Background

It was previously known as Bund für Lebensmittelrecht und Lebensmittelkunde (BLL), the German Federation for Food Law and Food Sciences.⁴

As of 2023, members include around 70 associations, 250 companies, and 150 corporate and individual members.⁵

LMVD describes itself as “opinion-forming platform, service provider and consultant” for its members.² It undertakes lobbying activities in both Germany and the European Union (EU).⁶³

Links to the tobacco industry

Tobacco industry members

LMVD is financed exclusively from its membership fees, however no figures are disclosed.⁷

Members include:

• Philip Morris GmbH, a subsidiary of Philip Morris International (PMI).⁸⁹
• The Association of the German Smoking Tobacco Industry (VdR). This association represents the interests of manufacturers and EU distributors of tobacco, as well as importers of cigars and cigarillos based in Germany.¹⁰ Patrick Engels, Chairman of VdR, sits on LMVD’s board of trustees.¹¹

Although not listed as a member on LMVD’s website, as of February 2023, the Federal Association of the Tobacco Industry and Novel Products (BVTE) listed its membership of LMVD in the German lobbying register in September 2022.¹² BVTE states that it “represents and promotes the interests of the entire value chain across all smoking and vaping products as well as tobacco and nicotine products for oral use”.¹³ BVTE’s members include British American Tobacco, Imperial Brands, Japan Tobacco International, and Swedish Match (now owned by PMI).¹⁴

Activities

LMVD has regularly criticised and lobbied against the introduction of new tobacco control policies.

Against bans on tobacco advertising

In October 2000, LMVD released a statement expressing its support of a recent ruling in the European Court of Justice that blocked a directive to ban tobacco advertising and sponsorship,¹⁵ stating “[LMVD] is again strictly against such advertising bans… A total ban on advertising legitimate products on the market is contrary to European legal systems… advertising bans cannot reduce the proportion of smokers in the population at all. Consumer information and education is a more appropriate way to enable consumers to make informed purchasing decisions”[translation].¹⁵

Lobbied against revisions to the EU Tobacco Products Directive

The Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) regulates the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products in the EU. In 2014, the EU completed the first revision of the TPD (2014/40/EU), which became applicable in the EU Member States in May 2016. Regulations included a ban on the use of characterising flavours, an increase in size of graphic health warnings, and a ban on tobacco advertising.

LMVD lobbied against the revision of the TPD on several occasions.

In December 2012, LMVD publicly opposed the proposed revisions to packaging regulations,¹⁶ stating that:

“These are requirements that are not compatible with either the fundamental rights of consumers or those of companies. Almost standardized packaging, 75 percent of which contains warnings and leaves little space for brand names and product information, ignores consumers’ right to information and freedom of choice”[translation].¹⁷

In February 2013, LMVD submitted a statement to the Government arguing against the draft directive. The statement noted that PMI would also be providing comments:¹⁸¹⁹

“…we thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above draft. For the rest, we refer to the statements of the trade associations and the company Philip Morris who will contact you directly with their comments”.[translation]

PMI is known to have spent millions of euros on an elaborate lobbying campaign against revisions to the TPD, involving more than 160 lobbyists.

In the statement, LMVD argued against the ban on characterising flavours, and stated that introducing plain packaging and increasing the size of graphic health warnings violated EU law.

LMVD also stated that the draft directive could affect a large number of small and medium enterprises, subjecting them to “administrative and financial hurdles that are disproportionate to adequate regulation for the purpose of comprehensive health protection”[translation].¹⁹

LMVD released another statement in July 2013 claiming that “With the proposed general ban on additives, the EU Commission is demonizing the use of flavourings without any scientific basis”.²⁰

It argued that scientific test criteria must be developed before the regulation of characterising flavours in tobacco products, and that its tobacco industry members would like to be involved in this process.²⁰

The World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) highlights the need to protect public health policies from the tobacco industry.

In November 2015, LMVD made a further submission to the government that was heavily critical of the changes, this time also citing concerns about the introduction of an advertising ban:²¹

“A total ban on information and advertising for lawful products contradicts our economic system and the basic law”[translation].

• For an overview of the EU TPD Revision process and the tobacco industry’s response, see: EU Tobacco Products Directive Revision

Opposed tobacco advertising ban in Germany

In 2016, LMVD criticised a draft law that proposed a ban on all outdoor advertising of tobacco products and e-cigarettes, a regulation which was not included in the 2014 TPD revision.  In a press release LMVD stated “[LMVD] considers total bans on the advertising of legal products to adults to be a deep cut in society’s concept of freedom”.²²

In 2019, it also took part in government discussions regarding the possible extension of tobacco advertising bans.²³

Lobbying on heated tobacco

In March 2022, LMVD opposed an amendment to the TPD which proposed the withdrawal of certain regulatory exemptions for heated tobacco products.²⁴

LMVD claimed that including the same health warnings on HTP packaging that appear on other tobacco products would constitute misinformation to the customer. It also argued that the EU commission did not have the authority to create new product categories or change existing definitions.²⁵²⁶

Tobacco Tactics Resources:

• EU Tobacco Products Directive Revision
• Third Party Techniques

References

The post Lebensmittelverband Deutschland (Food Federation Germany) appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

Philip Morris International (PMI) is the largest tobacco company in the world (excluding the Chinese National Tobacco Corporation).²⁷ The company is headquartered in New York in the United States (US), but also based operationally in Lausanne, Switzerland and Hong Kong. According to the Associated Press, Altria decided to separate Philip Morris USA and its international operations in order to “clear the international tobacco business from the legal and regulatory constraints facing its domestic counterpart, Philip Morris USA”.²⁸

In 2018, PMI and its subsidiaries sold its products in over 180 markets, selling cigarettes, other tobacco products and newer nicotine and tobacco products. The company reported in 2019 that it held 28.4% of the global market for cigarette and heated tobacco products (HTPS) excluding the US and China.²⁹ The company owned six of the top 15 international cigarette brands in 2018. Its global cigarette brands are Marlboro (the world’s bestselling international brand), Merit, Parliament, Virginian S, L&M, Philip Morris, Bond Street, Chesterfield, Lark, Muratti, Next and Red & White. The company reported owning a market share of at least 15% or over in 100 countries in 2018, although in the UK PMI held only fourth position for cigarette market share behind Imperial Tobacco, Japan Tobacco International (JTI) and British American Tobacco (BAT).³⁰

According to Euromonitor International, PMI’s global share of the cigarette market (by retail volume) was under 14% in 2018, and fell to 12% in 2020 (figures rounded). ³¹

On 27 August 2019, global news outlets reported that PMI and Altria were considering a merger to reunite the brands that had split in 2007.³²³³³⁴ However the merger was called off the next month, in response to news that the FDA was considering a ban on flavoured e-cigarettes.³⁵³⁶ On March 21, 2018, PMI acquired Tabacalera Costarricense, S.A. and Mediola y Compañía, S.A. for USD$95 million, which sell Derby, Marlboro and L&M cigarettes in Costa Rica.²⁹

Employees or Board Members: Past and Present

Jacek Olczak was appointed the Chief Executive Officer of PMI in May 2021.³⁷ Previously he was the company’s Chief Operating Officer. He succeeded André Calantzopoulos who was appointed Executive Chairman of the Board. The previous chairman Louis C. Camilleri, stepped down in Decemer 2020. A full list of the company’s leadership team can be accessed at PMI’s website. Other persons that currently work for, or have previously been employed with, the company:

