Design of plain packages

Van Onselen gets into the foam about growth forecast value of the total taxed tobacco for the first six months of the introduction of plain packaging, in December 2012 (“course”), it is difficult to count the ways that he can not understand why his conclusions so prone to error .

Many of my colleagues were very surprised by his statement that during the past 40 years the government had “billions” of tobacco control in Australia. Forty years takes us back to 1972. I worked on the first nationwide campaign in Australia in New South Wales in 1982. I do not remember our budget, but it was, of course, for less than $ 1 million. Expenditures under this consisted of several posters and brochures.

It was not until 1997 that the big money started to go in the fight against tobacco and its evaluation, starting with only $ 3.5 m a year. Add up all expenses and you will be pushed to get the total cost for 40 years and a half billion, not “billions”.

Van Onselen also does not seem to realize that plain packaging will not see packets that are “shrunken logos”: they will not have any logos, only brand in the standard font. Also, that the case “goes to the Supreme Court”: he went there in April, a decision is expected before October.

Decreases in the prevalence of smoking, which was pretty much continuously since the beginning of research in the 1970s reflects the interaction between many factors.

Niagara negative information is initially healthy enough to start the rot of tobacco. Rising prices sent the cost of smoking tobacco through a series of psychological barriers, with $ 20 packs of the impending attack of the body as just another industry.

The social demoralization caused by expulsion of smokers smoking outside buildings must stop sharing them with smoke, bottomless revelation of the falsity of the tobacco industry, including their designs drooling in children in their internal documents, and the end all tobacco advertising, smoking has led to the control records.

Still, tobacco kills more Australians each year than many other known causes of death combined.

Normal packages promise to add to the mix of toxic smoke and drive further into the story. Along the way, detractors and messengers for the industry will continue to question every new proposal advanced recipes such as “it’s never been done before – there is no evidence.

Finally, all those who believe that the excise tax on tobacco products are nothing more than a cynical exercise in raising government revenues need only spend a few hours in the swamp of millions of pages of internal tobacco industry documents available on the Internet after a lawsuit in the United States.

Here are some examples: “The surest way to reduce consumption through tax”, “high prices for cigarettes more than any other cigarette attribute, has the greatest impact on the output share of the population” and “Of all the problems are – taxation – it disturbs us the most “.

And again: “The problem of raising taxes is the fact that this decrease in consumption.”

Taxes on tobacco products currently used in Australia, is very effective to reduce tobacco consumption, with the added advantage that the Australian community are easily assembled form of tax revenues, which are used for the benefit of us all.

Former Owner of Cigarettes Cheaper Sentenced to 5 Years

CA-Ned Roscoe was sentenced yesterday to five years in prison, and his father, John Roscoe, was sentenced to five years probation with 12 months of house arrest, U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag announced. Ned and John Roscoe, former owners and employees of cigarettes for less! Who was in the midst of nearly 800 stores across the country and $ 1 billion in annual revenue?
After a month of trial by jury, Ned Roscoe, 51, of Fairfield, Calif., was convicted Feb. 22, 2011, of all 28 charges. At trial, evidence showed that Ned Roscoe of conspiracy to defraud and make false statements to Comerica Bank, committed 13 acts of bank fraud, and made 13 false statements to Comerica Bank, where he knowingly submitted weekly borrowing base reports of inventory Comerica to August 22 ., 2003, to November 14, 2003 with the overvaluation of inventory, eventually inflating inventory by more than 16 million dollars. The jury also found that Ned Roscoe caused additional false statements made in the Comerica Bank, where he directed the employee to explain the cause false inventory inflation. U.S. District Judge Ronald M. Whyte, who sentenced Ned Roscoe, showed that Ned Roscoe actions caused losses in the bank more than $ 10.7 million.
John Roscoe, 82, of Green Valley, Calif., pleaded guilty January 21, 2011, of conspiring to give false testimony in the Comerica Bank. In accordance with the plea agreement, John Roscoe admitted that from August 22, 2003 to November 24, 2003 Ned Roscoe deliberately prepared, or caused to be prepared, falsely inflated estimates of the inventory reported Comerica, that John Roscoe agreed with Ned Roscoe, that he would prepare, or cause to be prepared, these reports are borrowing base, and that John Roscoe agreed that they appear to Comerica Bank. John Roscoe later admitted that he was aware that the employee was directed to explain the cause of false inflation of inventory.
Federal Bureau of Investigation began an investigation in 2004 after the transition from Comerica Bank. Ned and John Roscoe were indicted by federal grand jury on June 16, 2007. September 30, 2011, the jury returned superseding the second charge, which contains 28 items.
These sentences were imposed Judge White, who was also sentenced Ned Roscoe, a five-year period of supervised release. Ned Roscoe is scheduled to begin serving his sentence on March 21, 2012. John Roscoe will begin serving his sentence immediately. The judge scheduled a hearing on the White March 5, 2012, to determine the amount of restitution Ned and John Roscoe will have to pay Comerica.
Eumi Choi and Grant Fondo are the assistant U.S. attorneys who prosecuted the case with Kamille Singh. The prosecution is the result of a three-year FBI investigation.

