Minnesota Contents ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................................. 3 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ 4 METHOD ..................................................................................................................................................... 6 Enforcement of minimum legal marijuana use age of 21 (MLMU-21) laws ...................................... 6 Pseudo-underage patron entry attempts ............................................................................................... 7 Sample design ............................................................................................................................ 8 Recruitment of pseudo-underage patrons ................................................................................. 9 Data collection protocol ............................................................................................................ 9 RESULTS ..................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Parks Denatured Alcohol
    Material Safety Data Sheet Section 1 General Information Manufacturer: Zinsser Company, Inc. 173 Belmont Drive Somerset, NJ 08875 (732) 469-8100 Emergency Telephone: Chemtrec (800) 424-9300 Date: December 1, 2006 Product Name: Parks Denatured Alcohol Codes: 002121 002122 002123 002125 Section 2 Hazardous Ingredients OSHA ACGIH Hazardous Component CAS# PEL TLV Ethanol 64-17-5 1000 ppm 1000 ppm Methanol 67-56-1 200 ppm 200 ppm 250 ppm STEL Methyl Isobutyl Ketone 108-10-1 100 ppm 50 ppm 75 ppm STEL Ethyl Acetate 141-78-6 400 ppm 400 ppm Rubber Solvent 64742-89-8 500 ppm 400 ppm Section 3 Hazard Identification Emergency Overview: This product is a clear liquid with a characteristic smell and flash point of 41oF. Primary Routes of Exposure: Skin Contact Eye Contact Inhalation Potential Acute Health Effects: Eye: Contact may cause eye irritation. N/A: Not Applicable N/D: Not Determined N/E: Not Established N/R: Not Required Est.: Estimated Parks Denatured Alcohol (12-01-06) Page 1 of 6 pages. Skin: May cause skin irritation. Repeated or prolonged contact with skin may cause dermatitis. Ingestion: May be fatal or cause blindness if swallowed. Inhalation: May cause respiratory tract irritation. Potential Chronic Health Effects: Signs and Symptoms: Prolonged exposure to excessive concentrations of ethanol may result in irritation of mucous membranes, headache, drowsiness, fatigue and narcosis. Methanol is also narcotic in effect and its effects are cumulative. Overexposure to methanol can result in acidosis and visual disturbances which may progress to permanent loss of vision. (See also Sections 4, 8, and 11for related information) Section 4 First Aid Measures Eye contact: Immediately flush eyes with water for at least 15 minutes.
    [Show full text]
  • Non-Beverage Alcohol Consumption & Harm Reduction Trends
    Non-beverage Alcohol Consumption & Harm Reduction Trends A Report for the Thunder Bay Drug Strategy Prepared by Kim Ongaro HBSW Placement Lakehead University June 15, 2017 Non-beverage Alcohol Consumption & Harm Reduction Trends What is non-beverage alcohol? Non-beverage alcohol can go by many names in the literature. Broadly, it is understood to be liquids containing a form of alcohol that is not intended for human consumption (e.g., mouthwash, hand sanitizer, etc.) that are consumed instead of beverage alcohol for the purposes of intoxication or a “high” (Crabtree, Latham, Bird, & Buxton, 2016; Egbert, Reed, Powell, Liskow, & Liese, 1985). Within the literature, there are different definitions for non- beverage alcohols, including surrogate alcohol, illicit alcohol and unrecorded alcohol. Unrecorded alcohol, as defined by the World Health Organization, is untaxed alcohol outside of government regulation including legal or illegal homemade alcohol, alcohol that is smuggled from an outside country (and therefore is not tracked by its sale within the country of consumption), and alcohol of the “surrogate” nature (World Health Organization Indicator and Measurement Registry, 2011). Surrogate alcohol is alcohol that is not meant for human consumption, and is generally apparent as high concentrations of ethanol in mouthwash, hand sanitizers, and other household products (Lachenmeier, Rehm, & Gmel, 2007; World Health Organization Indicator and Measurement Registry, 2011). Surrogate alcohols also include substances containing methanol, isopropyl alcohol, and ethylene glycol (Lachenmeier et al., 2007). Nonbeverage alcohol and surrogate alcohol can be used interchangeably, but Lachenmeier et al., (2007), goes even further to include alcohol that is homemade in their definition of surrogate alcohol, as they stated that this alcohol is sometimes created using some form of non-beverage alcohol.
