BAT Unconstitutional Cigarette Law

British American Tobacco Plc (BATS) said Australia’s planned cigarette plain-packaging law is unconstitutional and if enacted, the company will sue in the nation’s top court in a bid to repeal it.

The Australian Senate is scheduled to vote on the legislation today after debating it. The government will push back implementation of the law by five months to December 2012 because of delays in parliament’s upper house in passing the bill, Australian Health Minister Nicola Roxon said Nov. 2.

Passage would make the country the first to ban logos on cigarette packaging. Cigarettes would have to be sold in plain dark-olive packages, with no company logos and the same font for all brands.

“It is unconstitutional for the federal government to remove a legal company’s valuable property without compensation,” London-based BAT’s Australian unit said in an e- mailed statement today referring to the company’s trademarks. The cigarette maker said it “confirmed it will commence proceedings in the High Court against the federal government” should the legislation pass the Senate.

The Australian government announced the plan to ban branding on cigarette packs in April last year, along with a 25 percent increase in tobacco taxes and an A$85 million ($86 million) advertising campaign to combat smoking.
Roxon Responds

Smoking kills 15,000 Australians each year and costs the nation about A$31 billion annually in health and workplace expenses, according to the government. With 15.1 percent of the population aged 14 or over smoking daily, it is the country’s top drug and preventable health issue, the government said.

“We won’t be bullied by tobacco companies threatening litigation and we are prepared to fight them if they do,” Roxon said in Melbourne today.

Cigarette makers including BAT and Philip Morris International Inc., the world’s largest publicly traded tobacco company, have taken legal action against the Australian move.

Philip Morris said in June that it served the Australian government with a notice of claim stating its intention to pursue its case in international arbitration. The Australian proposal violates a treaty with Hong Kong and may cause billions of dollars in damages, the maker of Marlboro cigarettes said.
“Criminal Gangs”

“No other country in the world has implemented plain packaging and there are many good reasons for that,” BAT Australia said in today’s statement. “It will make criminal gangs countless dollars as they reproduce plain-packaged cigarettes with ease.”

Cigarette packs in Australia already contain graphic warnings including pictures of diseased lungs that cover half the back of a package.

In the U.S., a federal judge on Nov. 7 blocked rules from taking effect that would order tobacco companies to display graphic health warnings, saying the move may violate their rights to free speech.

Read more »

Probable Changes to Smoking Ban in Springfield City

It has been seven months since Springfield voters banned smoking in public, five months since the law kicked in, and city leaders are already being urged to make changes.

Opponents of the measure have been writing, calling, and emailing city council members urging them to modify the law.

At Tuesday afternoon’s luncheon, council members will begin discussing a handful of possible changes to the smoking ban.

They will, for instance, consider exemptions for theatrical productions, veterans organizations, some tobacco shops and cigar bars.

Any change or repeal, though, could only happen by a unanimous vote.

“It’s the power of one. If one person is opposed to it, it’s a veto,” explained Dan Wichmer, Springfield’s city attorney.

Council members will even discuss a complete repeal of the ordinance, which is a move a lot of bar owners are pushing for.

“We are concerned, this is our livelihood, this is what we do. It’s important that they understand that they’re taking that away from us,” said Jim Knight, owner of Knightyme Bar and Billiards.

If council does not vote to modify or repeal the smoking ban, constituents can try to repeal the measure through an initiative petition drive.

They would need to collect about 2,100 signatures to get the measure on a ballot.

Read more »

Jennifer Aniston and other selebrities that quit smoking cigarettes

Jennifer Aniston wants everyone to know that she hasn’t gained weight because she’s pregnant – the actress has been packing on the pounds because she quit smoking. So did she do it for new beaux Justin Theroux? Maybe, but there’s always the chance that she tossed her cigs because she’s hoping to get pregnant and wants her body to be all detoxified for a baby.

Jennifer Aniston arrives at ELLE's 18th Annual Women in Hollywood Tribute held at the Four Seasons Hotel on Oct. 17, 2011 in Los Angeles, Calif. In a recent interview, Aniston told Britain's Hello! Magazine that she "gained a couple pounds" since she quit smoking. Aniston had pledged to quit smoking as early as 2002, but as recently as last year she was still lighting up.
Or maybe Jen finally quit smoking because she knows it’s bad for her. She did try to quit at least once before by using the power of yoga, which evidently didn’t do the trick. So hopefully this time she’s really done with the cancer sticks. And at least she’s got plenty of celebrity inspiration to stay strong – here’s a look at a few other stars who have managed to quit smoking:

Matt Damon and Ben Affleck

A baby is what inspired Ben to quit smoking. When his wife Jennifer Garner was pregnant with their daughter Violet, he decided that it was time to give up his 20 year smoking habit. His old buddy Matt referred him to the same hypnotist that helped him quit, and now both pals have quit puffing their lives away. And of course this is great news for their fans – the actors are about to team up for a Whitey Bulger biopic, so being smoke-free will ensure that they’ll have many more opportunities to work together in the future.

David Arquette and Courteney Cox

This former couple also decided to use a special kind of therapy to help them give up cheap cigarettes. Together they visited Yefim “The Mad Russian” Shubentsov in Boston, and he used “energy” to help them kick their habit. But unfortunately David has been spotted smoking since, so his energy level is probably not as high as it could be as he competes on “Dancing with the Stars.”

Brad Pitt

But he’s not the only celebrity dad who has found it hard to quit smoking. Back in 2009 Brad stated that he had quit for his kids, but he’s since admitted that he sneaks a cig every now and then (it sounds like Angelina Jolie isn’t a fan of his secret smoke breaks). So does this make Brad a bad dad? Perhaps not, but we’d feel a lot better if he would completely quit (he might have given up Aniston, but he can’t seem to kill the craving they shared).

Mel Gibson

According to Access Hollywood, Mel said this about quitting smoking early last year: “”The first three days, you’re an axe murderer. Day four, well, you might take a bat to someone. Day five? You’re OK… It’s really tough.” Hmmm…was this violent imagery foreshadowing of his ugly outbursts to come?

Ashton Kutcher

Ashton gave up his 40-a-day habit for wife Demi Moore by reading the self-help book “The Easy Way to Stop Smoking.” However, he was happy that he got to keep puffing away while he read the manual – basically he was smoking while trying to quit smoking (sounds like he was committed to quitting smoking the same way he’s been committed to his marriage). Now if he could only give up his other unhealthy habit – having unprotected sex with women that aren’t his wife.

Gwyneth Paltrow

And maybe there’s something to all that GOOP in Gwynnie’s brain – she gave up smoking through sheer willpower alone before Apple was born (but she obviously got just a little too health-crazy after putting the cancer sticks down, as evidenced by her daughter’s name).

So hopefully Jen doesn’t fall off the wagon again, and even though she did admit that quitting made her gain weight, maybe she’ll inspire some other celebrities to also stop smoking (we’re looking at you, Lindsay Lohan).

Read more »

Michael Douglas caught smoking again after beating throat cancer

LOS ANGELES -- Actor Michael Douglas was photographed smoking on a yacht last week - less than a year after "beating" stage IV throat cancer.