Popular cigarette brand

Japan Tobacco is to launch redesigned versions of seven of its popular Pianissimo brand of cigarettes in middle of-January.
Pianissimo is a best-selling-cigarettes-brands-across-the-tobacco-industry in the Japanese 100 mm slim menthol category, and was especially popular among women smokers, because of Japan’s largest tobacco company says, “A sleek, unassuming and refreshing menthol taste and aroma.”
Smoking rates decreased in Japan, although they remain higher for men and women than in Europe and North America.
The government has raised taxes on tobacco products by 30% at the end of 2010, reducing the number of domestic smokers at the time were also suggestions recently that another tax hike needed, as the government looks for ways to pay for the reconstruction of the north-eastern Japan that were severely damaged by natural disasters in March last year.
As part of its campaign to attract new customers – as well as maintain existing customers – Japan Tobacco has updated his car collection in September, to make it “modern cigarettes to adults.”
Now it is the turn of seven Pianissimo products to be repackaged, while four will be given new names.
Pianissimo One of them, which will be renamed Aria menthol, “an opera term for air melodious solo,” the company said, while the new white packaging and water pipes are designed to symbolize a “sweet, gentle nature of the product.”
Pianissimo Super Slims Menthol One of them, to become Precis menthol, because menthol sensation concentrated, while the brand Icene Menthol will Icene Crist to emphasize the “scary feeling menthol.”
The brand was first launched in Japan in 1995 and the latest addition to the range – Pianissimo VIV Menthol – was in November 2011. A pack of 20 retails for Y440 (RM17.90).
Japan Tobacco is by far the dominant player in the domestic market and smokers will be waiting to see how other companies, particularly foreign firms such as British American Tobacco, respond.
Japan Tobacco’s products are sold in more than 120 countries and it controls Benson & Hedges as well as the Mayfair, Winston, Camel, Silk Cut and Glamour brands. At home, it has a two-thirds share of the domestic market and its flagship brands include Seven Stars, Peace, Caster, Hope and Mild Seven.
Japan Tobacco statistics show that 24.95 million Japanese smoke of the adult population 104.4 million. A recent study by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, showed that smoking among men has fallen to 36.8% – its lowest level since such surveys began in 1986 – while the figure for women came to 9.1%, below the 10% threshold for the first time since 2001. – AFP-Relaxnews

