Tobacco politics

Taxation Tobacco has been taxed by state governments in the United States for decades. The cumulative revenue of US tobacco taxation exceeded $32 billion in 2010, establishing a major revenue stream for government. That said, revenue from US tobacco taxation peaked in 2010 at $17.2 billion, and has steadily decreased every year since then with revenue in 2023 at $11.6 billion. The US Contraband Cigarette Trafficking Act of 1978, a law that makes cigarette smuggling a felony punishable by up to 5 years in federal prison, is a means to prosecute smugglers who avoid paying duties on cigarettes. The Stop Tobacco Smuggling in the Territories Act of 2013 (H.R. 338; 113th Congress), proposed during the 113th United States Congress, would have updated the Contraband Cigarette Trafficking Act to include American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and Guam, which were previously not extended to by the law. Although the bill was successfully passed in the House of Representatives, after much debate and discussion, it ultimately failed to gain approval in the Senate. This failure could have been due to a variety of factors, such as opposition from senators with differing political views, concerns over specific provisions within the bill, or procedural hurdles that prevented it from moving forward. As a result, despite its initial success in the House, the bill was unable to proceed through the full legislative process and become law. Cigarette advertising cigarettes In numerous parts of the world, tobacco advertising and sponsorship of sporting events is prohibited. The ban upon tobacco advertising and sponsorship in the European Union (EU) in 2005 prompted Formula One management to look for venues that permit display of the livery of tobacco sponsors, and led to some of the races on the calendar being cancelled in favor of more 'tobacco-friendly' markets. As of 2007, only one Formula One team, Scuderia Ferrari, received sponsorship from a tobacco company; Marlboro branding appeared on its cars in three races (Bahrain, Monaco, and China), all in countries lacking restrictions on tobacco advertising. Since 2018 Philip Morris International (PMI) and British American Tobacco (BAT) have circumvented the EU ban by using corporate mission statements and associated branding to link their ‘potentially reduced risk’ products to Formula One (F1) and Grand Prix motorcycle (MotoGP) racing teams. In 2022, PMI and BAT spent an estimated $40 million sponsoring the Ferrari and McLaren teams. Advertising billboards for tobacco remain used in Germany, whilst the majority of EU member states have outlawed them. MotoGP team Ducati Marlboro received sponsorship from Marlboro, its branding appeared at the race in Qatar and China. On July 1, 2009, Ireland prohibited the advertising and display of tobacco products in all retail outlets. ==Lobby==

Major tobacco lobbying companies include Altria Group (the parent company of Philip Morris USA), Philip Morris International, and Reynolds American. 20th century , alongside Richard Doll, published several studies demonstrating a causal relationship between smoking and lung cancer. In the early 1950s, numerous studies demonstrated a causal relationship between smoking and lung cancer. Although multiple proposals for relaxed electronic cigarette regulation, such as the Cole-Bishop Amendment in the 2017 omnibus bill and FDA Deeming Authority Clarification Act of 2017, have emerged, none have passed yet. In 2006, courts ordered tobacco companies to run anti-smoking advertisements, but tobacco companies delayed this order through multiple appeals until 2017. As of 2017, tobacco companies must now run advertisements detailing the negative health impacts of smoking for a year. In 2017, Philip Morris International established the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World and fully funds it (to the tune of $80 million per year over twelve years) to endorse new tobacco industry products. ==Litigation==

Lawsuits have been filed against varying tobacco manufacturers, attempting to hold them to account for wrongful death, injury, or medical expenses related to cigarette smoking and other tobacco use. Cases have been brought both by individual plaintiffs and by government officials, including the U.S. States Attorney General. Punitive damages for the plaintiff have often been awarded as a result of a successful litigation. However, the vast majority of court decisions have been in favour of the defendant tobacco companies. History The history of tobacco litigation in the United States can be divided into three waves: (1) from 1954 to 1973, (2) from 1983 to 1992, and (3) from 1994 until today. During the first two waves, tobacco companies had enormous success, winning all but one of their cases, with the only case they lost, Cipollone v. Liggett, being reversed. During the first wave, a growing abundance of evidence linked tobacco to death and disease. As a result, thousands of individual lawsuits were filed against