The Oscar winner appears on the new cover of Star Magazine and in photos inside puffing on what appears to be a hand-rolled cigarette July 21.

He looks tanned and relaxed in the exclusive Star photos, leaning on the yacht's railing while traveling with his wife Catherine Zeta-Jones along the Italian Riviera.

"Are you calling about the photos, because we have no comment," a rep for Douglas' spokesman Allen Burry told the Daily News.

The Hollywood icon, 66, was diagnosed with stage IV throat cancer last August and lost 32 pounds undergoing intensive chemotherapy and radiation.

"I feel good. I feel relieved," the actor told NBC "Today" host Matt Lauer in an interview in January, revealing that his treatment was a success.

"The tumor is gone," he told Lauer. "The odds are with the tumor gone and what I know about this particular type of cancer, that I've got it beat."

The "Wall Street" star was a longtime smoker before the health scare, and it's no secret the addiction is powerful.

"It's rare to return to smoking after something like this, but it's an addiction akin to heroin. It's a physical addiction, not just psychological, and very difficult to break," said Dr. Eric Genden, a Mt. Sinai surgeon specializing in cancers of the head and neck.

"(But) it's a bad idea. In patients with a history of carcinoma of the throat, smoking represents an exceptionally high risk to developing recurrence and even dying from the disease."

It's possible Douglas was smoking medical marijuana or another substance other than tobacco, but medical marijuana typically is used to treat loss of appetite and nausea while treatment is ongoing.

Most patients quit any type of smoking because it tends to cause a burning sensation on throat tissue damaged by radiation, Genden said.

"The whole point is, it's a really bad idea," he said.

Read more »

TOLL OF TOBACCO IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

• High school students who are current (past month) smokers: 19.5% or 3.4 million [Boys: 19.8% Girls: 19.1%] 

• High school males who currently use smokeless tobacco: 15.0% [Girls: 2.2%]

• Kids (under 18) who try smoking for the first time each day: 4,000

• Kids (under 18) who become new regular, daily smokers each day: 1,000+

• Kids exposed to secondhand smoke at home: 15.5 million

• Workplaces that have smoke-free policies:75.1%

• Packs of cigarettes consumed by kids each year: 800 million (roughly $2.0 billion per year in sales revenue)

• Adults in the USA who smoke: 20.6% or 46.6 million [Men: 23.5% Women: 17.9%]

Deaths & Disease in the USA from Tobacco Use

• People who die each year from their own cigarette smoking: approx. 400,000

• Adult nonsmokers who die each year from exposure to secondhand smoke: approx. 50,000

• Kids under 18 alive today who will ultimately die from smoking (unless smoking rates decline): 6,000,000+

• People in the USA who currently suffer from smoking-caused illness: 8.6 million

Smoking kills more people than alcohol, AIDS, car accidents, illegal drugs, murders, and suicides combined, with thousands more dying from spit tobacco use. Of all the kids who become new smokers each year, almost a third will ultimately die from it. In addition, smokers lose an average of 13 to 14 years of life because of their smoking.

Tobacco-Related Monetary Costs in the USA

Total annual public and private health care expenditures caused by smoking: $96 billion
- Annual Federal and state government smoking-caused Medicaid payments: $30.9 billion
[Federal share: $17.6 billion per year. States’ share: $13.3 billion]
- Federal government smoking-caused Medicare expenditures each year: $27.4 billion
- Other federal government tobacco-caused health care costs (e.g. through VA health care): $9.6 billion

• Annual health care expenditures solely from secondhand smoke exposure: $4.98 billion

Additional smoking-caused health costs caused by tobacco use include annual expenditures for health and developmental problems of infants and children caused by mothers smoking or being exposed to second-hand smoke during pregnancy or by kids being exposed to parents smoking after birth (at least $1.4 to $4.0 billion). Also not included above are costs from smokeless or spit tobacco use, adult secondhand smoke exposure, or pipe/cigar smoking.

Productivity losses caused by smoking each year: $97 billion

[Only includes costs from productive work lives shortened by smoking-caused death. Not included: costs from smokingcaused disability during work lives, smoking-caused sick days, or smoking-caused productivity declines when on the job.]

Other non-healthcare costs from tobacco use include residential and commercial property losses from smoking-caused fires(about half a billion dollars per year) and tobacco-related cleaning & maintenance ($3 billion).

• Taxpayers yearly fed/state tax burden from smoking-caused gov’t spending: $70.7 billion ($616 per household)

• Smoking-caused health costs and productivity losses per pack sold in USA (low estimate): $10.47 per pack

• Average retail price per pack in the USA (including sales tax): $5.29

Tobacco Industry Advertising & Political Influence

• Annual tobacco industry spending on marketing its products nationwide: $12.8 billion ($35+ million each day)
Research studies have found that kids are three times as sensitive to tobacco advertising than adults and are more likely to be influenced to smoke by cigarette marketing than by peer pressure; and that a third of underage experimentation with smoking is attributable to tobacco company advertising and promotion.

• Annual tobacco industry contributions to federal candidates, political parties, and PACS: Over $2 million

• Tobacco industry expenditures lobbying Congress in 2010: $16.6 million, 162 employees

Tobacco companies also spend enormous amounts to influence state and local politics; and, when threatened by the federal McCain tobacco control bill in 1998, spent more than $125 million in direct and grassroots lobbying to defeat it. Since 1998, Altria (Philip Morris) has spent more on lobbying Congress than almost any other business.

Read more »

Tobacco Consumption in Rajasthan

In Rajasthan, tobacco chewing is on the rise. It has increased by 0.1% as compared to smoking. In the state, around 18.9% of the total population chews tobacco while 18.8% population smokes Hilton cigarettes. The figures were released by the World Health Organization last week.

Asthma and tobacco specialist Dr Virendra Singh said, “The number of people chewing tobacco is rising. Chewing tobacco is more dangerous than smoking as it increases chances of cancer. The risk is three times higher in chewing tobacco than smoking because in chewing tobacco essence and supari is mixed, which make it more risky.” The newly-released figures show that smoking among women in Rajasthan is also higher than the national average. In India, 2.9% of total women population smoke but the figure is much higher in Rajasthan. It is around 5.3%.

But the percentage of women chewing tobacco is much higher than smoking. Around 8.5% of women in the state chew tobacco which is much less than the national average. In India around 18.4% women chew tobacco, which is a national average. Besides, the number of people smoking in Rajasthan is higher than the national average percentage. In India, around 14% of people, including men and women smoke while in Rajasthan around 18.8% of people smoke daily.

Read more »

Cigarette brands reviews

Westport FF King: Made in Canada. Length: 3 5/16, 84 mm; filter 13/16 inch, 20 mm. The tobacco is 

mostly medium-brown ribbons, and nothing foreign was found in the mix. About 1/8 inch of tobacco compressed in our tamp-down test. The Old Guy thought this was a pretty okay brand; it went down easily and was strong enough to be rightfully called full flavor. He said he may have detected a bit of vanilla, but it wasn’t overpowering. Also, he was satisfied with the burn rate. Though this isn’t his favorite brand (he has a favorite brand?), he said there would be nothing stopping him from smoking more of them.