Massimo Andolina | Chris Argent | Drago Azinovic | Emmanuel Babeau | Werner Barth | Charles Bendotti | Frank de Rooij | Frederic de Wilde | Suzanne Rich Folsom | Stacey Kennedy | Martin King | Michael Kunst | Andreas Kurali | Bin Li | Marco Mariotti | Mario Massroli | Deepak Mishra | Silke Muenster | John O’Mullane | Paul Riley | Marian Salzman | Gregoire Verdeaux | Michael Voegele | Stefano Volpetti | Jerry Whitson |  Martin J. Barrington | David Bernick | Bertrand Bonvin | Harold Brown | Patrick Brunel | Mathis Cabiallavetta | Louis C. Camilleri | Andrew Cave | Herman Cheung | Kevin Click | Marc S. Firestone | John Dudley Fishburn | Jon Huenemann | Even Hurwitz | Jennifer Li | Graham Mackay | Sergio Marchionne | Kate Marley | Kalpana Morparia | Jim Mortensen | Lucio A. Noto | Matteo Pellegrini | Robert B. Polet | Ashok Rammohan | Carlos Slim Helú | Julie Soderlund | Hermann Waldemer | Stephen M. Wolf | Miroslaw Zielinski

Affiliations

Memberships

In 2019, PMI declared membership of the following organisations on the European Transparency Register:³⁸

The American Chamber of Commerce to the European Union | American European Community Association (AECA) | American Chamber of Commerce of Lithuania | Ass. Industrial Portuguesa (AIP) | Business Europe | Centromarca | CEOE | Czech Association Branded Goods | Czech Foodstuff Chamber | Economiesuisse | Estonian Chamber of Commerce | European Communities Trademark Association (ECTA) | European Policy Centre (EPC) | Kangaroo Group | Latvian Chamber of Commerce | Latvian Traders Association | Lithuanian Confederation of Industrialists | MARQUES | Spanish Tobacco Roundtable | VBO-FBE

PMI had previously listed memberships of: International Trademark Association (INTA) | The Trans-Atlantic Business Council (TABC) | | European Risk Forum | European Smokeless Tobacco Council (ESTOC) | British Chamber of Commerce | Public Affairs Council | APRAM | LES France | AmCham Germany | Bund fur Lebensmittelrecht & Lebensmittelkunde | Europaischer Wirtschaftssenat (EWS) | Wirtschaftsbeirat der Union e.V. | American Chamber of Commerce of Estonia | American Lithuanian Business Council | Lithuanian Confederation of Industrialists | Investors’ Forum | AmCham Spain | Unindustria (Confindustria) | Consumer Packaging Alliance | British Brands Group | Foodstuff Chamber The company is also a donor to the Eliminating Child Labour in Tobacco Growing Foundation (ECLT), alongside BAT, Imperial Brands, JTI and Swedish Match, among others.³⁹

In May 2015, ECLT and the International Labour Organization (ILO) entered into an agreement to develop global guidance on occupational health and safety with regards to child labour in the tobacco industry.⁴⁰ PMI was a member of the Confederation of European Community Cigarette Manufacturers (CECCM), but left in 2006 following a dispute with other members.⁴¹

Consultancies

PMI has worked with numerous Public Relations (PR) and law consultancies:

• In 2020 and 2021 PMI released white papers and held events on public trust in science in partnership with the Industry Transformation Coalition.
• In January 2020, PMI released a white paper entitled “Unsmoke Your Mind: Pragmatic Answers to Tough Questions for a Smoke-Free Future”. The company enlisted the consulting firm Povaddo, which works across public affairs, strategy and research,⁴² to conduct an opinion-based survey of smokers across 14 countries.⁴³ The report was heavily criticised in The Lancet medical journal (see below)⁴⁴ who pointed out that its findings were based on a “self-funded online survey”.⁴⁴ In July 2020, PMI published another white paper called “In Support of the Primacy of Science”, which was also based on online surveys conducted by Povaddo, on the public’s views on science.⁴⁵⁴⁶ In March 2021 PMI released the results of a third online survey, conducted by Povaddo in 20 countries, on public attitudes to newer nicotine and tobacco products and collaboration between governments and tobacco companies.⁴⁷ Povaddo has conducted previous research for PMI.⁴⁸
• In December 2019, researchers and academic institutions received invitations from the consulting firm, Handshake, to commission research on behalf of PMI on how companies navigate corporate transformation.⁴⁹
• In 2016, Philip Morris UK was a client of London-based PR and communications company Instinctif Partners.
• That same year, media also linked Brussels-based PR company Pantarhei Advisors to Philip Morris.
• In 2014, UK-based Media Intelligence Partners was PMI’s media contact during Sir Cyril Chantler’s plain packaging review.
• In 2014, German PR company Communications & Network Consulting AG (CNC) listed Philip Morris as a client on the EU Transparency Register.
• In that same year, Luxembourg-based Felula SA, a one-person consultancy run by Serge Estgen, listed PMI as its client on the EU Transparency Register.
• In 2013, Edinburgh-based Halogen Communications supported PMI’s opposition to Scotland’s plans to introduce Plain Packaging.
• In 2012 and 2013, PMI worked with London-based PR and media company Pepper Public Affairs on PMI’s Anti-Plain Packaging Media Campaign.
• In 2012, the UK branch of Crosby Textor Group, helped PMI oppose Plain packaging in the UK.
• Law firm Clifford Chance has a history of lobbying for PMI in the UK and European Union (EU). In 2009, the firm submitted anonymous Freedom of Information requests to a UK university on behalf of the tobacco company, and in 2011 and 2012 Clifford Chance’s Michel Petite lobbied on the EU Tobacco Products Directive.
• From 2009 to 2011 PR company Gardant Communications worked for Philip Morris UK. In 2009, the PR company supported Philip Morris’ PR Campaign Against the Display Ban and was involved in Philip Morris’ Regulatory Litigation Action Plan Against the Display Ban.
• APCO Associates‘ collaboration with PMI goes back to the 1990s when it helped the company set up the European Science and Environment Forum. More recently, it was involved in Philip Morris’ PR Campaign Against the Display Ban.
• London-based PR company INHouse Communications also played a part in Philip Morris’ PR Campaign Against the Display Ban.
• Ogilvy Group‘s collaboration with Philip Morris goes back to the 1950s when it ran one of its advertising campaigns.
• José María Aznar, the former Spanish Prime Minister (see below)

Controversial Marketing Strategies

Since its controversial “Be Marlboro: Targeting the World’s Biggest Brand at Youth” campaign in 2014, PMI have been accused on multiple occasions of targeting their products at young people. On its website, PMI says that it is “committed to doing our part to help prevent children from smoking or using nicotine products”. ⁵⁰ It further states that its “marketing complies with all applicable laws and regulations, and we have robust internal policies and procedures in place so that all our marketing and advertising activities are directed only toward adult smokers”.⁵⁰ Despite these assurances, PMI has been accused of, and fined for, running marketing campaigns that target young people. For more information see Be Marlboro: Targeting the World’s Biggest Brand at Youth. PMI has increasingly used social media to market its newer products, including e-cigarettes (also known as electronic nicotine delivery systems, or ENDS) and heated tobacco products.

• For more information on PMI’s newer, including IQOS, visit Newer Nicotine and Tobacco Products: Philip Morris International and Heated Tobacco Products: Philip Morris International.

In December 2023 The Times newspaper highlighted PMI’s role in third party campaigns promoting e-cigarettes in the UK.⁵¹ For more information visit the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World page.