tobacco companies, but many of these verdicts are now on appeal. Smokers have also challenged light cigarettes, alleging that tobacco companies falsely advertise light cigarettes as healthier. Tobacco companies argue that 'light' refers to the taste, not the filters, and also used preemption arguments. Although the Supreme Court ruled in Altria Group, Inc. v. Good (2008) that federal law does not preempt certain state consumer protection laws, no courts have ruled on these laws being violated. Significant cases • 1992: In Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc. the US Supreme Court held that the Surgeon General's warning did not preclude suit by smokers against tobacco companies on several claims, and that the federal laws on tobacco regulation aren't worded to override state laws. • 1995: The Supreme Court of Canada in RJR-MacDonald Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General) upheld the constitutionality of the federal Tobacco Products Control Act, but struck out the provisions which prevented tobacco advertising and unattributed health warnings. • March 2001: The US Supreme Court affirmed the Circuit Court's ruling that the Food and Drug Administration could not classify tobacco as a pharmaceutical, so it could not control its production through the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. (FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.) • June 2002: A District Court in Kansas awarded $15 million in punitive damages against R.J. Reynolds Tobacco after calling the company's conduct "highly blameworthy and deserving of significant punishment." (''David Burton vs. R.J. Reynold's Tobacco'') • June 2002: A Miami jury held three cigarette companies liable for $37.5 million in a lawsuit involving an ex–smoker who lost his tongue to tobacco–related oral cancer. (Lukacs vs. Philip Morris) • October 2002: A Los Angeles jury issued $28 billion in punitive damages against Philip Morris. This was later reduced to $28 million. (Betty Bullock vs. Philip Morris) • 2003: A Madison County, Illinois jury awarded $10.1 billion against the tobacco company Philips Morris for deceptive cigarette advertising in a class action led by attorney Stephen Tillery (Price v. Philip Morris). • 2004: A New York jury issued $20 million to the wife of a long-term smoker who died of lung cancer at the age of 57. This was the first time that a New York court had held a tobacco company liable for an individual smoker's death. (Gladys Frankson vs. Brown and Williams Tobacco Corp) • 2005: In Imperial Tobacco v. British Columbia, the Supreme Court of Canada found that the provincial Tobacco Damages and Health Care Costs Recovery Act, which allowed the government to sue tobacco companies, was constitutionally valid. • 2007: Philip Morris USA v. Williams led the US Supreme Court to tell the Oregon Court of Appeals to reconsider its earlier judgment and lower the case's punitive damages amount in light of State Farm v. Campbell. The appeals court ultimately upheld their original damages. • 2008: The Altria Group v. Good US Supreme Court case said that state law is not preempted by a federal law regarding cigarette advertisement regulations. Grounds of claims ; Civil Rights: Tobacco companies have marketed menthol cigarettes specific to African Americans; groups have pursued civil rights remedies in court. ; Design defects: Claims of design defects allege that tobacco companies designed tobacco products with additional adverse health risks. Examples of design defects include cigarettes that increase addiction risks and deliberately choosing not to develop less harmful cigarettes. : In response, tobacco companies have argued that they have not intentionally made cigarettes more dangerous, but instead carefully and thoughtfully design the least hazardous tobacco product for smokers. ; Product liability: The liability of any or all parties along the chain of manufacture, distribution, and sale of any product for damage or injury caused by that product. ; Depriving of health hazards information: Lawsuits against tobacco companies have asserted that tobacco companies mislead the public on the risks of smoking, environmental smoke, and nicotine addiction. Defenses ; Volenti non fit injuria: Volenti non fit injuria, or "to a willing person, no injury is done", is a common law doctrine which states, when applied to these cases, that there is no damage to someone who willingly places themselves in a position where they are negatively affected by tobacco consumption. ; Contributory negligence: Contributory negligence is a common law defense to a claim based on negligence, where, before the cases, the adverse effects were unknown. This has been one of the commonly used defences. Most of them will assert that it was the plaintiff himself who has contributed to his own injury as he had prior knowledge of the harm associated with tobacco smoking. Tobacco advertising fails to influence non-smokers : In 2006, tobacco companies argued that tobacco advertisements were intended for smokers choosing between brands of tobacco products. Moreover, advertising has a limited effect on influencing smoking behavior. This reasoning was used in the 2005 McTear v. Imperial Tobacco Limited case in Scotland, arguing that the plaintiffs could not reasonably prove that the plaintiffs’ smoking caused lung cancer. In addition, tobacco companies challenge the way epidemiological evidence is collected. == Litigation outside of the United States ==