Quest Low Nicotine King: Made in the USA. Length: 3 ј inches, 83 mm; filter 1 inch, 25 mm. The filter is divided into three sections separated by what appears to be charcoal granules. We could definitely determine that the last part of the filter is made of something different than the ordinary cellulose found in filters. It can be described as a paper folded many, many times. In our tamp-down test, the tobacco compressed about 1/8 inch. The tobacco is made of mostly brown ribbons, and there was nothing out of the ordinary in it. We were very impressed with this one; it had a good rich flavor, didn’t burn too quickly, and the draw was nice and easy. This is a new breed of smoke in that it is made with genetically altered tobacco (like Omni) with increasingly lower nicotine levels. Although it says “low nicotine” right on the box, and these smokes have a new-fangled filter that may reduce carcinogens, the manufacturer makes no claims that Quest is safer than any other, and it is not being marketed as a smoking-cessation product, either. Nevertheless, we liked this one, and if perhaps it is one day proven to be “safer”, so much the better.

Parker Menthol Light 100s: Made in Cyprus, distributed by Burlington Tobacco Co. in Waynesville, North Carolina. Length: 3 7/8 inches, 98 mm; filter 1 1/16 inches, 27 mm. The tobacco is made of equal amounts of light-to-medium brown ribbons and flakes, and there was nothing unusual found in the mix. About 3/16 inch of tobacco compressed in our tamp-down test. This smoke gets an “A” for average; though the draw is a bit hard, it burned at a normal rate. It can definitely be classed as a light, if not less, but there was no discernable taste of menthol. Though this was very easy to smoke, if a person is looking for a distinct menthol flavor, this is not the one to choose. However, the average price for a carton (about twelve dollars) might make it desirable.

Camel Exotic Warm Winter Toffee King – Yet another offering from RJ Reynolds Tobacco’s “exotic” division, the Warm Winter Toffee King size is 3 1/4 inches (83 mm) long, with a 1 inch (21 mm) white filter. The flavored exotics are packed in a nearly square, metal tin. This packaging is pretty neat; colorful, smooth, and pleasing to the touch. We find it difficult to simply discard the empty tins, figuring they should be good for something. (Paper clips, perhaps? Trout flies?) The tobacco blend consists of light, medium, and dark leaf, cut in fine ribbons and some flakes. We were able to tamp the mix down about 1/8 inch, and we found no foreign material in it. As one would expect from RJR, this is a premium smoke. The draw is easy, the burn rate about average, and there is no harshness or unpleasant aftertaste. The “toffee” is not the Old Guy’s favorite — the bourbon model is firmly holding down that distinction — but it is nevertheless high on his list. The anti-smoking establishment is convinced RJR is marketing the flavored “exotics” to kids. Perhaps that is the case. If so, they must be pretty well-heeled kids, as these smokes are not cheap.

Pall Mall Lights Menthol 100′s Box – Made by Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., Louisville, Kentucky. Length: 3 7/8 inches, 98mm; filter 13/16 inch, 20 mm. The tobacco, comprised mostly of medium-brown ribbons, contained nothing unusual in the sample we checked out. In the tamp-down test, it compressed about 1/8 inch. The Old Guy was pretty pleased with this one. He liked the way it went down (not rough at all, even though he was sick), and he was impressed with the smooth, but pretty powerful, flavor. Though touted as a menthol, very little of that came through to the Old Guy, which is always a bonus for him. Also, he found no unpleasant aftertaste whatsoever in this one. The major drawback: it burns way too slowly. The Old Guy commented that, in the 100 style, and if a person were so inclined, you could get two smokes out of one with these. And it even states right on the foil wrap inside the box, “Burns Slower”. In spite of that, he gave it about a 7.5 on a scale to 10. Another bonus: because this is not classed as a “premium”, you can get it for a pretty decent price. Bottom line: give these a go, if you are ready to try a good, solid generic brand.

Legal Full Flavor King:Made in Columbia and imported by Freedom, “a little tobacco company”. Length:1/8 inches, 80 mm; filter 9/16 inch, 15 mm. The tobacco is a standard blend of medium-brown flakes and ribbons, and three pieces of stem were found in the sample that was inspected. In the tamp-down test, it compressed about 1/8 inch. One notable thing: the filter is recessed ј inch. The Old Guy didn’t care for this brand at all. He said it was possibly the weakest full-flavor he had ever tasted. The draw was extremely hard, which he thought could be attributed to the “funny” filter. He thought it went down okay, and it burned at an average rate. However, these didn’t make up for the wicked aftertaste it left him with.

Monarch Full Flavor King: Made in the U.S.A. by R.J. Reynolds Company, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. Length: 3 ј inches, 83 mm; filter 13/16 inch, 21 mm. The tobacco is a standard blend of medium-brown flakes and ribbons, and nothing unusual was found in the mix. It compressed about 1/8 inch in the tamp-down test. The Old Guy was much more receptive to this one. He thought it had a good, rich flavor that was strong enough to suit him. He found nothing wrong with the draw or the way it went down. He did comment that it would be nice if it burned a bit more slowly. Yes, he would smoke these again. And again…

Niagara Menthol Light King: Made in Seneca Nation Territory by Sovereign Tobacco Company, Irving New York. Length: 3 5/16 inches, 85mm; filter 13/16 inch, 20 mm. The tobacco is made of medium-brown course ribbons and flakes. Nothing out of the ordinary was found in the mix, but the sample inspected seemed extraordinarily dry. About 1/16 inch compressed in the tamp-down test. The Old Guy was very happy with this one. He liked the flavor: quite strong for a “light”, and without an overwhelming menthol taste. He said the draw was just right, and it went down very smoothly. Also, he was pleased with the burn rate. He said he would definitely like to try a full flavor of this brand. At an average cost of $11.00 per carton, he just may…

Seneca Menthol King: Made in Ohsweden, Ontario Canada by Grand River Enterprises. Length: 3 5/16 inches, 85 mm; filter 13/16 inch, 20mm. The tobacco is made up of light-to-medium brown mostly ribbons with some flakes. Nothing unusual was found in the mix, and about 1/16 inch compressed in the tamp-down test. The Old Guy was pretty satisfied with this one, too. Though it had a definite menthol taste, he was surprised by the richness of the flavor. He thought he might have detected a bit of vanilla in it, as well. And though the draw was just average, it went down very easily, with no lingering aftertaste. Typically, he complained that it burned a little too fast. Even if this brand didn’t turn him into a full-time menthol smoker, he said he would definitely finish the entire pack we gave him…

Cigs Menthol Light King…Made in Canada. Length: 3 ј inches, 83 mm; filter ѕ inch, 20mm. The tobacco is a standard blend of medium-brown ribbons and flakes, and one fairly large piece of woody stem was found in the sample. Negligible results were obtained in the tamp-down test. The Old Guy really liked this one. He thought it had a nice, easy drag and that it went down smoothly. The burn rate was just what it should be, also. He was particularly impressed with the taste, which he said had just the right amount of menthol flavor. The Old Guy thought this one was very similar to a Basic Menthol Light. He said a person really can’t miss with this one…