Complicity in Tobacco Smuggling

PMI portrays itself publicly as a victim of illicit tobacco trade, with the company reporting that tobacco smuggling results in “considerable financial losses” and “damage” to manufacturers’ brands.⁵² To help tackle illicit trade, PMI launched a funding initiative called PMI IMPACT in 2016, worth US$100m and aimed at bringing together “organisations that fight illegal trade and related crimes, enabling them to implement solutions”.⁵³⁵⁴ In its first call for proposals in 2016, PMI asked for “projects that have an impact on illegal trade and related crimes in the European Union…”⁵⁵ The second call, made in 2017, expanded the areas of focus to include the Middle East, North Africa, South and Central America and South and Southeast Asia.⁵⁶ For more information, visit our page on PMI IMPACT. In contrast to the company’s public persona of being part of the smuggling solution, evidence shows that the company was, in fact, part of the problem. In 2000, the European Commission (backed by a majority of EU member states) started court proceedings in the US Courts against PMI and other tobacco companies for its complicity in tobacco smuggling. The Commission claimed that the tobacco companies “boosted their profits in the past by deliberately oversupplying some countries so that their product could be smuggled into the EU”, costing the EU millions of euros in lost tax and customs revenue.⁵⁷⁵⁸ PMI and the Commission settled their dispute in 2004, when the company agreed to pay the Commission £675m to fund anti-smuggling activities.⁵⁹ The two Parties signed an Anti-Counterfeit and Anti-Contraband Cooperation Agreement,⁶⁰ referred to by the company as Project Star. As part of this agreement, PMI commissioned KPMG to measure annually the size of the legal, contraband and counterfeit markets for tobacco products in each EU Member States. Project Star’s methodology and data have been strongly criticised for lack of transparency, overestimating illicit cigarette levels in some European countries, and serving PMI’s interests over those of the EU and its member states.⁶¹

Tactics to Subvert Tobacco Control Campaigns and Policies

PMI has strongly opposed tobacco control legislation and regulations across the world, including plain packaging in Australia and the UK, the EU Tobacco Products Directive (TPD), and tobacco control decrees in Uruguay. The company has used a variety of strategies and tactics to influence tobacco control policies and subvert existing regulations.

Funding Pro-Tobacco Research and Discrediting Independent Evidence

In response to plain packaging proposals in the UK, PMI funded research, expert opinion and public relations activities which supported its position. One of the people that PMI funded for this purpose was Will O’Reilly, a former Detective Chief Inspector with the London Metropolitan Police. O’Reilly was appointed as a PMI consultant in 2011,⁶² conducting undercover test purchases of illicit tobacco and publicising his findings in UK regional press.⁶³ One of PMI’s arguments to oppose plain packaging was that the public health measure would lead to an increase in illicit tobacco, including counterfeited plain packs. For background on, and a critique of, this argument, go to Countering Industry Arguments Against Plain Packaging: It will Lead to Increased Smuggling. O’Reilly’s test purchases appear to have enabled PMI to secure significant press coverage of its data on illicit tobacco.⁶⁴ In March 2019, Euromonitor International, a market research organisation, received funding through two PMI initiatives: the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World and PMI IMPACT.⁶⁵⁶⁶⁶⁷ Examples of other organisations and individuals that have received funding from PMI to produce research or expert opinions or critiques of independent evidence, in order to oppose tobacco control legislation are: Deloitte | KPMG | Transcrime | Roy Morgan Research | Ashok Kaul | Michael Wolf | Populus | Centre for Economics and Business Research⁶⁸⁶⁹ | Compass Lexecon⁷⁰ | Rupert Darwall⁷¹ | James Heckman⁷² | Lord Hoffman⁷³ | Alfred Kuss⁷⁴ | Lalive ⁷⁵ | LECG⁷⁶⁷⁷⁷⁸ | London Economics | Povaddo⁴⁸| SKIM Consumer Research⁷⁹

• To see a list of all organisations funded through PMI’s Foundation for a Smoke-Free World (FSFW), visit our pages on the FSFW’s Centres of Excellence and grantees.
• For more information on the tobacco industry’s use of research to undermine legitimate independent evidence see: Plain Packaging in the UK: Tobacco Industry Funded Research, Expert Opinion and Public Relations.

Using Freedom of Information Requests to Acquire Public Health Research Data

Freedom of Information (FOI) requests are one strategy that the tobacco industry uses to undermine tobacco control legislation, often covertly using third parties.⁸⁰ In 2009, and again in 2011, PMI sent Freedom of Information requests to Stirling University (UK) requesting access to a wide range of data from its research on teenage smoking. PMI alleged that it wanted “to understand more about the research project conducted by the University of Stirling on plain packaging for cigarettes”.⁸¹ The FOI requests were eventually dropped. For more information on these FOI requests, and an explanation on how these requests impacted the University of Stirling, go to our page FOI: Stirling University.

Fabricating Support through Front Groups

PMI has used front groups to oppose tobacco control measures. Front Groups are organisations that purport to serve a public interest, while actually serving the interests of another party (in this case the tobacco industry), and often obscuring the connection between them. In Australia, leaked private documents revealed that the supposed anti-plain packaging retailer grass roots movement, the Alliance of Australian Retailers was set up by tobacco companies and that the Director of Corporate Affairs Philip Morris Australia, Chris Argent, played a critical role in its day-to-day operations.⁸²⁸³⁸⁴

• For more information on this front group, and Philip Morris Australia’s involvement, visit the Alliance of Australian Retailers page.
• For more information on front groups funded and/or organised by PMI and other tobacco companies, see the list on the Expose Tobacco website.

Lobbying of Decision Makers

Article 5.3 of the The World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) explicitly aims to reduce industry influence in public health policymaking by obliging parties to protect their health policies from tobacco industry interests and interference.⁸⁵ Yet tobacco industry representatives, and third-parties regularly attempt to influence public health policymaking in the industry’s favour. This section details some of these incidents involving PMI and the response of the governments and the global health community.

EU

PMI reported that it spent between €1,250,000 and €1,499,999 in 2019 lobbying EU institutions, employing only 2 fulltime equivalent staff in its Brussels office.³⁸ If this data is correct, it suggests that PMI relied heavily on external lobbying firms. A 2013 leaked internal PMI document revealed that the company had 161 lobbyists working to undermine the revision of the EU Tobacco Products Directive (TPD).⁸⁶ The objective of PMI’s campaign was to either “push” (i.e. amend) or “delay” the TPD proposal, and “block” any so-called “extreme policy options” like the proposed point of sales display ban and plain packaging.⁸⁷

• For more information on PMI’s campaign to undermine the TPD, go to EU Tobacco Products Directive Revision and PMI Mobilised Support from Retailers.

UK

The leaked internal PMI documents from 2013 also revealed the extent of a multi-faceted campaign against Plain Packaging in the UK, including a detailed media campaign using dozens of third parties (both individuals and organisations) to promote its arguments against the policy. The documents also included a detailed political analysis of potential routes of influence for the tobacco company (Image 1).⁶²

One third party appointed in November 2011 to help PMI oppose the plain packaging proposal was the Crosby Textor Group. This appointment led to a conflict of interest scandal, given that Lynton Crosby co-Director of the Crosby Textor Group, was also the political election strategist for the UK’s Conservative Party, which was in power in the UK. David Cameron, then Prime Minister, insisted that Crosby never lobbied him about plain packaging. ⁸⁸⁸⁹ Despite a lack of evidence that Crosby lobbied the Prime Minister and Health Minister on plain packaging, documents released under FOI legislation, obtained by the University of Bath Tobacco Control Research Group, show that Crosby lobbied the UK Government on plain packaging via Lord Marland, the then Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Intellectual Property, to oppose plain packaging. For more information on this lobbying scandal, go to Lynton Crosby’s page.