Introduction As of 2000, litigation also continued in several countries outside the United States. Citing third-party reimbursement, several countries, such as Bolivia, Guatemala, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, have filed lawsuits both in the United States and in their own courts against tobacco industries. As of 2000, individual suits have also been filed in a multitude of countries, including Argentina, Finland, France, Japan, Ireland, Israel, Norway, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Turkey. WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control The World Health Organization (WHO) Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), adopted in 2003, represents an important landmark in international tobacco control governance. It was formalized on February 27, 2005, The FCTC encourages states to reduce tobacco production and use through measures like cigarette taxes, restrictions on advertising, clean air controls, plain packaging and tobacco smuggling legislation. In 1991, the Federal Court found advertisements denying environmental smoke to be misleading. Personal injury cases are less common in Australia, as unsuccessful plaintiffs must pay the legal fees of the defendant, less profit incentives exist for Australian lawyers, and momentum from successful tobacco litigation has not been generated. The plaintiff, Rolah McCabe, who was diagnosed with lung cancer, claimed British American Tobacco Australia misled her in estimating the risk for smoking cigarettes. The companies agreed to stop describing cigarettes as “light” and “mild” and provide $9 million for corrective advertising, in exchange for the ACCC to no longer pursue certain legal action against the companies. In Meeuwissen v Hilton Hotels of Australia Pty Ltd (1997), the plaintiff argued environmental smoke in a nightclub constituted unlawful discrimination based on disability, and was awarded $AU2000 in compensation. In 2011, the Australian government introduced plain packaging legislation. Philip Morris Asia Limited challenged this directive under a bilateral trade agreement with Hong Kong, but did not succeed. Cuba, Honduras, the Dominican Republic and Indonesia also filed a World Trade Organization complaint, but the WTO upheld the plain packaging law in 2017. Some magazines have not yet ended tobacco advertising within their issues, largely because it remains unprohibited on a legal basis, likewise with promotions as well as free public distribution, mounting concern amongst organisations as a result. Austria Austria subscribed to the WHO anti-tobacco convention on December 14, 2005. Bhutan The Tobacco Control Act of Bhutan 2010 prohibits the cultivation, manufacture, sale, and distribution of tobacco products within Bhutan Brazil In Brazil, tobacco litigation focuses on three main areas: compensation claims brought by the State, industry challenges to ANVISA regulations, and lawsuits for damages filed by consumers and the Public Prosecutor's Office. On May 21, 2019, the Attorney General of the Union filed a lawsuit in the Federal Court of Rio Grande do Sul requesting that manufacturers reimburse the SUS (Brazilian Public Health System) for expenses related to illnesses attributable to smoking. The industry also filed several lawsuits challenging ANVISA's regulatory acts, notably RDC No. 14/2012, which restricted additives and established technical parameters for tobacco derivatives. A direct action of unconstitutionality (ADI 4874) prompted a preliminary injunction granted by minister Rosa Weber in 2013 and was the subject of a judgment in the Supreme Federal Court, which ruled the action inadmissible. Retail sale of e-cigarettes and e-cigarette refills is prohibited. Tobacco products are not prohibited. Canada Canada proposed a plan for their three biggest tobacco companies to pay out $32.5 billion to Canadian provinces, territories, and smokers. As of October 18 2024, this plan has not been approved yet. If approved, the deal would see the three firms — Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltd., JTI-Macdonald Corp. and Rothmans, Benson & Hedges — pay: $24.7 billion to the provinces and territories; $6.6 billion to individuals who experienced defined smoking-related diseases or their survivors; and $1 billion to a new national foundation for research into cancer and other smoking-related diseases. China Although China faces many tobacco-related health problems, with over 1.2 million tobacco-related deaths per year, the government has had a limited response. The tobacco industry