Euro Menthol King – A product of Uruguay. Length: 3 ј inches, 83 mm; filter 13/16 inch, 21 mm. The tobacco is a course-cut standard blend and there was one piece of stem found in the mix. The results of the tamp-down test were negligible. The Old Guy wasn’t overly thrilled with this one. Though it had a decent drag and went down okay, it burned much too quickly for him. He said the flavor was pretty bold and there was no mistaking it was a menthol. The menthol flavor stayed with him for a long time after he was done with the smoke (too long for his liking). He thinks this would be an excellent choice for someone who really likes a menthol…

Lobo Full Flavor King…Made in Spain. Length: 3 5/16 inch, 84mm; filter 13/16 inch, 20 mm. The tobacco is a standard blend and nothing out of the ordinary was found in the mix. About 1/8 inch of tobacco compressed in the tamp-down test. The Old Guy thought this was a very weak smoke for a full flavor. Though he thought it had an easy enough drag and that it went down smoothly, he didn’t get the “kick” from it that he likes a smoke to have. He said a person would have to smoke at least two of them at the same time to get the effects of a true full flavor. Also, he detected a lot of vanilla in the flavor, which he didn’t particularly care for. We don’t know if he finished the whole pack of these, but it’s a good bet that he didn’t…

Vegas Full Flavor King – Made by Star Tobacco, Petersburg, Pennsylvania. Length 3 ј inches, 83 mm; filter 1 inch, 25 mm. The tobacco is a course-cut standard blend with a strong binder. One piece of stem was found in the mix. In the tamp-down test, about 1/16 inch of tobacco compressed. Also, unlike other Star Tobacco products, this one didn’t have a charcoal-embedded filter. The Old Guy was very pleased with this one. He said it had everything a good full flavor smoke should have: an easy drag, smooth draw, and a rich, bold flavor (that means STRONG to the rest of us). He even liked the name of this brand. Also, he liked the burn rate. Would he smoke more packs of these (or maybe even buy them)? You bet…

Read more »

Japan Tobacco Advances on Domestic Shipment

Japan Tobacco Inc. rose the most in six weeks after saying it planned to resume shipments of all Beverly cigs and other cigarette brands disrupted by the March 11 earthquake earlier than previously announced.

The world’s third-largest publicly traded cigarette maker climbed 4.3 percent to 312,500 yen as of the 11 a.m. break on the Tokyo Stock Exchange, its biggest gain since May 13. The benchmark Nikkei 225 Stock Average added 1 percent.

Japan Tobacco will restore deliveries of all brands by July 18 instead of early August, as it had planned earlier, the company said yesterday. The 9-magnitude earthquake and tsunami forced Japan Tobacco to suspend all domestic shipments for 12 days, with cigarette brands gradually returning to production after that.

“Japan Tobacco can finally move on,” Mitsuo Shimizu, an equity analyst at Cosmo Securities Co. in Tokyo, said by telephone today. “The impact from the earthquake has started to diminish.”

Domestic sales fell 38 percent to 7.2 billion cigarettes in May, the Tokyo-based company said June 10. They plunged 81 percent in April.

Read more »

Cheap Newport Cigarettes

Newport, introduced in 1957, is a brand of menthol cigarettes produced by Lorillard Tobacco Company of Greensboro, North Carolina, United States.  In the United States it is considered to be one of the most selling and preferable brands from the menthol category. Newport cigarettes are commonly referred to as “newies,” “new-pees,” , “ports,” and “ghetto breath mints.” They also have many slang terms such a “shorts” “longs” and “loosies”, all of which could be used for other brands but started in the 60′s with Newports and still usually refer to Newports. Newports are particularly popular among the African-American community; a 2005 survey states that 49.5% of cigarette sales to African-Americans were Newports.
Newport has these flavors: full, medium, lights, and “M Blend” — a mixture of a light and a medium flavor. Each is packaged in Regular (Kings, Shorts) and 100′s. The 100 mm has a longer filter. There is also a 25 mm package.

Read more »

Taking Tobacco Trouble to Duty

In most of the villages in the country, it is a common sight to see menfolk — and even children — chewing tobacco, a habit that becomes addiction and the cause of oral cancer. However, there are some villages in Belgaum district in Karnataka where the villagers have ‘banned’ tobacco. Fine is slapped on shops that are found selling gutkha.
Also, those who were earlier addicted to chewing tobacco are now themselves supporting the campaign against it. The campaign involves everyone in the villages: farmers, women, school children and panchayat leaders. When Express visited some of these villages, it came to light that although the villagers are against tobacco and liquor, some business interests are trying to make sure that the business survives and thrives there. Also, even though most of the rural populace is against these Gauloises addictions, the sale of such products continues in a covert way.
How it started 13 years ago
Kalloli village in Gokak taluk took offence to gutkha 13 years ago. The local leaders of Bajrang Dal started the campaign against gutkha and appealed to all the vendors of pan shops and provision stores to stop selling it.
They started the movement after seeing that even primary school students were addicted to chewing tobacco.
Although many vendors agreed to Bajrang Dal’s request, some approached police as legally the shopowners are allowed to sell tobacco.
Even the then DSP got involved in the debate. Ultimately, a resolution was passed wherein it was decided to rid the village of gutkha. After the resolution was passed, four shops were found selling gutkha and they were asked to pay a fine of `1,000 each. Also, villagers declared `100 reward for those who would help catch such offenders red-handed.
Soon the news of Kalloli’s anti-gutkha campaign reached a neighbouring village Rajapur. These villagers too adopted a resolution to save its youth from the health hazards that come with chewing tobacco.
Hefty penalty, strict warning
Another village that has woken up to the hazards of chewing gutkha, Biranagaddi, has already collected `80,000 as fine from those who were found selling gutkha and/or liquor. The amount has been used to construct a community hall and renovate Basaveshwara temple. Also, the villagers have taken note of the practice wherein menfolk get drunk in a neighbouring village and create nuisance back home. They have been clearly told not to quarrel with anybody in inebriated condition and sleep in their house.
Basavaraj Kadadi, one of the anti-gutkha campaigners, says now just one-two per cent people of Kalloli and
Rajapur villages chew tobacco.
A villager Goudappa Kotigi reminisces how his village was nine months ago, when even students of fourth class could be seen consuming alcohol openly. He said it was this sight that got them thinking about starting a campaign against tobacco and liquor.
All is well? No
Some youths of Gokak taluk complain that arrack lobby was stopping them from prohibiting the sale of liquor. A youth, on condition of anonymity, said the arrack lobby was involved with some politicians and thus nobody dared confronting them.
Bailoor and Tigadolli villages of Bailhongal taluk have banned the sale of arrack but the business goes on behind closed doors. The covert trade goes in Balobal too. A 13-year-old boy told Express that there was total ban on sale for three-four months but now someone had resumed it.
Sanganakere Cross in Gokak taluk is the hub of tobacco chewers of nearby villages where gutkha has been banned.
Former addict Shivanand, President of Vishnua Sena, said Sanganakere Cross is the centre point and most addicts get their gutkha sachets from here. He said even drivers and cleaners of commercial vehicles were serving the addicts by bringing sachets from Sanganakere Cross to the villages.
Shivanand said they had observed a day’s bandh there but the vendors were not keen to stop the sale.
Unperturbed, the villagers are determined to end the tobacco menace.