• For more detail on PMI’s attempts to undermine plain packaging proposals in the UK, visit: PMI Mobilised Support from Retailers | PMI’s Anti-Plain Packaging Lobbying Campaign | PMI’s Anti-Plain Packaging Media Campaign | PMI’s “Illicit Trade” Anti-Plain Packaging Campaign
• For information on the tobacco industry’s tactics to undermine this tobacco control measures, visit our pages on: Plain Packaging in the UK: Tobacco Company Opposition | Plain Packaging in the UK: Tobacco Industry Funded Research, Expert Opinion and Public Relations | Plain Packaging in the UK: Tobacco Industry Built Alliances | Plain Packaging in the UK: Tobacco Industry Funded Third Party Campaigns
• PMI also opposed the tobacco product display ban gradually introduced in the UK from 2012. More information on PMI’s tactics to stop this measure, see: Philip Morris’ PR Campaign Against the Display Ban

Australia

Australia has one of the least hospitable regulatory environments for the tobacco industry, having passed regulations banning advertising since 1976, a point of sale ban in 2011, and a plain packaging law in 2012. It also has regulation in place to prevent the sale of nicotine products, including e-cigarettes and HTPs.⁹⁰

The industry has not, however, given up on attempting to market its products and lobby decision makers across the country. In a 2019 article, the Sydney Morning Herald reported that Tammy Chan, Managing Director of PMI Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific wrote letters to health organisations urging them to enter into a “dialogue” on PMI’s “smoke-free” vision in the lead up to a parliamentary select committee meeting on the impact of e-cigarettes on “personal choice”.⁹¹

In March 2019, PMI was accused of “subliminal advertising” in its sponsorship of the Ferrari Formula One team during the Australian Gran Prix in Melbourne. PMI has been accused of attempting to evade advertising bans by sponsoring motorsports teams.

• For more information see Motorsport Sponsorship

Latin America

José María Aznar, the former Prime Minister of Spain, has been widely reported by media outlets as having taken up a position as a lobbyist for PMI in Latin America.^92939495

• For more information on his meetings with public officials in Chile and Peru, as well as his history of association with the tobacco industry while in office, see our page on José María Aznar.

Intimidating Governments with Litigation or Threat of Litigation

PMI has legally challenged tobacco control regulations across the globe, including:

• Comprehensive No Smoking Ordinance (2010 and 2016) and Tobacco-Free Generation Ordinance (2016) in Balanga, Philippines. A front group for the world’s biggest tobacco companies, including PMI, called the Philippine Tobacco institute (PTI) sued the city of Balanga in August 2017 over the Comprehensive No Smoking Ordinance, which it argued was “arbitrary and oppressive” and cost PMI USD$420,000 a month in lost sales. In July 2018, regional courts ruled in PTI’s favour, noting that although the city’s tobacco control efforts were “commendable”, they were also unconstitutional. PTI launched another lawsuit in May 2018 to challenge the constitutionality of the city’s Tobacco-Free Generation Ordinance.⁹¹
• The Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Packaging and Labelling) Second Amendment Rules, 2018 text and pictorial health warnings law in India. PMI affiliate Godfrey Phillips India sought a stay of implementation of new legislation requiring health warnings to increase to cover 85% of the surface of cigarette packaging, from the High Court of Karnataka in Bangalore, India. The Court rejected the request for stay in August 2018. The legality of the Rules themselves was at the time pending in the Supreme Court.⁹⁷
• The May 20, 2016 Decree plain packaging law in France. In December 2016, the Conseil d’Etat (the Council of State, the highest administrative jurisdiction in France) dismissed a six-part legal challenge jointly brought against the plain packaging law by JTI, Philip Morris France, BAT France, a tobacco paper manufacturer and The National Confederation of Tobacco Retailers of France (Confédération Nationale des Buralistes de France).⁹⁸
• In 2013, the mayor of Popayán, a city in southwestern Colombia, issued a decree prohibiting tobacco sales within 500 metres of schools, libraries and health institutions. Following heavy lobbying from Coltabaco, a Philip Morris affiliate, the radius was decreased to 200 metres. Coltabaco sued Popayán in March 2015, arguing that a mayoral decree was insufficient to effect legitimate regulation. Coltabaco won its lawsuit in September 2015.⁹⁹
• The Standardised Packaging of Tobacco Products Regulations 2015 (UK). Following the passage of the legislation in March 2015, PMI and others launched a legal action, which it lost in May 2016 (the day before the legislation was due to come into force).¹⁰⁰¹⁰¹
• The 2014 EU Tobacco Products Directive (TPD). PMI and BAT attempted to invalidate the TPD as a whole, or various provisions within it, but this legal challenge was dismissed in the European Court of Justice in May 2016.¹⁰² More details can be found on the page TPD: Legal Challenges.
• The Ministry of Public Health Notice of Rules, Procedures, and Conditions for the Display of Images, Warning Statements, and Contact Channels for Smoking Cessation on Cigarette Labels of 2013 (Thailand). In July 2013, Philip Morris Thailand and Japan Tobacco International (JTI) Thailand requested a temporary injunction against an increase of picture and text health warnings from 55 to 85 percent of the front and back of cigarette warnings. Though their request was initially granted in August 2013 in the Central Administrative Court of Thailand, the injunction was reversed in May 2014 by the Supreme Administrative Court following appeal by the government. PMI and JTI ultimately withdrew their legal challenge.¹⁰³
• Following heavy criticism of its “Be Marboro” campaign worldwide (see below), Germany banned PMI from displaying “Be Marlboro” advertising in the country. A German court overturned the ban in 2015, stating that the wording of the advertisements did not explicitly target younger than legal age smokers.¹⁰⁴
• National Systems of Health Oversight RDC No. 14/2012 Brazil. The Brazil Health Regulatory Agency’s (ANVISA) resolution No. 14 banned tobacco additives and flavours. The National Confederation of Industry (Confederação Nacional da Indústria) challenged the ban as an unconstitutional use of regulatory power. In February 2018, the highest court in Brazil, the Supreme Federal Tribunal, upheld the 2012 ban and reaffirmed the right of ANVISA to regulate tobacco products.¹⁰⁵
• The Tobacco Plain Packaging Act 2011 (Australia). PMI fiercely opposed the legislation, fearing that it might set a global precedent. The company fought this legislation unsuccessfully on three fronts:
  • World Trade Organization (WTO) challenge: In 2014, PMI supported a request by the Dominican Republic government before the WTO Dispute Settlement Body, alleging that Australia’s plain packaging laws breach the WTO’s General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) and agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).¹⁰⁶ Similar requests were submitted by Ukraine, Cuba, Indonesia and Honduras, and furthermore, a record number of more than 40 WTO members joined the dispute as third parties.¹⁰⁷
  • Constitutional challenge: In March 2012, PMI supported a claim made by British American Tobacco (BAT) in December 2011 before the Australian High Court that plain packaging was in breach of the Australian constitution.¹⁰⁸ On 15 August 2012, the Hight Court ruled that plain packaging was not in breach with the Australian constitution as there had been no acquisition of property as alleged by the tobacco companies.¹⁰⁷
  • Bilateral Investment challenge: In 2011, PMI started legal proceedings against the Australian government for allegedly violating the terms of The Australia – Hong Kong Bilateral Investment Treaty.¹⁰⁹ In December 2015, The Permanent Court of Arbitration issued a unanimous decision that it had no jurisdiction to hear the claim. For more information on all three claims go to Australia: Challenging Legislation.
• Executive Decree No. 611 passed on 3 June 2010 in Panamá. Philip Morris Panamá joined onto a claim of unconstitutionality brought by British American Tobacco (BAT) against a ban on tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship (TAPS) and tobacco product display at the point of sale. BAT Panama claimed the ban violated freedom of expression and property rights, among others. The Supreme Court ruled in May 2014 against BAT, noting that, among other things, freedom of expression could be restricted in order to protect public health.¹¹⁰
• 2010 Amendment to the 1973 Act relating to the Prevention of the Harmful Effects of Tobacco (the Tobacco Control Act) in Norway. The Norwegian display ban on tobacco products came into effect on 1 January 2010 after an amendment was passed by the government in favour of the prohibition of visible tobacco products, smoking accessories and vending machines of tobacco products. PMI unsuccessfully challenged the ban as imposing a barrier to trade; the Oslo District court ruled in favour of the display ban in September 2012.¹¹¹
• Ordinance 514, dated 18 August 2008, and Decree 287/009 dated 15 June 2009 (Uruguay). PMI unsuccessfully challenged the Uruguayan Tobacco Control Act which included a mandate for 80% health warnings on tobacco packets. The case was decided in favour of public health in 2017.¹¹² PMI brought its claim under the Switzerland-Uruguay Bilateral Investment Treaty at the World Bank’s International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes. The tribunal ruled in favour of Uruguay in July 2016.¹¹³