    [Show full text]
  • Forbidden Transactions and Black Markets
    Forbidden Transactions and Black Markets Chenlin Gu,∗ Alvin E. Roth,y and Qingyun Wuzx Abstract Repugnant transactions are sometimes banned, but legal bans sometimes give rise to active black markets that are difficult if not impossible to extinguish. We explore a model in which the probability of extinguishing a black market depends on the extent to which its transactions are regarded as repugnant, as measured by the proportion of the population that disapproves of them, and the intensity of that repugnance, as measured by willingness to punish. Sufficiently repugnant markets can be extinguished with even mild punishments, while others are insuf- ficiently repugnant for this, and become exponentially more difficult to extinguish the larger they become. (JEL D47, K42, P16) Keywords: black market; repugnance; Markov process. 1 Introduction Why are drug dealers plentiful, but hitmen scarce? I.e. why is it relatively easy for a newcomer to the market to buy illegal drugs, but hard to hire a killer? Both of those transactions come with harsh criminal penalties, vigorously enforced: In the U.S., half of Federal prisoners have drug convictions,1 and murder for hire is treated ∗DMA, Ecole Normale Sup´erieure,PSL Research University, Paris 75230, France (email: chen- [email protected]). yDepartment of Economics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, United States (email: al- [email protected]). zDepartment of Economics, and Department of Management Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, United States (email: [email protected]). xWe thank Itai Ashlagi, Fuhito Kojima, Jean-Christophe Mourrat, Muriel Niederle, Andrei Shleifer, Gavin Wright, Zeyu Zheng and Zhengyuan Zhou for helpful discussions.
    [Show full text]
  • Safety Data Sheet Denatured Alcohol
    Safety Data Sheet Denatured Alcohol SECTION I - IDENTIFICATION PRODUCT NAME: Denatured Alcohol PRODUCT CODE: 6210 PRODUCT USE: Industrial Cleaner COMPANY NAME: QuestVapco Corporation COMPANY ADDRESS: PO Box 624 Brenham, TX 77834 COMPANY PHONE: 1-800-231-0454 EMERGENCY PHONE: 800-255-3924 SECTION II – HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION CLASSIFICATION: Flammable Liquid: Category 2 Skin Irritant: Category 2 Eye Irritant: Category 2A HAZARD STATEMENT(S): Danger: Highly flammable liquid and vapor Causes skin and serious eye irritation. This product contains the following percentage of chemicals of unknown toxicity: 0% PRECAUTIONARY STATEMENTS: Keep away from heat, sparks, open flames, and hot surfaces. -No smoking. Keep container tightly closed. Wear protective gloves and eye protection. If on skin (or hair): Take off immediately all contaminated clothing and wash it before reuse. Rinse skin with water or shower. If skin irritation occurs: Get medical advice or attention. If in eyes: Rinse cautiously with water for several minutes. Remove contact lenses, if present and easy to do. Continue rinsing. If eye irritation persists: Get medical advice or attention. In case of fire use dry chemical, foam, or carbon dioxide. Store in a well- ventilated place. Keep cool. Dispose of contents and container in accordance with local, state, and national regulations. Wash hands thoroughly after handling. For large quantities: Ground or bond container and receiving equipment. Use explosion-proof electrical, ventilating, and lighting equipment. Use only non-sparking tools. Take precautionary measures against static discharge. SYMBOL: HAZARDS NOT OTHERWISE CLASSIFIED: N/A SECTION III – COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS HAZARDOUS INGREDIENT CAS NUMBER PERCENT Ethyl Alcohol 64-17-5 60%-100% Isopropyl Alcohol 67-63-0 3-7% SECTION IV - FIRST AID MEASURES EYES: If in eyes: Rinse cautiously with water for several minutes.
    [Show full text]
  • Surrogate Alcohol: What Do We Know and Where Do We Go?
    Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research Vol. 31, No. 10 October 2007 Surrogate Alcohol: What Do We Know and Where Do We Go? Dirk W. Lachenmeier, Ju¨rgen Rehm, and Gerhard Gmel Background: Consumption of surrogate alcohols (i.e., nonbeverage alcohols and illegally pro- duced alcohols) was shown to impact on different causes of death, not only poisoning or liver dis- ease, and appears to be a major public health problem in Russia and elsewhere. Methods: A computer-assisted literature review on chemical composition and health conse- quences of ‘‘surrogate alcohol’’ was conducted and more than 70 references were identified. A wider definition of the term ‘‘surrogate alcohol’’ was derived, including both nonbeverage alcohols and illegally produced alcohols that contain nonbeverage alcohols. Results: Surrogate alcohol may contain substances that cause severe health consequences including death. Known toxic constituents include lead, which may lead to chronic toxicity, and methanol, which leads to acute poisoning. On the other hand, the role of higher alcohols (e.g., propanol, isobutanol, and isoamyl alcohol) in the etiology of surrogate-associated diseases is cur- rently unclear. Whether other constituents of surrogates have contributed to the high all-cause mortality over and above the effect of ethanol in recent studies also remains unclear. Conclusions: Given the high public health importance associated with the consumption of sur- rogate alcohols, further knowledge on its chemical composition is required as well as research on its links to various disease endpoints should be undertaken with priority. Some interventions to reduce the harm resulting from surrogate alcohol could be undertaken already at this point.
    [Show full text]
  • Issues in the Implementation and Evolution of the Commercial
    International Journal of Drug Policy 27 (2016) 1–12 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect International Journal of Drug Policy jo urnal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/drugpo Editors’ Choice Issues in the implementation and evolution of the commercial § recreational cannabis market in Colorado a, b a Todd Subritzky *, Simone Pettigrew , Simon Lenton a National Drug Research Institute, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia b School of Psychology and Speech Pathology, Curtin University, Kent St, Bentley, WA, 6102, Australia A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T Article history: Background: For almost a century, the cultivation, sale and use of recreational cannabis has been Received 21 September 2015 prohibited by law in most countries. Recently, however, under ballot initiatives four states in the US have Received in revised form 27 November 2015 legalised commercial, non-medical (recreational) cannabis markets. Several other states will initiate Accepted 1 December 2015 similar ballot measures attached to the 2016 election that will also appoint a new President. As the first state to implement the legislation in 2014, Colorado is an important example to begin investigating early Keywords: consequences of specific policy choices while other jurisdictions consider their own legislation although Cannabis the empirical evidence base is only beginning to accrue. Regulation Method: This paper brings together material sourced from peer reviewed academic papers, grey Colorado Marijuana literature publications, reports in mass media and niche media outlets, and government publications to Testing outline the regulatory model and process in Colorado and to describe some of the issues that have Edibles emerged in the first 20 months of its operation.
    [Show full text]
  • Legalization of Cannabis in Canada: Implementation Strategies and Public Health
    LC LSIC Inquiry into Use of Cannabis in Victoria Submission 347 Inquiry into the use of Cannabis in Victoria Organisation Name: Your position or role: SURVEY QUESTIONS Drag the statements below to reorder them. In order of priority, please rank the themes you believe are most important for this Inquiry into the use of Cannabis in Victoria to consider:: Accessing and using cannabis,Education,Mental health,Public health,Social impacts,Young people and children,Public safety,Criminal activity What best describes your interest in our Inquiry? (select all that apply) : Individual Are there any additional themes we should consider? Select all that apply. Do you think there should be restrictions on the use of cannabis? : Personal use of cannabis should be legal. ,Sale of cannabis should be legal and regulated. ,Cultivation of cannabis for personal use should be legal.,There should be no restrictions. YOUR SUBMISSION Submission: Every term of reference can be cut and copied from Canada's implementation. If required, sale of cannabis can be done just as tobacco sales have been implemented, which would include the restrictions to underage people. Minimising the risk of underage people growing cannabis at home for personal use can be managed by advertising to parents with honest, non-divisive, independent science based studies, all of which are available to be copied from Canada's implementation. Do you have any additional comments or suggestions?: People should not live in fear of growing or utilising a plant. The illegality of Cannabis and crime surrounding it is because it is illegal, that's all. Decriminalise and permit either personal or public production stops the criminality and all associated negative impacts.
