The study examines the impact of refusal conversion on data quality in the Consumer Expenditure (CE) Interview Survey. Response rates for the Interview Survey have declined, leading to the implementation of refusal conversion guidelines to increase participation. The analysis compares data quality measures between converted refusals and other respondents, finding that converted refusals report lower total expenditures, fewer expenditure questions answered, more "don't know/refused" responses, and less complete reporting of expenditures and income. Interview characteristics, such as the time spent on expenditure questions and the use of records, also differ between converted refusals and respondents, with converted refusals spending less time and using fewer records. Demographic differences between converted refusals and respondents are mixed, but regression analysis suggests that differences in interview characteristics, not demographics, explain the lower reporting of expenditures. Treating converted refusals as proxy nonrespondents, the study estimates a small positive nonresponse bias for quarterly total expenditures, indicating that including their expenditure reports lowers overall expenditure estimates. The findings raise questions about the cost-effectiveness of refusal conversion efforts.The study examines the impact of refusal conversion on data quality in the Consumer Expenditure (CE) Interview Survey. Response rates for the Interview Survey have declined, leading to the implementation of refusal conversion guidelines to increase participation. The analysis compares data quality measures between converted refusals and other respondents, finding that converted refusals report lower total expenditures, fewer expenditure questions answered, more "don't know/refused" responses, and less complete reporting of expenditures and income. Interview characteristics, such as the time spent on expenditure questions and the use of records, also differ between converted refusals and respondents, with converted refusals spending less time and using fewer records. Demographic differences between converted refusals and respondents are mixed, but regression analysis suggests that differences in interview characteristics, not demographics, explain the lower reporting of expenditures. Treating converted refusals as proxy nonrespondents, the study estimates a small positive nonresponse bias for quarterly total expenditures, indicating that including their expenditure reports lowers overall expenditure estimates. The findings raise questions about the cost-effectiveness of refusal conversion efforts.