Newer Nicotine and Tobacco Products

As the harms from conventional products have become better understood, and tobacco control measures have been put in place, the cigarette market – from which tobacco companies make most of their profits – has started to shrink. To secure the industry’s longer-term future, transnational tobacco companies (TTCs) have invested in, developed and marketed various newer nicotine and tobacco products.¹¹⁴  

In January 2017, PMI issued a press release which stated that the company intended to move its business away from conventional tobacco products entirely (see Image 2).¹¹⁵ The company’s much publicised vision for a “smoke-free” future is one in which PMI plays a central role in “[providing] better alternatives to smoking for those who don’t quit”.²⁹ Integral to this vision was the release of IQOS in 2014. By 2016, PMI was the market leader in heated tobacco products (HTPs), accounting for over 99% of the global HTP market.⁹⁶ By 2018, PMI’s share of the global HTP market had fallen to around 80%.⁹⁶¹¹⁶ PMI reported that by the end of 2019, IQOS was available in 52 markets, including the United States (US), and a number of lower income countries.¹¹⁷

• For more information on IQOS and PMI’s newer products see Newer Nicotine and Tobacco Products: Philip Morris International and Heated Tobacco Products: Philip Morris International.
• See also PMI’s Promotion of IQOS Using the FDA’s 2020 Modified Risk Tobacco Product (MRTP) Order

In April 2019, a life insurance company Reviti was launched. Registered in the UK at Companies House, Reviti is a wholly owned subsidiary of PMI.¹¹⁸¹¹⁹ The London-based company specialises in offering policies to smokers, with discounts for those who reduce or switch to PMI’s newer products.¹²⁰

In May 2022, PMI made an offer of US$16 billion deal to acquire Swedish Match, a manufacturer of snus and nicotine pouches, as well as chewing tobacco, snuff and cigars.¹²¹¹²² Swedish Match had planned to sell its cigar business but these plans were put on hold in March 2022.¹²³ PMI CEO Jacek Olczak said of the deal: “An important aspect of this proposed combination is the opportunity in the U.S., which is the world’s largest market for smoke-free products.”¹²⁴PMI is also hoping to significantly increase its market share of newer nicotine products in Europe and Asia.¹²⁵ 

As of 28 November 2022, PMI had acquired over 90% of Swedish Match, gaining control of the company and enabling it to buy the remaining shares and take Swedish Match off the stock market.¹²⁶¹²⁷

• For details see Swedish Match

Tobacco companies, including PMI, also invest in therapeutic products, such as nicotine lozenges, gum and inhalers. More information can be found on this page: Tobacco Company Investments in Pharmaceutical & NRT Products

“Smoke-Free” Campaigns

PMI has run various “smoke-free” campaigns promoting its newer products, including “Hold My Light” (UK); “Unsmoke Your World” (global); “It’s Time” (targeting policy makers); and “Futuro sin Humo” (in Mexico).

• For details see: Philip Morris International: “Smoke-Free” campaigns

Participation in Global Platforms to Rehabilitate Image

PMI has attempted to gain access to many high-level international events as a means of “rehabilitating its image and securing influence over global institutions and policy elites”. Since January 2019, PMI presence has been documented at:⁹⁶

January 2019

• World Economic Forum (WEF; Davos, Switzerland): PMI launched its first “white paper” to coincide with WEF. Though it was not an invited guest, PMI held a side-event co-hosted by the Wall Street Journal, and sponsored the Davos Playbook, Politico’s daily newsletter distributed to attendees.

June 2019

• (Group of 20) G20 Summit (Osaka, Japan): PMI took out a two-page advertisement in The Japan Times promoting its corporate transformation and reiterating the need for dialogue between decision-makers and industry.
• Cannes Lions International Film Festival of Creativity (Cannes, France): PMI attended Cannes to talk about newer tobacco products and potentially recruit celebrity activists to its cause.¹²⁸ In addition, PMI had its own schedule of events, hosted by actress Rose McGowan and rapper Wycliff Jean. It also spoke in the festival’s Good Track stream alongside organisations including Greenpeace and UN Women. The decision to include PMI on the Good Track was heavily criticised in the light of “the ethics of proclaiming a smoke-free philosophy while continuing to sell billions of cigarettes a year”.¹²⁹¹³⁰

October 2019

• United Nations General Assembly (UNGA; New York City, USA): Though barred from participating directly in the UNGA, PMI hosted a parallel event at Concordia, a high-level event to foster partnerships between businesses, governments and UN agencies. In attendance were officials from the UN’s World Food Program, the UN Foundation and the World Bank as well as PMI’s Vice President of Global Partnerships and Cooperation, who spoke at the event. Bob Eccles, a paid PMI advisor, spoke at the UNGA during a side event on Exclusion and Engagement in Sustainable Investing.

TobaccoTactics Resources

• PMI Mobilised Support from Retailers
• PMI’s Anti-Plain Packaging Lobbying Campaign
• PMI’s Anti-PP Media Campaign
• PMI’s “Illicit Trade” Anti-Plain Packaging Campaign
• PMI IMPACT
• Philip Morris vs the Government of Uruguay
• Philip Morris’ PR Campaign Against the Display Ban
• Philip Morris’ Regulatory Litigation Action Plan Against the Display Ban
• Philip Morris’ Marlboro Brand Architecture
• Codentify
• Motorsport Sponsorship
• Digital Coding & Tracking Association (DCTA)
• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World
• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World: How it Frames Itself for a detailed analysis of the ways in which the Foundation portrays itself and those who oppose the Foundation, plus the counter evidence to these portrayals
• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World People
• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World Grantees
• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World Centres of Excellence
• Newer Nicotine and Tobacco Products: Philip Morris International
• Heated Tobacco Products: Philip Morris International

Relevant Links

• Read the STOP report: Addiction At Any Cost: The Truth About Philip Morris International
• Philip Morris International company website
• Cancer Council Australia’s Critiques of KPMG Australia illicit tobacco trade reports
• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World website
• PMI Impact website

TCRG Research

• The Philip Morris-funded Foundation for a Smoke-Free World: tax return sheds light on funding activities, T. Legg, S. Peeters, P. Chamberlain, A. Gilmore, The Lancet, 2019, 393(10190):2487-2488
• The revision of the 2014 European tobacco products directive: an analysis of the tobacco industry’s attempts to ‘break the health silo’, S. Peeters, H. Costa, D Stuckler, M. McKee, A. Gilmore, Tobacco Control, 2016, 25(1):108-117
• ‘It will harm business and increase illicit trade’: an evaluation of the relevance, quality and transparency of evidence submitted by transnational tobacco companies to the UK consultation on standardised packaging 2012, K. Evans-Reeves, J. Hatchard, A. Gilmore, Tobacco Control, 2015, 24(e2):e168-e177
• Illicit trade, tobacco industry-funded studies and policy influence in the EU and UK, G, Fooks, S. Peeters, K. Evans-Reeves, Tobacco Control, 2014, 23(1):81-83
• Transnational tobacco company interests in smokeless tobacco in Europe: Analysis of internal industry documents and contemporary industry materials, S. Peeters, A. Gilmore, PLoS Medicine, 2013, 10(9):1001506
• Towards a greater understanding of the illicit tobacco trade in Europe: a review of the PMI funded ‘Project Star’ report, A. Gilmore, A. Rowell, S. Gallus, A. Lugo, L. Joossens, M. Sims, 2013, Tobacco Control, doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2013-051240

For a comprehensive list of all TCRG publications, including research that evaluates the impact of public health policy, go to the Bath TCRG’s list of publications.