Several US States Weigh in on Cigarette Label Suit

Several states and U.S. territories are weighing in on a lawsuit over proposed graphic cigarette warning labels that include a sewn-up corpse of a smoker and a picture of diseased lungs, saying the federal government should be allowed to require the labels for the “lethal and addictive” products.
The 24 attorneys general filed a friend of the court brief on Friday in the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington in support of the Food and Drug Administration’s challenge of a lower court ruling in the case.
Last month, a U.S. District Court judge granted a request by some of the nation’s largest tobacco companies, including R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. and Lorillard Tobacco Co., to block the labels while deciding whether the labels violate their free speech rights. The judge ruled it is likely the cigarette makers would succeed in a lawsuit to block the requirement that the labels be placed on cigarette packs next year.
Representatives for R.J. Reynolds declined to comment. Officials with Lorillard did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment Saturday.
The tobacco companies have questioned the constitutionality of the labels, saying the warnings don’t simply convey facts to inform people’s decision whether to smoke but instead force the cigarette makers to display government anti-smoking advocacy more prominently than their own branding. They also say that changing cigarette packaging will cost millions of dollars.
Meanwhile, the FDA has said that the public interest in conveying the dangers of smoking outweighs the companies’ free speech rights.
In the filing Friday, the attorneys general said that the First Amendment does not prevent the government from requiring that “lethal and addictive products carry warning labels that effectively inform consumers of the risks those products entail.”
“Over forty years’ experience with small, obscurely placed text-only warning labels on cigarette packs has demonstrated that they simply do not work,” they wrote. “The warning labels reflect the unique magnitude of the problem they address, the deadly and addictive nature of the product, and the unparalleled threat this product and its marketing pose to America’s youth.”
The brief was filed by attorneys general from Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Mississippi, Montana, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, the Virgin Islands, Washington and West Virginia.
In June, the FDA approved nine new warning labels that companies are to print on the entire top half of cigarette packs, front and back. The new warnings, each of which includes a number for a stop-smoking hotline, must constitute 20 percent of cigarette advertising, and marketers are to rotate use of the images.
One label depicts a corpse with its chest sewn up and the words “Smoking can kill you.” Another shows a healthy pair of lungs beside a yellow and black pair with a warning that smoking causes fatal lung disease.
Joining North Carolina-based R.J. Reynolds and Lorillard in the lawsuit are Commonwealth Brands Inc., Liggett Group LLC and Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Company Inc.
Richmond-based Altria Group Inc., parent company of the nation’s largest cigarette maker, Philip Morris USA, which makes top-selling Marlboros, is not a part of the lawsuit.
The free speech lawsuit is separate from a lawsuit by several of the same companies over the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. That law, which took effect two years ago, cleared the way for the more graphic warning labels. But it also allowed the FDA to limit nicotine and banned tobacco companies from sponsoring athletic or social events or giving away free samples or branded merchandise.
A federal judge upheld many parts of the law, but the case is now pending before the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati.
While the tobacco industry’s latest legal challenge may not hold up, it could delay the new warning labels for years. And that is likely to save cigarette makers millions of dollars in lost sales and increased packaging costs.
Tobacco companies are increasingly relying on their packaging to build brand loyalty and grab consumers. It’s one of few advertising levers left to them after the government curbed their presence in magazines, billboards and TV.

