Yoon and Lam BMC Public Health 2012, 12:717 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/12/717 including reports, conferences, meetings, opinion pieces and letters to lucidly articulate the rationale for alcohol tax elimination [62]. In its proposal submitted to the Treasury Bureau in January 2008, the coalition claimed that abolishing the wine duty would generate HK$ 4 bil- lion a year in sales and related businesses such as wine storage and fine wine actions [63]. The coalition held a press conference on 2 February 2008, where they urged the government to scrap the wine duty and halve taxes on spirits to 50 percent [64]. Tommy Cheung said that abolishing the alcohol tax would “drive Hong Kong to be a regional wine trading centre and bring economic benefit to Hong Kong [64].” The extensively publicized health benefits of moderate wine consumption had served to underscore their argument. The corporative initiative appeared to have convinced the government officials and senior policy makers. On 27 February 2008, Hong Kong entered a new era as it implemented a zero alcohol taxation policy. In his budget speech, newly appointed Financial Secretary John Tsang announced that he would scrap all duties on wine and beer. This move has made Hong Kong the only place in the world where wine and beer are completely untaxed [65]. Tsang stated that the aim of the action was to attract more commercial opportunities and invest- ments to Hong Kong in the alcohol trade, costing the government HK$ 560 million annually in lost revenues [66]. Effective 6 June 2008, a new regulation that eased permit controls was implemented under the amended Dutiable Commodities Ordinance [67]. This policy re- moved the need to obtain licenses and permits to sell liquor with less than 30 percent alcoholic strength and wine, thus creating a more conducive commercial environment. The HKWSIC commended the decision, claiming that “a bottle of wine will now be cheaper in Hong Kong than anywhere else in Asia. It will make Hong Kong into a sensible hub for exporting, primarily into China [68].” The economic deregulation and liberalization of licens- ing, alongside the industry’s publicity to cultivate the wine culture, is likely to induce a change towards a wine drinking culture. One US alcohol industry document clearly indicates that its publicity efforts would target the changing drinking practices in Hong Kong. It states that “Hong Kong drinkers are getting more and more receptive to wine drinking practice. The total elimin- ation of the excise tax on wine would probably help nur- ture wine drinking culture in Hong Kong. . .. It is an excellent opportunity for US wine traders to expand their exports [69].” As anticipated, wine consumption among the adult population in Hong Kong has dramat- ically increased in terms of the volume of pure alcohol consumed from 1,588,901 litres in 2004 to 3,164,107 litres in 2008 [14]. Page 8 of 12 Intriguingly, following the reduction (and elimination) of wine and beer duties, alcohol consumption per capita in Hong Kong has slightly increased from 2.54 litres in 2006 to 2.64 litres in 2010 [14]. In particular, a surge in alcohol consumption per capita (3.00 litres) was ob- served in 2008 when duties on wine and beer were to- tally abolished. Since the implementation of a zero wine and beer tax policy, there have been calls for the Hong Kong government to lower the duty on distilled spirits by changing the current duty system [70]. The govern- ment did not accept the proposal on the grounds that the current system is simpler and fairer and is in line with the ability to pay principle. The government stated that any reform to the current system should avoid any regressive effects and other possible unfair situations be- tween products of different price ranges [71]. Nonethe- less, the HKWSIC, which represents the distilled spirits industry in Hong Kong, continues to pursue further tax reform that will effectively lower the duty. Discussion This paper examined the role of the alcohol industry in the changes to alcohol tax policy in Hong Kong. More specifically, we investigated how the industry actors sought to successfully influence policymaking in an ef- fort to abolish the duties on alcohol. The conversion of Hong Kong from an environment of high alcohol tax- ation to a duty-free zone was done with remarkably high speed and efficiency over a two year period. Although the city’s changing financial circumstances and the Hong Kong Government’s strong propensity towards economic liberalism have in part contributed to such a dramatic transformation, the alcohol industry’s tactics and strat- egies were clearly the main drivers of the policy decision. Whereas the alcohol industry had been constantly vocif- erous in lowering the alcohol tax, the second half of the 2000s witnessed striking changes in the political tactics and rhetoric that they employed to lobby for selective amendments to licensing laws and to the ways in which alcoholic products were taxed. To comprehend how the alcohol industry successfully advanced their vested interests and carefully positioned themselves in the policy-making arena, it is important to identify the political tactics that they employed. From the experience of Hong Kong, the industry’s political tac- tics were two-fold. The first tactic was to forge a new co- alition. The alcohol industry lobbying as a whole was not tightly integrated and coherent right from the begin- ning. The industry actors came to realize that individua- lized and haphazard lobbying techniques were not effective in shaping the views of legislators or the public on alcohol tax issues. The alcohol industry, notably the HKWSIC, employed a tactic that was designed to en- compass a range of alcohol-related catering and trade