References

The post Philip Morris International appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

Career with Japan Tobacco International

Pekhazis joined RJ Reynolds in 1988 where he held various marketing and sales positions.¹³¹
Promoted to Regional Vice President Middle East in 1998, his responsibilities were extended to the North and West of Africa, and Iran from 2004.¹³¹
Turkey was added to his responsibilities in April 2007 and the World Wide Duty Free in January 2008.¹³¹

Involvement in JTI’s Expansion

Cigarettes in Sudan

In 2011, JTI announced a deal to buy Sudanese cigarette manufacturer Haggar Cigarette & Tobacco Factory (HCTF).¹³⁴
Pekhazis stated that JTI’s motivation behind the decision to invest in Sudan was to expand the company’s geographical footprint in developing markets and to build a strong business base there.¹³⁴
At the time of acquisition, HCTF held a 80% market share of the cigarette market in the Republic of Sudan.¹³⁵

Waterpipes in Egypt

Japan Tobacco Inc, the parent company of JTI, announced on 16 November 2012, that it had entered into an agreement to acquire all the outstanding shares of Egyptian waterpipe company Nakhla.¹³⁶
At the time, Nakhla held a 70% waterpipe tobacco market share in Eqypt, and exported its products to 85 countries, mainly in the Middle East and Africa.¹³⁶
In response to this development, Pekhazis commented that; “Our acquisition of Nakhla offers an excellent opportunity for growth in the waterpipe segment and widens our brand portfolio, in line with our strategy to address the needs of adult consumers across a range of tobacco product categories… Furthermore, the acquisition enhances JTI’s geographical footprint in the Middle East and Africa, and over the long-term, provides a platform for JTI to participate in the sizeable cigarette market in Egypt.”¹³⁶

Spokesperson on Smoking Lounges in Munich Airport

JTI opened three smoking lounges, a ‘Camel Plaza’ and six smoking corners at Munich Airport in 2008, claiming to provide smoking passengers a ‘relaxed environment’ before boarding the plane.¹³⁷
Pekhazis stated in response that “I think this new facility will be applauded by many people travelling from or via Munich, both smokers and non-smokers” and concluded that “This is a win-win solution for all parties: the smoking public is looked after, non-smokers are not annoyed by tobacco smoke and the airport provides an excellent service to travellers.”¹³⁷

• Other airports with tobacco company sponsored smoking areas: Bristol Airport (UK).

TobaccoTactics Resources

• Japan Tobacco International
• RJ Reynolds

References

The post Fadoul Pekhazis appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

The German Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (GRUR), or ‘Rechtsschultz und Urheberrecht’ as it is known in the German language, is, according to a report written by the organisation:

“a recognised non-profit-making, academic association of the members of those groups of occupations and organisations active in the field of intellectual property and copyright. The association is made up of academics, judges, civil servants, lawyers and patent attorneys as well as the representatives of associations and enterprises. The explicit purpose of GRUR is the academic advancement and the development of intellectual property and copyright law at German, European and International level.”¹³⁸

According to its website “GRUR does not pursue personal, professional or commercial interests, but exclusively and directly academic objectives of a non-profit nature.”¹³⁹

Links to the Tobacco Industry

At its last count (12 November 2013), GRUR had over 350 international members from 36 different countries¹⁴⁰ and has approximately 5,000 members overall, mostly in Germany. Despite stating that “Membership shall be open to individuals, enterprises, agencies, associations, professional guilds and other entities” and that “Corporate members can be represented by individuals when being affiliated to or working with the Association´s bodies and committees, and when participating in the Association´s events”,¹⁴¹ GRUR does not disclose exactly who its members are.
However, on the EU Transparency Register Philip Morris International (PMI) discloses that it is a member of GRUR (see Image 1).¹⁴²

Sister Associations

GRUR is openly affiliated with a number of other associations referred to as “Sister Organisations”, namely, the Association of Trademarks and Designs Rights Practitioners (APRAM), Beneluxvereniging voor Merken-en Modellenrecht (BMM), the European Communities Trademark Association (ECTA), MARQUES, and Union-IP. All of these associations represent their members’ interests in intellectual property issues. Together these associations have lobbied in favour of upholding the intellectual property of tobacco companies. ¹⁴³¹⁴⁴

Against Plain Packaging

UK 2012: Shortly after the launch of the first UK Consultation on plain packaging for tobacco products on 16 April 2013, a joint statement was issued by GRUR, APRAM, BMM, ECTA, MARQUES and Union-IP. The organisations argued that the proposed legislation:

* would adversely affect the markets, with harmful impacts on the economy as a whole as would be derived from escalating counterfeiting and piracy throughout the EU and worldwide.¹⁴⁵

* trademarks…are relied upon by consumers as signposts of genuine goods and services…Trademarks also indicate the source of goods and services to assure consumers on the quality of the products that they purchase or that they would consider purchasing. This fundamental function cannot be fulfilled if trademarks are not noticeable, or unavailable…would lead to consumer confusion and therefore diminish the goodwill acquired in that brand through considerable investment and effort over a significant period of time. In fact the inability to call for or recognize a brand also takes away a consumer’s freedom of choice.

The statement did not offer any evidence to support these concerns. Nevertheless, in its submission to the UK Consultation on plain packaging, Japan Tobacco International cited it as an argument to underline “The UK’s International Legal Obligations”.¹⁴⁶

EU Transparency Register

GRUR was not listed on the EU Transparency register at the time of writing (April 2014). However, as mentioned above, PMI disclosed that it was a member of GRUR in 2012 (see image).

TobaccoTactics Resources

• Global Trademark and Intellectual Property Rights Groups
• Plain Packaging
• EU Tobacco Products Directive Revision

References

The post German Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

The Foundation now also includes a list of awarded grantees and associated grants on its website,¹⁵² with each grant being assigned to one of three categories: Health and Science Research (HSR) (previously Health Science & Technology (HST)); Agricultural Diversification (AgL); or Industry Transformation.¹⁵³ However, this list of grantees is not always comprehensive, see section below for details.

In July 2020, FSFW uploaded a set of documents to report on its progress on its 2019-2021 Strategic Plan.¹⁵⁴ These included an overview of the grants process,¹⁵⁵ a mid-year report on operating expenses;¹⁵⁶; updated lists of grantees in both Health, Science & Technology (HST) and research streams;¹⁵⁷¹⁵⁸; and a list of published, pre-print and future FSFW-funded reports and publications.¹⁵⁹

In 2022, FSFW published its 2022-2024 Strategic Plan, which includes further details of its grant focus areas over this period.¹⁶⁰

Visit the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World: Research Database to find out more about its research outputs

FSFW Grantees

The following spreadsheet collates information from the FSFW tax returns from 2018 to 2021, plus the 2020 strategy update, to provide a comprehensive list of grantees.^{147148149150151}

To view and download the spreadsheet, click HERE.

Grantees for 2022

In May 2023, the Foundation released its 2022 tax return, which listed grants awarded in 2022.¹⁵¹ Grants for projects that appeared in the 2022 tax return, but did not appear in previous tax returns are listed below, with the title of their grants.