Read more »

Kelly Osbourne And Miley Share – Celebrity Bond

Kelly Osbourne has revealed she and Miley Cyrus hit it off on the set of their new movie ‘So Undercover’ because they both have famous parents. Kelly Osbourne and Miley Cyrus have bonded because of their famous parents.

The pair became close while working on movie ‘So Undercover’ together and Kelly – the daughter of rocker Ozzy Osbourne and TV star Sharon – explained they became close because they are so similar and both understand the pressure of being the kids of celebrities.

Speaking about Miley – whose father is ‘Achy Breaky Heart’ singer Billy Ray Cyrus – Kelly told the Daily Record newspaper: “I didn’t know Miley well before. We had only met once or twice but as soon as we started shooting it was pretty instant how we got along so well.

“She just gets it. She has a really similar upbringing to me – though her side of things is on a completely different scale to mine.

“I’m from rock ‘n’ roll music and hers is country . but she gets it.

“It’s nice to hang around an unaffected girl you can have fun with and understand what I go through and I understand what she goes through.”

The pair are so close that Kelly previously took to twitter to defend Miley after the 18-year-old singer-and-actress was filmed smoking Bond a legal high from a bong – a filtration device generally used for smoking illegal drug cannabis.

She previously tweeted: “This really makes me mad. Miley is one of the most hard working respectful women I have ever worked with I am learning a lot from her!

“Miley and I have become really close I’m sick of all the haters judging her she made one mistake and trust me she has learned her lesson!”

Read more »

Panel Pushes Tobacco Law Change

In the waning days before Republican lawmakers present a reworked version Gov. Scott Walker’s 2011-13 budget, the Legislature’s finance committee pushed through major changes to the tax structure on some smokeless tobacco products.
The Joint Finance Committee approved a provision put forth by Altria Client Services Inc., parent company of tobacco giant Philip Morris and U.S. Smokeless Tobacco, that would tax moist snuff, or chewing tobacco, by weight, not a percentage of what it costs distributors.
The tobacco would be taxed at a rate of $1.76 per ounce, or $2.11 if it weighed less than 1.2 ounces.
David Sutton, spokesman for Altria, said it would put smokeless tobacco products on par with other items like Marengo cigarettes, alcohol and gasoline, which Wisconsin taxes by volume. U.S. Smokeless Tobacco is the largest producer of moist snuff and includes the brands Copenhagen and Skoal.
“This is just a much more effective system,” Sutton said. “And it’s why the federal government uses it and two dozen states have gone to the weight-based approach.”
Wisconsin switched from a weight-based tax in 2009 under then-Gov. Jim Doyle as part of a broad tax increase on cigarettes and other tobacco products to shore up the state’s flailing budget.
Noncigarette tobacco taxes tallied $59.89 million in 2009-10, up from $29.75 million in 2007-08, but that also included tax increases on cigars and other tobacco products.
State Rep. John Nygren, R-Marinette, a member of the Joint Finance Committee, said tax rates could be adjusted so the fiscal impact would be minimal. However, opponents point out that weight-based taxes rarely keep up with inflation. Beer, for example, is taxed by volume, and tax collections have increased just $120,000 in the last 10 years.
An ounce of moist snuff was taxed $1.31 in 2008. Distributors now pay a tax equal to 100 percent of the manufacturer’s list price, so brands that charge more for their product — like Skoal and Copenhagen — are taxed at a higher rate. A weight-based tax would likely make the top brands cheaper at checkout while lower-priced products would become more expensive.
Opponents of the effort said switching to a weight-based tax would steer more minors toward tobacco because the desirable products with flashy advertising would be cheaper.
“We’re concerned that changing the taxation on tobacco would make certain products more accessible to kids,” said Gail Sumi, government relations director for the American Cancer Society. “Thirteen percent of kids already use smokeless tobacco. We don’t need to make it easier.”
Writing policy measures into the budget almost guarantees they don’t undergo the same scrutiny as other bills that require separate legislative hearings and votes from lawmakers. That’s problematic, said Sen. Rob Cowles, R-Allouez.
“They’re down to the last week and there’s all sorts of crazy stuff coming up,” Cowles said. “All this stuff should not be taken up in the state budget.”
Nygren said he agreed that the topic would benefit from a full debate but added the law was changed in 2009 in a similar manner.
“One of the things we could do with policies that are egregious and out of line, the quickest way to change them back is to do it in this budget,” he said.

Read more »