provides 7 to 10 percent of tax revenue for the government, while also providing many jobs in agriculture, sales, and other businesses. However, smoking is completely banned in many public places and workplaces such as healthcare, educational, and government facilities, and on public transport. However, public health advocates have been pushing for stricter regulations to curb tobacco use, citing the economic burden of tobacco-related diseases on the healthcare system. India is a signatory to the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC), which mandates strong anti-tobacco measures, including bans on advertising, higher taxes, and warning labels. Japan After the Meiji Restoration in the nineteenth century, Japan began taxing tobacco. Historically, tobacco revenue has been used to fund military endeavors. In 2017, in preparation for the 2020 Summer Olympic and Paralympic Games hosted in Tokyo, the Health, Labor and Welfare Ministry called to ban smoking in public facilities. The food service industry, which includes public premises like restaurants and bars, strongly opposed this measure. Nicotine-containing e-cigarettes are only permitted as medicinal products, and no e-cigarettes have been approved. Regular cigarettes and other tobacco products are not prohibited. Netherlands The Lidl supermarket chain in the Netherlands stopped selling cigarettes in 2021. Portugal Law No. 37/2007 established the legal basis for advertising bans, labeling rules, and measures to protect against exposure to smoke. The Directorate-General of Health coordinates the National Program for the Prevention and Control of Tobacco Use and publishes technical guidelines that support regulatory actions and cessation policies. In 2017, the Supreme Court of Justice ruled that the Competition Authority should launch an investigation to look into allegations of abuse of dominant position by Tabaqueira, raised by wholesalers. Wholesalers (represented by industry associations) challenged decisions by the Competition Authority that authorized concentration operations in the tobacco market — the administrative court annulled at least one of these authorizations, forcing the repetition of acts or allowing the parties to seek judicial redress. News reports from 2025 indicate that Tabaqueira may be ordered to pay millions of euros to shopkeepers, following the recognition, in higher court rulings, of practices that may constitute abuse of dominant position; this legal process includes requests for the standardization of jurisprudence and potential lawsuits for damages. Russia In Russia, smoking is very prevalent, with tobacco industries wielding great influence in Russian politics. Several Russian Duma members have also worked within the tobacco industry. Seychelles While tobacco products are not prohibited, there are some restrictions that exist on the manufacture, importation, and sale of tobacco products, including packaging and labeling requirements. The use of e-cigarettes has also been legal since 2019. Singapore While tobacco products are not prohibited, some restrictions exist on the sale of tobacco products, and E-cigarettes are prohibited. Slovenia The ranking of Slovenia in the Tobacco Control Scale moved from the 28th position in 2016 to the 8th in 2019. It is one of the 13 EU member states that in 2012 approved a smoking ban in private cars in the presence of minors. The remaining countries are: Ireland, UK, France, Finland, Italy, Malta, Cyprus, Lithuania, Slovenia, Luxembourg, Austria, Greece and Belgium. In 2020, Slovenia launched a program with the purpose to become a tobacco-free society by 2040, as the last useful date. South Africa Smoking in public is banned. This includes pubs, bars, walkways, and parking spaces, and smoking on public transport and domestic flights. The use of tobacco is also banned in any car carrying a person under the age of 12. Switzerland In 2018, following an appeal by an association of vapers, the Federal Administrative Court authorised the sale of nicotine-containing electronic cigarettes. In 2019, following an appeal by a company importing snus, the Federal Supreme Court authorised its sale, due to a lack of sufficient legal basis for a ban. England met its target to reduce its adult smoking prevalence to 21% or lower by 2010. The majority of tobacco advertisements were outlawed under British jurisdiction after the Tobacco Advertising and Promotion Act 2002 was implemented. Ukraine While tobacco products remain legal in Ukraine, recent legislative reforms introduced additional licensing and compliance requirements for farmers cultivating tobacco (as outlined in Law of Ukraine No. 481/95-VR). These measures aim to maintain quality standards and reduce illicit trade, reflecting the government’s broader strategy to address the health impacts of tobacco consumption. Uruguay The law prohibits the sale of tobacco products via vending machines, the internet, educational facilities and various other places. E-cigarettes are also prohibited. ==See also==