New grant projects for existing grantees

• Alternative Research Initiative: Office # 31, 1st Floor, Al- Anayat Mall, Islamabad, Pakistan Support capacity of PANTHR (Pakistan Alliance for Nicotine and Tobacco Harm Reduction) to increase access to tools that support cessation and tobacco harm reduction in Pakistan, including engaging with health professionals to reduce impediments to access
• Analytisch- Biologisches Forschungslabor GmbH: Conduct a literature review of nicotine’s role in human health & Research the efficacy of tobacco harm reduction products as tools for smokers to quit combustible tobacco products
• M Group, Inc: Conduct nonpartisan analysis and research and disseminate to the public regarding risk proportionate taxation of tobacco products in Malaysia. Specifically, how tobacco excise taxes impact illicit trade and public health
• Michigan State University (MSU): Support FSFW grantee’s work at the MwAPATA Institute, an independent think tank, which focuses on research in areas such as economics policy, to promote agricultural transformation in Malawi
• Yayasan Pembangunan Indonesia: Prepare and disseminate reports analyzing economics, economic policies, and health costs of tobacco products (cigarettes, e- cigarettes, and heated tobacco products) in Indonesia

New grantees

• Blue T-Matrix, LLC: Engage in a three- part project focusing on China including: (i) a critical review of the importance of offering help to smokers to quit or switch; (ii) a study estimating the health and economic benefits of reduced harm products, and the factors affecting initiation, cessation, and switching rates; and (iii) the creation of a reduced- harm products tracking system
• Cyntax Health Projects PVT LTD: Develop protocols for a randomized, double-blind, two-arm parallel, clinical trial to compare the effectiveness of different tobacco harm reduction products in general adult population in low- and middle- income countries
• Faculty of Medical Sciences University of Kragujevac Serbia: Research the effects of electronic nicotine delivery systems on phenotype and function of immune cells of patients with chronic inflammatory diseases
• Innovative Development Solutions: Develop tools to study the needs of marginalized smokers and other tobacco users
• OX1ST LTD: Researching intellectual property and technological innovation to promote smoking cessation and tobacco harm reduction in low- and middle-income countries
• Physicians Research Institute: Develop a web-based presentation on tobacco harm reduction for distribution to state medical societies and member physicians
• South Asian Forum for Environment: Study the behavioral dynamics of tobacco smokers in India, Bangladesh and Nepal
• Strategic Health Research Limited: Develop a study protocol for comparing the efficacy of tobacco harm reduction products to nicotine replacement therapy as tools for smokers in Pakistan to quit combustible tobacco products
• Tel Aviv University: Sponsor scholarships for Malawian students to attend a one-year program at the Nitsan Lab to gain skills and education around smallholder innovation at Tel Aviv University so these students may return to Malawi and contribute to agricultural diversification

Grantees for 2021

In May 2022, the Foundation released its 2021 tax return, which listed grants awarded in 2021.¹⁵⁰ Grants that appeared in the 2021 tax return, but did not appear in the 2020 tax return are listed below, with the title of their grants. Some organisations appear for the first time in the 2021 tax return, meaning they had never received FSFW grants before.

Out of all the new grants paid in 2021, nearly all fell under the FSFW category of “Health and Science Research”, with only 4 out of 17 falling other categories: a new grant for Euromonitor International, categorised under “Industry Transformation”, and two grants to Malawi (Opportunity International and the Rotary Club of Lilongwe), categorised under “Agriculture and Livelihoods”. A grant for Pakistani organisation QBAL SMC PVT LTD seemed to also be categorised as “Agriculture and Livelihoods”, despite the aim of the grant being research into tax policies and newer nicotine and tobacco products.¹⁶¹

New grant projects for existing grantees

• BOTEC Analysis, LLC: Further develop the drivers of smoking cessation in five countries with legalized alternative nicotine delivery systems (ANDS) through a series of additional journal articles, econometric studies, and a full-length book on optimal nicotine regulation and Conduct an investigation and analysis and develop recommendations regarding the (i) literature addressing the relationship between COVID-19 and tobacco and nicotine products; (ii) the impact of various tobacco/nicotine-related COVID restrictions around the world on smoking and alternative nicotine delivery system (ANDS) use.
• Cambridge Design Partnership Ltd: Disseminate findings of scoping work related to key impediments to mass adoption of RRPs in low- and middleincome countries
• Cornell University: Develop empirical evidence to help provide education around public policies to end smoking in this generation.
• ECLAT srl: Bridge the gaps and build accountability in media communications around tobacco harm reduction science and Establishment of a Center of Excellence for the Acceleration of Harm Reduction.
• Economic Policy Research Foundation of Turkey, The (TEPAV): Research and disseminate findings relating to the policies and economics around ending smoking in Turkey.
• Euromonitor International Inc: Conduct the Tobacco Marketing Study in support of the Tobacco Transformation Index to establish a framework for tobacco companies’ marketing practices to support transition away from High-Risk Products while preventing uptake of Reduced-Risk Product alternatives by non-smokers and youth.
• QBAL SMC PVT LTD: Provide and disseminate a comprehensive research study on tax and health policies in Pakistan, focusing on health benefits, and optimal tax policies for noncombustible nicotine products to help smokers quit and stem the sales of illicit harm reduction products.
• Rose Research Center, LLC: Examine the acceptability and outcome of a harm reduction approach to tobacco use for individuals with serious behavioral health disorders and determine the association with decrease in smoking.
• Yale University: Conduct cohort study and perform real-world data analysis to inform development of online interventions aimed at stimulating engagement for smokers unable to quit; Conduct research on misinformation on social media on tobacco harm reduction and COVID-19 and interventions to correct misinformation about tobacco harm reduction and Explore the relationship between COVID-19 and discourses around tobacco products, including ecigarettes, acknowledging that information about tobacco use (and harm reduction products) during the pandemic comes from varying sources.

New grantees

• ASCRA Consulting Inc.: Conduct and disseminate research focused on policies around cessation and tobacco harm reduction in the Philippines. Develop a network of stakeholders including tobacco harm reduction advocates, medical professionals, and others.
• Foundation for Professional Development: Research to determine the effects of tobacco use and smoking on long-term recovery from mild COVID-19 in South Africa. Disseminate results, including by publishing a manuscript(s) in a peer-reviewed scientific journal(s).
• M Group, Inc.: Conduct an analysis of tobacco excise policy and opportunities for risk-proportionate reform in Indonesia
• Movimiento Pro Vecino: Promote multi-sectoral engagement and awareness in Mexico, and Latin American region.
• Opportunity International, Inc.: Develop innovative financial products to help foster agricultural transformation in Malawi.
• Rotary Club of Lilongwe: Sponsor the travel of Malawian graduate students to study at Tel Aviv University’s Nitsin Lab so they may gain skills and education around smallholder innovation and return to Malawi and contribute to agricultural diversification.
• SERMO INC: Conduct global survey of physicians to develop actionable insights to drive smoking cessation and harm reduction success worldwide.
• Synergeia Foundation, Inc: Assess results of the tobacco cessation program of government in Philippines relative to its objectives and conduct an exploratory study of the market and policy environment for non-tobacco products.

Grantees for 2020

In May 2021 the Foundation released its 2020 Tax return, which listed grants as of May 2021.¹⁴⁹Some of these grants had previously been listed in a Mid-Point Strategy Update the Foundation released in July 2020. Grants that appeared in the 2020 Tax Return but did not appear on the 2019 tax return are listed below, with the title of their grants.¹⁵⁷¹⁵⁸ The names of new grantees for 2020 (i.e. organisations that have not previously received a grant from FSFW) are in bold.

The Foundation appears to have created a new category to encompass all of its “Health, Science and Technology” (HST) grants on its website: “Health, Science and Technology (Research, Education, and Awareness)” and eliminated the previous “Presidential Grants” category.¹⁶²

In its 2020 Midpoint Strategic update, FSFW further divides the HST category into HST and HST+: those grants under HST+ include advocacy and non-scientific research.¹⁵⁷

The 2020 Tax Return featured several grants awarded to charitable organisations and for humanitarian purposes. Some of these are linked to COVID-19 relief funds and may represent a new Corporate Social Responsibility strategy.