Snus focus of yearlong study

A University of South Carolina researcher is preparing to answer two questions with widespread implications for the tobacco industry and public-health community.
Can a smokeless product, in this instance Camel Snus, contribute to a smoker quitting cigarettes — particularly one who doesn’t want to stop?
If it does, could an increase in use of smokeless-tobacco products over cigarettes cause a net harm to the population?
Trying to provide clarity is Matthew Carpenter, an associate professor in the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences and the Department of Medicine at the Medical University of South Carolina. Carpenter’s research focus has been on tobacco use and control, with his studies primarily funded by the National Institutes of Health.
The yearlong study will consist of 1,250 smokers nationwide, half being given Camel Snus or another smokeless product, and the other half given nothing.
Carpenter’s research team wants to learn whether Snus leads to quit attempts, smoking reduction and cessation. They also want to measure the amount and pattern of Snus use.
“The study will provide strong, clear and objective evidence to guide clinical and regulatory decision-making for this controversial area of tobacco control,” Carpenter said.
Matt Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, said research of smokeless products must evaluate what harm is caused by the product along with how the product is marketed.
“If a smokeless product reduces the risk of disease, but results in more people using tobacco, it could result in more deaths, not fewer,” Myers said.
Carpenter said researchers are not trying to encourage the use of smokeless tobacco with the study.
“We’re just trying to mimic the real-world scenario of a smoker being exposed to these products in their own environment, such as a grocery store,” Carpenter said.
“If they decide to use them, what is the effect? We believe no matter the determination of this study, it will have a public-health impact.”
The study follows up on a similar smoking-cessation study Carpenter released in February 2010 on Star Scientific Inc.’s Ariva and Stonewell tobacco lozenges.
The main determination of that study was smoking decreased by 40 percent during the two-week study period, but overall use of tobacco remained stable.
“This suggests that Ariva and Stonewall are effective products to curb withdrawal and craving,” Carpenter said in his report. “We found no changes in overall craving or withdrawal, as smokers substituted Ariva/Stonewall for cigarettes.
“We found no evidence that smokeless tobacco (Ariva or Stonewall) undermines quitting. To the contrary, readiness to quit — in the next month and within the next six months — significantly increased among smokers who used a smokeless-tobacco product relative to those who continued to smoke conventional cigarettes.”
Carpenter said it is “doubtful that a smokeless-tobacco product could ever serve as a total substitute for cigarettes among a majority of smokers.”
“However, the amount of substitution among those smokers who choose to use smokeless products is not insignificant,” he said.
* * * * *
The multimillion-dollar Camel Snus study is part of an initiative the National Cancer Institute began in October 2009.
The institute wants to determine whether smokeless products, such as snus and dissolvable Camel Orbs, Camel Sticks and Camel Strips from R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., provide “a truly less-harmful alternative to conventional tobacco products, both at the individual and population level.”
“We want to explore all aspects of tobacco products, including the sale, marketing and health risks,” said Michele Bloch, medical officer of the Tobacco Control Research Branch of the National Cancer Institute.
Carpenter said “a number of short-term lab studies of toxicant exposure suggest smokeless tobacco could offer reduced harm as compared to conventional cigarettes.”
Major U.S. tobacco manufacturers, led by Reynolds, are putting more emphasis on smokeless products to gain market share and sales as the smoking rate among adults is declining. Government figures show that fewer than 44 million Americans smoke, down from a peak of 53.5 million in 1983.
“We certainly support studies conducted objectively while using sound scientific principles and techniques on the use of tobacco products and tobacco-harm reduction,” said David Howard, a spokesman for Reynolds.
The evolution of some health-advocacy groups from anti-smoking to anti-tobacco is ratcheting up the moralistic aspect of buying and consuming a legal product.
Some advocates say that smokeless tobacco can serve as a gateway for youths to smoking.
Others are encouraging the Food and Drug Administration to allow the advertising of smokeless tobacco as less harmful than cigarettes if such claims can be proved through research.
A study of smokers ages 18 to 70 — released in November by the Tobacco Use Research Center of the University of Minnesota — found that “quit rates for Camel Snus were comparable to those obtained with nicotine-replacement therapy.”
The Minnesota center said a “properly powered study is needed to determine if use of smokeless-tobacco products with higher nicotine content can be an effective path to smoking cessation, perhaps especially among smokers who are not interested in or previously were not successful with using approved pharmacotherapies.”
Reynolds added fuel to the debate in December when it launched its first campaign aimed specifically at encouraging smokers to switch to Camel Snus.
* * * * *
Reynolds has marketed Camel Snus as an option for tobacco consumers who can’t smoke in a growing majority of public venues.
Carpenter acknowledges the intensity of debate in his abstract. “There is limited evidence to determine if potentially reduced exposure products ultimately undermine or promote public health,” he said.
John Spangler, a professor of family and community medicine at Wake Forest University School of Medicine, said he supports research that determines whether smokeless tobacco can help with quitting cigarettes.
Spangler is conducting a National Cancer Institute study, which began in September 2009, that’s aimed at developing strategies to encourage reduced use or even quitting smokeless-tobacco products. Wake Forest received a $2.9 million grant for its study.
Among the goals are: determining the health risk of smokeless-tobacco products; whether the products serve as a gateway for nontobacco users, particularly teenagers and young adults, into smoking; and whether they can be accurately marketed as a reduced-risk alternative to cigarettes.
“We have a substantial amount of data in our research showing that users of smokeless tobacco have a very high likelihood, not of quitting smoking, but of co-using smokeless and cigarettes,” Spangler said.
Bill Godshall, executive director of SmokeFree Pennsylvania, said, “I’d be shocked if Reynolds would apply to market it as a smoking-cessation drug device.”
Scott Ballin, past chairman of the Coalition on Smoking or Health, said the study could demonstrate that there is not enough evidence available about reduced risk, “therefore products like snus or Ariva or Stonewall should not be able to make any claims.”
“That would preserve the status quo and give the pharmaceutical companies the competitive protections they want,” Ballin said.
In October, the consumer health care division of GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), which sells nicotine-replacement therapy products Nicorette and NicoDerm, requested that the FDA take Reynolds’ dissolvable tobacco products out of test markets.
The FDA acknowledges Reynolds is marketing the products to adult consumers, but has concerns that the marketing and shape of the dissolvable products might appeal to children and adolescents.
GSK’s request strikes at the core of Reynolds’ attempt to create a reputation as an innovator of products that could be less harmful to consumers than cigarettes.
Elizabeth Whelan, president of the American Council on Science and Health, said “GSK is clearly trying to protect its own market for dissolvable tobacco.”
“From a business perspective, this is understandable,” Whelan said. “But from a purely public-health point of view, if products like the orbs can help more smokers quit more effectively than other cessation products, then let them stay on the market.”

Read more »

Imperial Tobacco aims for organic growth

Please respect FT.com’s ts&cs and copyright policy which allow you to: share links; copy content for personal use; & redistribute limited extracts. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights or use this link to reference the article – http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/12f6fb72-817a-11e0-9c83-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz1MmICfwRO

On the first anniversary last week of Alison Cooper’s appointment as chief executive of Imperial Tobacco, an analyst at Investec Securities reminded investors of the fundamental question that she needs to answer: can the FTSE 100 tobacco company transform itself from the M&A machine it has been over the past two decades into a vehicle for organic growth?

The tobacco marketShareholders may have been temporarily distracted from that question by the announcement that Imperial would begin buying back shares.

The company has paid down debt from its last big deal – the acquisition of Altadis, maker of Gauloises Blondes, in 2008 – to just over two times earnings.

It will also push up dividends, hitting 50 per cent of adjusted earnings this year and aims to increase them ahead of the rate of earnings growth.

But with investors’ “cash return bloodlust now sated” – as the Investec analyst Martin Deboo put it – the organic growth question is nagging again.

Please respect FT.com’s ts&cs and copyright policy which allow you to: share links; copy content for personal use; & redistribute limited extracts. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights or use this link to reference the article – http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/12f6fb72-817a-11e0-9c83-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz1MmIFjvWz

Ms Cooper does not deny the importance of the answer, for employees as much as investors. She recalls how, a year ago, some staff had seemed hesitant about the new direction she was advocating.

She wants to turn a team skilled at bedding down new businesses – from Australian, Dutch and African acquisitions in the late 1990s, to Reemtsma of Germany in 2002 and Altadis six years later – into one that can increase market share and volumes through better sales and marketing.

“They all said, ‘we like Alison, we really want to go for it’,” she says. “But they wanted to get some meat on the bones.” Enthusiasm has grown in the course of the year, she believes, as seen at a recent management meeting in Prague. “All the feedback from Prague was, ‘we really see it’.”

She has also brought in fresh blood. Two recent hires – a marketing director from Reckitt Benckiser and a sales director from Metro Group, the German retail business – underscore her belief that Imperial should think of itself as a regular fast-moving consumer goods company and that organic growth, not M&A, is top of the agenda.