2011 in Review: Local Tobacco Issues

NATO executive director looks at issues that have affected retailers at the local level this year.
In 2011, there has been an increase in local governments considering ordinances to further regulate tobacco products, restrict tobacco advertising and impose new local excise taxes on tobacco products. Aside from budget deficits prompting proposals to raise excise taxes, there are two main reasons why local governments have been pursuing more restrictive laws and higher taxes on tobacco products.
First, Section 916 of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the law enacted in 2009 that authorized the FDA to regulate cigarettes, roll-your-own and smokeless tobacco products) specifically states that local governments may “enact, adopt, promulgate, and enforce any law, rule, regulation, or other measure…prohibiting the sale, distribution, possession, exposure to, access to, advertising and promotion of, or use of tobacco products by individuals of any age….” While local governments have always had this implied authority to enact such restrictions, including outright prohibition, the FDA law essentially sanctioned the ability of cities and counties to consider and adopt such regulations and restrictions.
Second, the federal stimulus program passed by Congress and signed into law by President in 2009 included hundreds of millions of dollars in grant funds, being disbursed by such agencies as the Centers for Disease Control. The purpose of these federal grants to local governments is to support adoption of tobacco control measures, obesity awareness programs and other wellness efforts. That is, federal taxpayer dollars are being used by local governments to fund passage of ordinances to regulate and restrict legal tobacco products.
A summary of the major local issues that NATO has been involved in during 2011 are as follows:
Linn County, Iowa sought to adopt an ordinance to ban the sale of dissolvable products and prohibit “buy-one, get-one-free” promotions. The ordinance did not pass.
Worcester, Mass., became the first city to pass an ordinance banning all outdoor and in-store tobacco advertising. NATO, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, Philip Morris USA and Lorillard Tobacco Company filed a lawsuit against the city, seeking to overturn the ordinance on First Amendment free speech grounds. A summary judgment motion hearing was held in federal district court on September 8th and a ruling from the judge should be issued soon.
The Philadelphia Board of Health is considering an ordinance to require that graphic image warning signs be placed at each register in retail stores that sell tobacco products. NATO has submitted legal comments to the Philadelphia Board of Health regarding how such a mandate violates constitutional First Amendment free speech protections. And NATO President Andy Kerstein, along with another retailer, testified against the ordinance. Just after a federal district court judge issued a temporary restraining order on November 7th against the FDA’s graphic image cigarette warnings, a copy of the judge’s ruling was sent to the Philadelphia Board of Health since the board is considering essentially the same kind of graphic image requirement. As this point, the Philadelphia Board of Health has not taken any action on the proposed sign ordinance.
The Danville, Va., city council considered adopting a local cigarette tax and tobacco product tax. NATO Board of Director Frank Armstrong and one of his store staff members testified against the proposed taxes. The cigarette and other tobacco product (OTP) taxes were not adopted.
The Boston Public Health Commission passed an ordinance on December 1st that bans single cigar sales, and also requires that cigars be sold in a manufacturer’s package of at least four cigars. The ordinance does allow a retailer to sell a single cigar that has a wholesale price of more than $2 or a retail price of more than $2.50. Also, the ordinance doubled the fines on retailers that violate the ordinance. NATO sent legal comments to Public Health Commission members, opposing the cigar sales restriction and objecting to the doubling of retail violation fines.
The Cook County Board of Commissioners in Illinois passed a budget on November 18th that included new taxes on cigarettes produced by retailers using roll-your-own (RYO) machines and on RYO tobacco, smokeless tobacco and cigars. The new taxes are as follows:
A tax of $.10 per cigarette on cigarettes produced by retailers operating roll-your-own machines.
Through December 31, 2012, the following taxes apply:
RYO and smokeless tobacco: $.30 per ounce of fraction thereof.

  • Little cigars: $.05 per unit or cigar.
  • Large cigars: $.25 per unit or cigar.

Effective January 1, 2013, the following taxes apply:
RYO and smokeless tobacco: $.60 per ounce of fraction thereof.

  • Little cigars: $.05 per unit or cigar.
  • Large cigars: $.30 per unit or cigar.

NATO opposed these new taxes with legal comments sent to the board of commissioners, activating not only NATO members, but also urging non-member retailers to contact their elected board members to oppose these new taxes.
By Thomas A

Cigarette debris plagues the campus

Let’s admit it, we are so fortunate to be students here at Saddleback College with the superb administration, exceptional professors, abundance of student resources, and a clean environment.
Unfortunately there is one issue that I have been observing here at Saddleback over a period of time, and that issue is the excess cigarette butt litter all over campus.
I’m sure every student has seen them. They cover our floors, planters, benches, lawns, tables, and are even abundant in our bathrooms.
The area most plagued by this debris is right outside of the Business/General Studies building. Many students gather in this area between classes to study, snack, socialize, or smoke a cigarette.
The problem with this is that many of the smokers in this area are not disposing of their cigarette butts properly. Just looking at this field of cigarette butts is disgusting.
The ethics behind the litter is my greatest concern. Are we, as current students, setting a good example for incoming students to our college? Are we expecting the staff at Saddleback to pick up our mess? And what does this say about the way we carry ourselves outside of academia?
These questions don’t need to be answered here, but should guide us in moving forward. On November 23, 2011, I organized a team of four to take action. Patrick Dobson, Jeffrey Whitridge, Bart Piwczynski and I decided to clean up the cigarette butts around the BGS building and in the quad.
We wanted to leave an impression on people, so we created fliers that asked students “What are you contributing to?” with before and after photos of the areas, and then posted them around the BGS building.
As I prepare to end my journey here at saddleback and make my way into the UC system, I felt compelled to give back to Saddleback for all the wonderful education that was provided for me. I feel that my experiences here at Saddleback have helped me become a responsible person.
I hope that the students will begin to dispose of their cigarettes properly, and that they will motivate others to continue this legacy of a clean and respectable campus.
By Giuseppe Cefalu