    [Show full text]
  • Alcohol in the Soviet Underground Economy"
    ALCOHOL IN THE SOVIET UNDERGROUN D ECONOM Y b y Vladimir G . Trem l Paper No .5, December 1985 Library of Congress Catalog Card Numbe r 85-73407 TABLE 0F CONTENT S Forewor d i i 1 . Introduction 1 ALC0HOL IN THE SOVIET UNDERGROUND EC0NOMY 2 . Samogon 2 3 . Theft of Alcohol 1 6 by Vladimir G . Treml 4 . Abuses in Trade 2 3 Duke University 5 . Vodka as Money 2 7 6 . Sources and Bibliography 3 9 Footnotes 4 2 References Cited 5 3 Appendix 62 December 198 5 To be published in STUDIES IN THE SECOND ECONOMY OF THE COM - MUNIST COUNTRIES, edited by Gregory Grossman, University o f California Press, Berkeley, California, 1986 . ii i FOREWORD The research for this study was completed In early 1982 but the pape r Accordingly, the study and its conclusions can be viewed as curren t itself remained somewhat unfinished waiting for completion of the Berkeley - despite the cutoff of Soviet sources in early 1982 . Duke emigre survey which provided the author with estimates of such phenomen a In May of 1985 Soviet authorities launched a new and tar-reaching anti - as the theft of technical alcohol from places of employment, the use o f drinking campaign marked by higher penalties for drunkenness, increase d different inputs in illegal home distillation of alcohol, purchases and price s restrictions on the sale of alcoholic beverages, and a projected reduction i n of samogon, and the like . Computerization of the emigre questionnaire wa s the output of vodka and fruit wine . Penalties for making, selling and buyin g completed by mid-1985, and so was the paper .
    [Show full text]
  • Based Hand Sanitizer Products During the Public Health Emergency (COVID-19)
    Contains Nonbinding Recommendations Temporary Policy for Manufacture of Alcohol for Incorporation Into Alcohol- Based Hand Sanitizer Products During the Public Health Emergency (COVID-19) Guidance for Industry March 2020 Updated February 10, 2021 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) Pharmaceutical Quality/Manufacturing Standards (CGMP)/Over-the-Counter (OTC) Preface Public Comment This guidance is being issued to address the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) public health emergency. This is being implemented without prior public comment because FDA has determined that prior public participation for this guidance is not feasible or appropriate (see section 701(h)(1)(C)(i) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) and 21 CFR 10.115(g)(2)). This guidance document is being implemented immediately, but it remains subject to comment in accordance with the Agency’s good guidance practices. Comments may be submitted at any time for Agency consideration. Submit written comments to the Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. Submit electronic comments to https://www.regulations.gov. All comments should be identified with the docket number FDA-2020-D-1106 and complete title of the guidance in the request. Additional Copies Additional copies are available from the FDA web page titled “ COVID-19-Related Guidance Documents for Industry, FDA Staff, and Other Stakeholders,” available at https://www.fda.gov/emergency-preparedness-and-response/mcm-issues/coronavirus-disease- 2019-covid-19, and from the FDA web page “Hand Sanitizers | COVID-19” available at: http://wcms-internet.fda.gov/drugs/coronavirus-covid-19-drugs/hand-sanitizers-covid-19.
    [Show full text]
  • Marijuana Legalization: Public Health, Safety, and Economic Factors for States to Consider
    Health Issue Brief Aparna Keshaviah, Eric Morris, Dara Lee Luca, Huihua Lu, Sarah Bardin, Colleen Staatz, and David Jones Marijuana Legalization: Public Health, Safety, and Economic Factors for States to Consider As of September 2019, 11 states and Washington, DC, have legalized retail marijuana, or marijuana for recreational or “adult” use. States have had a wide variety of experiences with legalization, based in part on whether their retail program built on an existing medical marijuana program, how well expectations about market size lined up with actual demand in the first years of legalization, and how closely the state regulates sales and cultivation. This brief discusses several factors that state and Background local governments should think about when decid- ing whether to legalize marijuana. Drawing from Many states across the country are considering credible literature and the experiences of states that whether to legalize retail marijuana. Legalization have legalized retail marijuana, we summarize con- can produce ample tax revenue, some of which siderations in four key domains where legalization states are using to fund health and social service is likely to have an effect: (1) tax revenue, (2) public programs—especially for communities dispro- health, (3) public safety, and (4) regulatory oversight. portionately affected by marijuana-related arrests Within each domain, we discuss the factors that and detention. States are also using these funds to shape the short-term fiscal impacts of legalization; further study marijuana’s benefits and harms. But the complex, long-term effects; and areas where legalization can also impose major costs, such as the more research, education, or training is needed.
    [Show full text]