Investors, meanwhile, saw some signs of progress in the company’s half-year results. Sales of its premium Davidoff brand were up 9 per cent, helped by a strong performance in emerging markets. And while the West value brand had subdued growth – up just 1 per cent – and cigarette volumes were down as a whole, fine-cut tobacco volumes rose 5 per cent.

“In most of my discussions with the investment community, I feel there’s a general growing confidence with the organic growth story,” says Ms Cooper.

Mr Deboo is less convinced. He points out that market share declined in the six months to March 31 in 11 of the company’s 20 reported markets, including Russia, France and regulation-hit Spain.

To counter these trends, Ms Cooper has been creating “cocktails” of solutions, designed for each territory. They are based on the notion that Imperial can improve revenues not just through pricing and cigarette sales, but by selling cigars, fine-cut tobacco, rolling papers and filters, even rolling machines.

The difficult UK market, where Imperial generates 13 per cent of its revenues via brands such as Lambert & Butler, Regal and Golden Virginia, is a good example. The company is coping with poorer, recession and austerity-hit smokers by pushing fine-cut tobacco as a cheaper alternative to cigarettes. This year, it introduced an alternative to roll-your-own tobacco: cigarette-making kits, with filters already fitted into tubes, and a special cut of loose tobacco to be fed into the tubes using a machine.

Julian Hardwick of RBS says: “There’s a perception in the market that the European Union is not a good place to have a tobacco business. One of the strong views that Alison has is that there are always growth opportunities. It may not be in cigarettes, it may not be in premium cigarettes, but there are always going to be opportunities, and it’s very important that Imperial capitalises on them through its ‘total tobacco’ portfolio. That’s a key mindset that’s brought to the whole business.”

If Ms Cooper can’t capitalise on these opportunities, M&A could be back on the agenda – this time with Imperial as the target.

Some of the 12 per cent climb in the share price since the start of the year has come on the back of research by analysts at Goldman Sachs arguing that four global tobacco companies – Philip Morris, British American Tobacco, Japan Tobacco and Imperial – is still one too many. They argue that debt across the sector is low, volumes are stagnating and competition issues are not insurmountable, particularly if BAT were to buy Imperial.

Ms Cooper, who occasionally deviates from the on-message, unironic language of top managers to show a more jaundiced view of the world, is sceptical: “Anything to do with four to three has got very significant antitrust issues; I always describe it as not impossible but very difficult. But I’m sure bankers in particular will continue to speculate. Because I’m sure they’d love the fees on a deal like that.”

Her counterpart at BAT, meanwhile, who is also new to the job, says M&A will not be his focus for the next few years at least.

Mr Hardwick, of RBS, argues, like Ms Cooper, that if the market were taking bid speculation seriously, the shares would be much higher than they are. Even Mr Deboo says that the stock is a safe buy, “the closest thing to a bond available in the equity market”. He contests the notion, however, that Imperial is cheap next to rivals with greater emerging markets exposure.

Ms Cooper prefers to see emerging markets as one of the opportunities on offer for a company occupying fourth position in the global market. For the M&A bulls on the sidelines, being fourth could offer other tantalising opportunities, too.

The Financial Times Limited 2011. You may share using our article tools. Please don’t cut articles from FT.com and redistribute by email or post to the web.

Read more »

Philip Morris International: Alternative Annual Report

Every year, one of the world’s best-known corporations provides its shareholders a glowing image of a company that is handsomely rewarding its shareholders by expanding into new markets, developing new products, and overcoming market and regulatory challenges.
The truth is that this corporation makes its billions of dollars in profits at the expense of people’s health and their lives. This report reveals the dark truth behind how Philip Morris International earns its profits.

Philip Morris International (PMI) is the world’s largest, deadliest and most profitable publicly traded transnational tobacco corporation. PMI currently operates in 180 countries and holds more than 27 percent of the international tobacco products market (excluding the People’s Republic of China and the United States). In 2010, PMI reported revenues (excluding taxes) of over US $27 billion and an operating income of US $11.2 billion. Another way to look at it: That’s $5,500 in profits for every person who has died so far this year from tobacco-related disease.

FINANCIAL LOWLIGHTS: THE PRICE PAID FOR PROFITS

PMI reported 11.6 percent growth in profits and an increase of 4.1 percent in its cigarette shipment volume in 2010. This increase in profits and volume contributes to:

One tobacco-related death every six seconds worldwide. That’s 5.4 million people every year.
Premature deaths. On average, smokers lose 15 years of life and up to half of all smokers will die of tobacco-related causes.
Higher healthcare costs and lost productivity. Tobacco causes a $500 billion global economic drain each year — nearly $74 for each person in the world.
For every dollar of PMI revenue, health care expenses and productivity loss cost the world economy $7.39.

To achieve these profits, PMI:

Spends nearly $5 on its so-called corporate social responsibility initiatives for every tobacco related death — a means of distracting attention from its core business of selling a harmful and deadly product.
Implements a range of tactics to undermine the success of public health policies that protect people from the harms of tobacco, including:

Read more »

Marlboro cigarettes are registered brand cigarettes of Altria.

They are one of the most popular and preferable brands not only all over the world. Marlboro cigs were introduced in 1924 as a "women cigarettes" but during the World War II they disappeared because the sales dramatically decreased. It was decided to start new promotional campaign and advertise them to the male smokers. Marlboro reappeared and quickly became popular due to the wise advertising campaigns that used Marlboro man cowboy figure, which later became an American icon to capture attention of male smokers. The red cigarette pack was advertised for almost fifty years by all possible means of advertisement: on billboards, in store window displays, on the pages of magazines and newspapers.
Buy now your Marlboro Cigarettes brand from one of the largest retailers of cigarettes worldwide. Most of the top brands discount cigarettes including Marlboro Cigarettes are available in cigarea.com store and ready to be delivered fast and fresh to your doorstep.
You can choose your favorite brand Marlboro Red Box cigarettes, Marlboro Lights Box cigarettes, Marlboro Medium Box cigarettes, Marlboro Ultra Lights Menthol Box cigarettes and Marlboro Lights Menthol Box cigarettes at discount prices from our online cigarettes shop and enjoy smoking cheap but high-quality tobacco products. Make your choice of our exquisitely flavored Marlboro cigarettes.

Read more »

Philip Morris vs Norway in front of the EFTA Court

This is one of the first legal challenges brought against the most recent tobacco control policy: display ban of cigarettes. Its outcome is expected to indirectly determine also the legality of the first display ban adopted within the EU (in EIRE) and to shape the ongoing reform of the EU tobacco products directive.

In an attempt to cut impulse buys of tobacco products and to further reduce smoking rates, five countries (Australia, Canada, Iceland, Ireland and Norway) have recently banned the display of tobacco products at the point of sale.
As with many tobacco control policies, both the scientific basis and the legality of display bans are questioned today. This is certainly the case for plain packaging, as we have recently reported here and here.