Tobacco Companies Think Their Trademarks Are More Important Than Your Health

Back in January of this year, Techdirt reported on tobacco companies suing a local Australian importer of their products for covering up part of their logos with a mandatory health warning. At the time, a spokeswoman for the company involved, British American Tobacco, said:
As the matter is currently before the Court, BAT is unable to comment other than to say that this is a further demonstration that we will take all necessary steps to protect our valuable intellectual property.
Given that stance, it will come as no surprise to learn that tobacco companies are now threatening to take on the European Commission as well:
EU Health Commissioner John Dalli will face legal action if he tries to reproduce Australia’s plain-packaging proposals for cigarettes in Europe, a tobacco industry representative warned this week.
The approach is the same as in Australia:
One likely focus of attack is intellectual property rights, since plain packaging has a smothering effect on companies’ logos and trademarks.
I’d like to think that the word “smothering” was taken verbatim from some tobacco company representative, because it sums up nicely the industry’s attitude: that any breathing difficulties or respiratory diseases that you may develop as the result of smoking pale into insignificance compared with the outrageous “smothering” of their logos and trademarks.
That’s a particularly callous attitude, because those logos and trademarks are only valuable to the degree they have been attached to products that have caused death and disease: the “best” brands are those with a track record of selling – and hence killing – more people than rival products. In effect, the tobacco companies are complaining that all their hard work getting people addicted and smoking themselves to death will be wasted if the plain-packaging proposals for cigarettes are implemented.
The cynical posturing of tobacco firms as the victims in these continuing attempts to undo and avoid the social harm they cause underlines once more how easily intellectual monopolies can be twisted for purposes far from any original justification they may once have had. Patents can kill: so, it seems will trademarks, if tobacco companies get their way.

Tobacco’s bad, but it is not the main killer

As the Summit County Coroner, I was surprised to read that tobacco is the No. 1 cause of death in Summit County (“Tobacco has a lifetime of consequences for kids,” guest commentary by Jenniffer Gonzalez, Nov. 25). When I then saw the “We Count” organization ad in the Daily on Nov. 28, I felt compelled to clarify. I cannot abide by facts being distorted or inflated to make a point. I list tobacco use on a death certificate as “past smoker or current smoker” when applicable, but it is NOT the No. 1 cause of death in Summit County.
The No. 1 cause of death in Summit County is heart disease. It is usually not due to any one cause but a combination. You can be doing everything right and still have heart disease. In these cases, genetics is to blame. Social history of current or past history of tobacco use, drug use, obesity and processed food are the lifestyle contributors. There are only a handful of cases a year in Summit County that can be directly linked to tobacco use. These would include lung cancer, COPD or emphysema. So no, it is not the No. 1 cause of death in Summit County. I don’t know where Ms. Gonzalez pulled this number from, but she didn’t consult my office and it is obvious she did not consult the Colorado Health Department, either.
We live in a free market society that brings many choices, and people don’t always make the right choices. Tobacco companies have lobbyists, and the incestuous nature of their relationships with lawmakers contributes to this problem. We live in such a commercial society that it will continue to be an issue. These new tobacco products aren’t taxed due to a loophole in our state law. There is an interactive video program geared for students that I would like to bring to Summit County. It was developed by People Learning About Destructive Decisions or PLADD. It’s called “Beat the Reaper.” Part of my job includes trend analysis, public education and prevention. To quote PLADD: “Every decision made has a ripple effect that stretches well beyond what we can see or even imagine. Good decisions can be the difference between life and death.”
By my stating that tobacco is not the No. 1 cause of death in Summit County might cause some to think “The coroner says smoking and tobacco are not so bad.” That is not what I am saying at all. It is a stupid habit. Tobacco instigates many medical issues and makes exercise and stamina difficult. Becoming addicted to tobacco has been shown to lead to other addictions. So to kids, I say be your own person. Be an individual. Think for yourself. They aren’t your friends if they encourage you to do what they do. You can hang with them without joining in. Your decision should be respected. To adults, it’s your choice, but it’s not a smart one.
By Joanne Richardson

