jackpot rollover and lottery regressivity

Main Article Content

Sukhun Lee
Ki C Han
David Suk
Hyunmo Sung


have found the lottery to be a regressive form of taxation that varies by game and whose regressivity declines at higher jackpot size.  This paper conducts an in-depth analysis of the effect of consumer spending on lottery regressivity during the Mega Millions rollover sequence and reports the following findings.  First, regressivity among six games examined in the paper varies by game and is inversely related to the prize/jackpot size of the game.  Second, an increase in the jackpot size reduces the regressivity for the Mega Millions game, but not for the other five games.  Third, the impact of household income distribution on lottery sales varies by game, and in the case of Mega Millions, by jackpot size as well.  We did not find a significant difference in the demand for the Mega Millions game between below middle-income households and high-income households.  However, the demand by middle and upper-middle income households is significantly higher than the demand by high-income households, especially at a higher jackpot size.  Lastly, as the jackpot size grows over $100 million and higher, a large cash inflow from states with no Mega Millions flows into the New Jersey lottery market.  The majority of the additional cash inflow is spent on the Mega Millions game and there does not appear to be a significant spillover to other New Jersey lottery games.         

Article Details

Author Biographies

Sukhun Lee, Loyola University Chicago

Finance DepartmentProfessor

Ki C Han, Suffolk Univeristy

Finance DepartmentProfessor

David Suk, Rider University

Finance DepartmentAssociate Professor

Hyunmo Sung, Handong Global University

FinanceAssociate Professor


Clotfelter, C. & Cook, P., 1987. “Implicit Taxation in Lottery Finance.” National Tax Journal, 40, 4, 533-46.

Combs, K., Kim, J. & Spry, J., 2008. “The Relative Regressivity of Seven Lottery Games.” Applied Economics, 40, 35-39.

Garrett, T., 2012. “The Distributional Burden of Instant Lottery Ticket Expenditures: An Analysis of Price Point.” Public Finance Review, 40, 6, 767-788.

_____, 2016. “The (Aggregate) Demand for State-Lottery Tickets: What Have We Really Learned?” Contemporary Economic Policy, 34, 3, 475-482.

Garrett, T. & Coughlin, C., 2009. “Inter-temporal Differences in the Income Elasticity of Demand for Lottery Tickets.” National Tax Journal, 62, 1, 77-99.

Garrett, T. & Kolesnikova, N., 2015. “Local Price Variation and the Income Elasticity of Demand for Lottery Tickets.” Public Finance Review, 43, 6, 717-738.

Ghent, L. & Grant, A., 2010. “The Demand for Lottery Products and their Distributional Consequences.” National Tax Journal, 63, 2, 253-268.

Guryan, J. & Kearney, M, 2008. “Gambling at a Lucky Stores: Empirical Evidence from State Lottery Sales.” American Economic Review, 98, 458-73.

Han, K., Lee, S., Suk, D. & Sung, H., 2016. “Analysis of Large Mega Millions Rollovers.” Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, 10, 1, 66-86.

Jackson, R., 1994. “Demand for Lottery Products in Massachusetts.” The Journal of Consumer Affairs 28 (2), (Winter), 313-325.

Kearney, M. S., 2005. “State Lotteries and Consumer Behavior.” Journal of Public Economics, 89, 2269-2299.

Mikesell, J., 1989. “A Note on the Changing Incidence of State Lottery Finance.” Social Science Quarterly 70, 2, 513-21.

Oster, E., 2004. “Are All Lotteries Regressive? Evidence from the Powerball.” National Tax Journal, 57, 2, 179-87.

Pérez, L. & Humphreys, B., 2011. “The Income Elasticity of Lottery: New Evidence from Micro Data.” Public Finance Review, 39, 4, 551-570.

Price, D. & Novak, E., 1999. “The Tax Incidence of Three Texas Lottery Games: Regressivity, Race, and Education.” National Tax Journal, 52, 4, 741-751.

Stranahan, H. & Borg, M., 1998. “Separating the Decisions of Lottery Expenditures and Participation: A Truncated Tobit Approach.” Public Finance Review, 26, 2, 99-117.