As the first empirical evidence about the public health effectiveness of display bans begins to emerge (the Icelandic measures dates back 2001), Philip Morris recently took the Norwegian state to court in an attempt to overturn the law banning the display of cigarettes in stores. In Norway, since January 2010, cigarettes have been banished to closed cases, while cigarette dispensers may no longer display brand labels. This is how the closed cases look:

cigarettes display
“Display bans have had no impact on reducing smoking in the countries that have implemented them, a fact acknowledged by the Norwegian Ministry of Health and Care Services. Instead these regulations prevent adult consumers from seeing the available product range and overly restrict competition” said Anne Edwards, spokesperson for PMN. “We have raised these issues with the government to no avail, which has regrettably left us with no choice but to litigate.”
The goal of the lawsuit is to overturn the display ban to permit retailers to display tobacco products in their stores enabling adult smokers to see the products on offer.
The Oslo district court decided to request, last October, for an advisory opinion to the EFTA Court regarding the compatibility of the contested display ban with the EEA Agreement (i.e. a Treaty extending considerable portions of EU legislation to non-EU countries, such as Norway). This Court, having jurisdiction with regard to EFTA States which are parties to the EEA Agreement (at present Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway), is competent inter alia to give advisory opinions to courts in EFTA States on the interpretation of EEA rules.
In essence, in case E-16/10, Philip Morris Norway AS and Staten/Helse- og omsorgsdepartementet, the Norwegian national court asks the EFTA Court whether the display ban constitutes an obstacle to the free movement of goods within the meaning of Article 11 of the EEA, which – as is typically the case in the EEA Agreement – is identical to Article 34 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU, prohibiting measures having an equivalent effect to a quantitative restrictions.
Being the EFTA Court bound by the « principle of homogeneous interpretation », its case law is based on the ECJ’s case law as far as such jurisprudence exists. The case law of the ECJ on Article 34 and the free movement of goods is vast. Yet the measure at stake in Philip Morris Norway is of a type which has not yet come before the European Court of Justice.
This would seem to allow the EFTA Court, as it already occurred in the past, to set a precedent. Although the ECJ is not bound by the principle of homogeneous interpretation and may depart from the EFTA’s interpretation of identical provisions contained in EU law, it referred – in a number of cases – to EFTA Court case law as a main or even a leading argument when interpreting EU law. This is relevant to the extent one EU country, Ireland, has implemented since July 2009 a display ban.
Although the compatibility of display bans with EU/EEA law is a novel issue, this does not mean that the EFTA Court won’t find any guidance in the case law of the ECJ. As is well known, the ECJ after having given a broad interpretation of the prohibition of measures having an equivalent effect to a quantitative restriction (by including also non distinctly applicable measures), it held in Keck that ‘certain selling arrangements’, i.e. measures concerning the circumstances of selling the goods, are covered by this provision, only if they discriminate against imports in law or in fact.
Will the EFTA Court apply the Keck jurisprudence to the Norwegian display ban? This may have a considerable impact on both the reasoning and the outcome of the case.
Should the Court qualify a display ban as a ‘selling arrangement’, this measure might escape from the scope of application of the prohibition and being upheld without being subject to a scrutiny of its underlying public health rationale. Yet to do so the EFTA Court should conclude that:

1. a display ban is a ‘selling arrangement’;
2. the application to tobacco products from other Member States of the display ban is not such as to hinder directly or indirectly, actually or potentially, trade between Member States :

a. “so long as those provisions apply to all relevant traders operating within the national territory; and

b. so long as they affect in the same manner, in law and in fact, the marketing of domestic products and of those from other Member States”.
Previous case law shows that while requirement a) of the Keck test is easy to verify, requirement b) is trickier, especially when dealing with a measure limiting (rectius, banning) the possibility of advertising a product. Here it might be crucial to look at the percentage of local cigarettes sold in Norway vs those imported. A display ban of tobacco product might indeed ossify the market by crystallising existing patterns of consumption and raising barriers for new entrants. Yet this has never been a concern in the (non) EU market for cigarettes!
Interestingly enough, in a number of cases, the EFTA Court has indicated that it does not take the ECJ’s Keck jurisprudence for the last word of the wisdom. (See e.g. Cases E-5/96 Nille, 1997 EFTA Court Report, 30, at para 28 et seq., with reference to ECJ 17 October 1995 – C-124/94 – DIP and Others v Comune di Bassano del Grappa and Comune di Chioggia, 1995 ECR, I-3257; E-4/04 Pedicel EFTA Court Report [2005] 1). At the same time though, attempts by EFTA States to have provisions of the EEA Agreement interpreted differently from those of the EC Treaty because of an alleged difference in scope have been rejected.
Should the display ban be considered a restriction – what seems quite likely and that regardless of the application of the Keck jurisprudence, the discussion – as predicted by the second question raised by the referring court – will shift to its possible justification.
To what extent the Norwegian display ban, based on the declared objective of reduced tobacco use by the public in general and especially amongst young people, is it proportionate, i.e. suitable and necessary, having regard to public health?
In examining the first prong of the proportionality test, the EFTA Court is likely to face an abundant amount of conflicting data advanced by the parties concerning the effectiveness of the display ban in reducing consumption and prevalence in smoking. In our view, to determine the suitability of the measure to achieve the desired objective the Court will have to establish at least the potential effectiveness of display bans in changing smoking behaviour (by looking, for instance, at pre- and post-display ban adolescence prevalence in Norway). Is there a causal link between banning display and reduction in tobacco consumption? Moreover, when examining necessity, the second prong of the test, the EFTA Court will have to determine whether the desired objective (public health) could be attained by less onerous methods. In a country like Norway, where most forms of advertising of tobacco products are already prohibited – now also at the point of sale -, this won’t be an easy exercise to carry out. In any event, according to established case law, – because of the margin allowed to the legislature – to fail the proportionality test, a measure has to be “manifestly inappropriate” having regard to the objective pursued before judicial intervention. This reading of the proportionality test reflects concerns of legitimacy and expertise. Yet never forget that – as observed by Advocate general Jacobs extra judicially – “proportionality is a flexible tool of judicial review, which is applied differently in different context”.
The deadline for receiving written observations from Governments and relevant institutions having expired (according to the EFTA Court website – besides the Norwegian government and the EFTA Surveillance authority – only the European Commission would seem to have lodged its observations), the hearing of the case is expected in June 2010 in Luxembourg.
Although other legal challenges have been initiated by the tobacco majors against the spreading of tobacco display bans, this is the first international legal challenge brought against one of the most recent tobacco control policies. Its outcome is expected to indirectly determine also the legality of the first display ban adopted within the EU and, more importantly, to shape the ongoing reform of the EU tobacco products directive. Indeed, under section 6 of the DG SANCO public consultation document, anticipating the reform, the EU Commission discusses – among several regulatory options aimed at controlling the access to tobacco products – the possibility of introducing EU-wide mandatory display restrictions or bans at points of sales. In the meantime, both the UK and Finland have announced to intend to follow Ireland in prohibiting the display of tobacco in large shops from October 2011 and in points of sale as from the beginnings of 2012, respectively.
A more detailed analysis of the pending EFTA case (E-16/2010) is forthcoming in issue 2 of the European Journal of Risk Regulation, which is expected by next June.

Read more »