24 juin 2009
Package onserts
One of the vehicles for the corrective statements is a
cigarette package onsert, which the district court ordered
Defendants to “affix to cigarette packaging, either on the outside
of or within the outer cellophane wrapping around the package
. . . in the same manner as certain Defendants, such as Philip
Morris and Brown & Williamson, have utilized package onserts
in the past.”
Defendants
object that the onserts violate the Federal Cigarette Labeling and
Advertising Act (“Labeling Act”), which provides that “[n]o
statement relating to smoking and health, other than the
statement required by section 1333 of this title, shall be required
on any cigarette package.”
The Labeling Act defines a “package” as “a pack, box,
carton, or container of any kind in which cigarettes are offered
for sale, sold, or otherwise distributed to consumers.” A package onsert is “[a] communication affixed to
but separate from an individual cigarette pack and/or carton
purchased at retail by consumers, such as a miniature brochure
included beneath the outer cellophane wrapping or glued to the
outside of the cigarette packaging.”
09 juin 2009
Newport cigarettes ads
02 juin 2009
Countries can save lives by raising tobacco taxes
Tobacco tax increases are the most effective
way to reduce tobacco use, and also have the
benefit of increasing government revenues.
Although many countries have raised tobacco
taxes, they remain low in the overwhelming
majority of countries. With inflation and
increased consumer purchasing power,
cigarettes are becoming relatively more
affordable, even in many countries where
the tax accounts for a large proportion of
the purchase price. Furthermore, in many
countries, low levels of taxation on smoked
tobacco products other than cigarettes
(e.g. bidis and kreteks) and low prices for
inexpensive brands of cigarettes reduce the
potential health benefits of tobacco taxation
and can undermine other tobacco control
interventions.
Countries could cut tobacco use
significantly and save lives through higher
tobacco taxes.
Among 152 countries that provided
information, cigarette tax rates range from
near zero to more than 80%. Most countries
could increase taxes significantly. One quarter
of countries report tax rates less than 25% of
the tobacco retail price. Only four countries,
representing 2% of the world’s population,
have tax rates greater than 75% of retail price.
While more than four fifths of high-income
countries tax tobacco at more than 50% of
retail price, less than a quarter of low- and
middle-income countries tax tobacco at 50% or
more of retail price. This pattern is particularly
disturbing given the shift in the epidemic from
high-income countries to developing countries.
Increasing taxes in all countries is essential.
Many are already raising taxes – without
increasing smuggling or experiencing other
negative economic impacts predicted by the
tobacco industry.
In South Africa, tobacco
tax increases led to a doubling of the retail
price of cigarettes and a large increase in
tax revenues in the 1990s. During the same
period, cigarette consumption declined
dramatically; approximately 40% of the
decrease was due to smokers quitting. The
largest decreases were among young people
and low-wage earners, those who reduce
smoking most when prices increase.107
Increasing taxes is the most effective tobacco
control measure. Higher taxes reduce
consumption, lower health-care costs, help
households save money by reducing tobacco
use, and increase government revenues, which
can help pay for tobacco control interventions
and other policy priorities.