Stiffer penalties enacted as illicit trade increases

Singapore has approved stiffer penalties for those convicted of smuggling tobacco products, according to a story in the Straits Times relayed by the TMA.
First-time offenders now face a minimum fine of S$2,000, while repeat offenders face a minimum fine of S$4,000 and risk imprisonment if caught with more than 2 kg of tobacco products.
In addition, traders who provide incorrect information to third-party agents for making customs declarations will also be liable for prosecution.
The changes came after customs statistics indicated that tobacco-related offenses, including smuggling and buying, selling or possessing untaxed tobacco products, increased by 24 per cent from 2005 to 2010, and that the number of repeat offenders rose by more than six times during the same period.

Obama Scolds Tobacco Companies Over Labeling

President Barack Obama scolded tobacco companies Thursday for trying to block health warning labels on cigarettes, a product the world leader himself only recently quit using.
“The fact is quitting smoking is hard, believe me, I know,” Obama said in a recorded statement posted on the White House’s Web site Thursday. The message coincided with the Great American Smokeout, an annual campaign to encourage Americans to quit smoking sponsored by the American Cancer Society.
“Today some big tobacco companies are trying to block these labels because they don’t want to be honest about the consequences of using their products,” said Obama. “Unfortunately, this isn’t surprising.”
In 2009, Congress passed Family Prevention and Tobacco Control, which put tobacco products under the watch of the Food and Drug Administration and forced companies to label their products.
In August, several tobacco companies fired back with a lawsuit against the FDA, FDA chief Margaret Hamburg and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. The lawsuit claimed that the graphic warning labels violated the constitutional rights of the companies.
The White House announced Oct. 31 that the president was tobacco-free. The medical exam, given by presidential physician Dr. Jeff Kuhlman, stated that Obama was in good health, tobacco free and fit for duty.
The International Tobacco Regulators’ Conference was held Wednesday in Maryland, a meeting of 65 regulatory agencies from 22 countries hosted by the FDA and the World Health Organization.
“The industry sees the entire world as a potential market,” FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg said in a press statement. “It is only natural that like-minded leaders band together to combat this global threat in unison.”
The tough talk did little to rattle stocks in tobacco companies. Stocks rose in three of the world’s largest tobacco companies in Thursday trading including Reynolds American, Inc. (RAI), parent company of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Holdings, Inc.; Altria Group, Inc. and Vector Group, Ltd. Stocks in British American Tobacco fell Thursday.
“The best way to prevent the health problems that come with smoking is to keep young people from starting in the first place,” Obama said.
Government officials pushed the campaign to restrict tobacco manufacturers from reaching the next generation of potential smokers.
The campaign is “making tobacco not cool to kids, letting kids know at an early age that this will cause a lifetime of harm,” Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said in an interview Thursday with iVillage correspondent Kelly Wallace.
Every day, 3,800 teens aged 12-17 smoke a cigarette for the first time, according to the 2010 National Survey on Drug Use and Health. The survey showed that each year, 1,000 teens cross over to become daily smokers.
Sebelius, herself a smoker when she was a teenager, said, “It was stupid, I thought it was cool.
“Doing something that (teens) think is going to be social and ‘I’ll do it every once in a while’ can quickly become a habit,” she said. “The fact that I used to smoke will be with me forever,” including increased risk for cancer,” she said.
Sebelius said government regulators were using various strategies to reduce cigarette consumption in youth. For example, on Nov. 10, the FDA released a list of 1,200 retailers slapped with warnings of underage selling. Some states have also boosted cigarette taxes, which prohibits teen sales, Sebelius said.
By Trevor Stokes