Search

In 2014 the legislature of Vermont, USA passed a law requiring the Secretary of Administration to report on the consequences of legalizing marijuana. The RAND Corporation was commissioned to write that report. This paper summarizes insights from that analysis that are germane to other jurisdictions.Translation of key findings from the RAND Corporation report to the broader policy debate.Marijuana legalization encompasses a wide range of possible regimes, distinguished along at least four dimensions: which organizations are allowed to produce and supply the drug, the regulations under which they operate, the nature of the products that can be distributed and taxes and prices. Vermont's decriminalization had already cut its costs of enforcing marijuana prohibition against adults to about $1 per resident per year. That is probably less than the cost of regulating a legal market. Revenues from taxing residents' purchases after legalization could be many times that amount, so the main fiscal cost of prohibition after decriminalization relative to outright legalization may be foregone tax revenues, not enforcement costs. Approximately 40 times as many users live within 200 miles of Vermont's borders as live within the state; drug tourism and associated tax revenues will be important considerations, as will be the response of other states. Indeed, if another state legalized with lower taxes, that could undermine the ability to collect taxes on even Vermont residents' purchases.Analysis of possible outcomes if Vermont, USA, legalized marijuana reveal that choices about how, and not just whether, to legalize a drug can have profound consequences for the effects on health and social wellbeing, and the choices of one jurisdiction can affect the options and incentives available to other jurisdictions.

Drug policy strategies and discussions often use prevalence of drug use as a primary performance indicator. However, three other indicators are at least as relevant: the number of heavy users, total expenditures and total amount consumed. This paper stems from our efforts to develop annual estimates of these three measures for cocaine (including crack), heroin, marijuana and methamphetamine in the United States.The estimates exploit complementary strengths of a general population survey (National Survey on Drug Use and Health) and both survey and urinalysis test result data for arrestees (Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring Program), supplemented by many other data sources.Throughout the 2000s US drug users spent in the order of $100 billion annually on these drugs, although the spending distribution and use patterns changed dramatically. From 2006 to 2010, the amount of marijuana consumed in the United States probably increased by more than 30%, while the amount of cocaine consumed in the United States fell by approximately 50%. These figures are consistent with supply-side indicators, such as seizures and production estimates. For all the drugs, total consumption and expenditures are driven by the minority of users who consume on 21 or more days each month.Even for established drugs, consumption can change rapidly. The halving of the cocaine market in five years and the parallel (but independent) large rise in daily/near-daily marijuana use are major events that were not anticipated by the expert community and raise important theoretical, research, and policy issues.

No modern jurisdiction has ever legalized commercial production, distribution and possession of cannabis for recreational purposes. This paper presents insights about the effect of legalization on production costs and consumption and highlights important design choices.Insights were uncovered through our analysis of recent legalization proposals in California. The effect on the cost of producing cannabis is largely based on existing estimates of current wholesale prices, current costs of producing cannabis and other legal agricultural goods, and the type(s) of production that will be permitted. The effect on consumption is based on production costs, regulatory regime, tax rate, price elasticity of demand, shape of the demand curve and non-price effects (e.g. change in stigma).Removing prohibitions on producing and distributing cannabis will dramatically reduce wholesale prices. The effect on consumption and tax revenues will depend on many design choices, including: the tax level, whether there is an incentive for a continued black market, whether to tax and/or regulate cannabinoid levels, whether there are allowances for home cultivation, whether advertising is restricted, and how the regulatory system is designed and adjusted.The legal production costs of cannabis will be dramatically below current wholesale prices, enough so that taxes and regulation will be insufficient to raise retail price to prohibition levels. We expect legalization will increase consumption substantially, but the size of the increase is uncertain since it depends on design choices and the unknown shape of the cannabis demand curve.