Health, Science & Technology (HST)

• AF Development Care LLP: Alternative livelihood Options for Women Bidi Rollers- Primary Research and Policy Mapping of home-based Women bidi rollers of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka
• Alternative Research Institute: COP9 – Increasing Awareness
• American Masala: 51 Shades of Smokey Grey
• Asociación Argentina de Servicios y Estudios Médicos de Avanzada: COP9 – Increasing Awareness
• Biochromex: Nicotine product relative risk assessment
• Centre for Health Research and Education: Evaluating the feasibility and establishment of a multi-center network for tobacco research and cessation in India
• Child Sight Foundation: Economics of cessation and THR in South Asia: A Scoping Study and Situation Analysis
• COHRED USA – Council on Health Research for Development: Strengthening national research system capacity in Low- and Middle-Income countries in support of tobacco control, health, equity and development. Brief Title: NRS for FCTC20-21-22
• Child Sight Foundation: Review of progress in tobacco control in five countries in Southeast Asia including identification of gaps in policy relevant research
• Conrad Foundation: Conrad Challenge winners 2019 and 2020
• Cornell University: Economic Analysis of Harm Reduction, Hyperbolic Discounting, and Menthol
• Cornell University: An Economic Study of Risk Perceptions and Consumer Demand for Harm Reduction Products
• Economic Policy Research Foundation of Turkey (TEPAV): Economic analysis of tobacco, tobacco products, and their alternatives in Turkey and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus
• Ernst & Young AG: Synthesize and formulate lessons learned from countries with ANDS availability which have seen drastic drops in number of smokers. A separate project: Identification of observable smoker characteristics that are linked to cessation success
• Etheim Biotics, LLC: Multi-regional study to examine the impact of smoking and vaping on the human microbiome
• Euromonitor International Inc: EU Menthol Ban Impact Analysis
• FP Group: Sponsorship of Her Power Summit
• Healthy Initiatives: Economics of ending smoking epidemic by evaluating the status and the gaps in existing TC policies in Ukraine, the Russian Federation and number of developing Former Soviet countries in East and Central Asia (ECA) region
• Institute for Human Development: Study legal protections impacting Beedi workers in India
• International Network of Nicotine Consumer Organisations: Strengthen and build capacity for Tobacco Harm Reduction as a tool to reduce incidence of smoking
• International Network of Nicotine Consumer Organisations: COP9 and NCDs
• Just Managing Consulting: Public Health and Government Investment in Tobacco – Phase 1
• Just Managing Consulting: Public Health and Government Investment in Tobacco – Phase II
• The Lung Foundation (established by Oncimmune Plc): Investigate the nexus of COVID-19 and nicotine use.
• Oncimmune Ltd: Characterization of COVID-19 outcomes in a high-risk cohort: Assessment of background levels of autoantibodies in an at risk population of smokers as a prognostic marker for severe COVID-19 infection.
• Oncimmune Plc: Establishment of a trust (the “Lung Trust”) suitable for e the application, receipt, and administration of future grant awards
• Patras Science Park: Scoping work for development of an Institute for Research and Innovation on THR
• Qbal (Quality Belligerence): Situation analysis and development of a comprehensive report on tobacco economics in Pakistan
• Sustainability Inc: Tobacco Transformation Index stakeholder engagement, development and facilitation of Advisory Panel, and post-publication project review
• Yale University: Support Yale University to work with Signals Analytics as Signal Adapts a platform already in use for FSFW to help in humanitarian efforts around COVID-19
• Yayasan Pena Bulu: Build capacity to share stories that present facts about THR and nicotine use to all stakeholders

Agriculture & Livelihoods (AgL)

• Causal Design: Advisory service work stream to support programming and implementation along the ATI theory of change
• LTS International Limited: Advisory Service for M&E and Programming
• LTS International Limited: Working Paper Series – How can Gender inequalities in the Tobacco Value Chain inform interventions towards inclusive livelihood diversification
• Thanthwe Holdings Limited: Contribute to the expansion of protected cultivation in Malawi and neighboring countries.
• Palladium Group Global: Bamboo as A Solution
• University of Illinois: Feed the Future Soybean Innovation Lab for Value Chain Development [PENDING]
• University of Minnesota: Data Revolution for Agricultural Markets (DRAM) Validation Exercise [PENDING]

Charitable Donations

In May 2021, the FSFW’s tax return revealed a number of organisations which had received grants for charitable and humanitarian purposes.¹⁴⁹ In some cases these were connected to COVID-19 but in other cases the purpose was obscure.

• Caritas Italiana: Grant for charitable, humanitarian purposes. Grant went on to fund COVID-19 relief in Sicily.¹⁶³
• Hartford Foundation for Public Giving: US$500,000 grant for charitable, humanitarian purposes to this American organisation
• International Rescue Committee: US$500,000 grant for charitable, humanitarian purposes to this American organisation
• Lega Italiana Anti Fumo (LIAF): Grant for charitable, humanitarian purposes. No further information available about outcomes of this grant. The Chief Scientific Advisor (previously President) of LIAF is Riccardo Polosa.
• Merkos L’Inyonei Chinuch: A US$100,000 grant for charitable, humanitarian purposes was made to this Jewish educational charity based in Italy.
• National Smallholders Farmers Association of Malawi (NASFAM): Grants for charitable, humanitarian purposes. No further information available about outcomes of this grant. Current FSFW board member, Dyborn Chibonga, served as CEO of NASFAM for 18 years.¹⁶⁴
• Prime Minister’s Citizen Assistance and Relief in Emergency Situations (PM CARES): US$18,000 grant for charitable, humanitarian purposes to this Indian charitable trust chaired by the Prime Minister to alleviate the impact of COVID-19
• Zodiac Broadcasting Station Limited: This Malawi based media organisation received US$42,842 in 2020 for charitable and humanitarian purposes.

Problem of transparency around the Foundation grantees

FSFW grantees do not always disclose Foundation funding in publications, reports and news media. The statement in the Grants Process Overview document, published by FSFW in July 2020, reads:¹⁵⁵

“Grantee shall take all necessary measures to publicize this Grant and disclose that FSFW is the source of the Grant in any resulting publications and shall acknowledge the Grant in its internal and annual reports, and in any exchanges with the media. Any publication relating or referring to FSFW, in whatever form or by whatever means or medium, including internet, must include the following statement: ‘Produced with the help of a grant from the Foundation for a Smoke- Free World, Inc. The contents, selection and presentation of facts, as well as any opinions expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the authors and under no circumstances shall be regarded as reflecting the positions of the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World, Inc.’”

TobaccoTactics has identified several occasions on which grantees have failed to consistently and openly disclose their FSFW funding. For examples, see our page on Riccardo Polosa and the Centre for Health Research and Education (CHRE).

Both the 2018 and the 2019 tax returns from the Foundation showed several discrepancies with the “Awarded Grants” section of the Foundation´s website. Included on the spreadsheet of FSFW grantees is a column that notes discrepancies between the publication of grantee names and purposes on the FSFW grantee webpage and its tax returns. On the “Awarded Grants” page, grantees are organised by which of the Foundation’s three “core pillars” funding was awarded through. The “Presidential Grants” category appeared to be a fourth classification of grant unexplained by the Foundation’s website.¹⁶² It was then eliminating and the new HST category introduced (see above).

The following are new grantees were included on the strategic update, but do not appear on the FSFW website as of August 2020:¹⁶²

• AF Development Care LLP
• FP Group
• Oncimmune Ltd
• Oncimmune Plc
• Yayasan Pena Bulu

The following grantees have received grants from FSFW, as documented by its tax returns, but do not appear on the FSFW website as of August 2020:¹⁶²

• BRAC: This grantee returned its FSFW funding (see below).
• Clinivantage Healthcare Technologies
• Medical University of South Carolina Foundation
• N. Srivastava Foundation for Scientific Education & Research
• Telenor Health ASA: This grantee returned its FSFW funding (see below).
• University of California San Francisco
• University of Cape Town: UCT has put in place a policy not to accept tobacco industry funding (see below). 

Notes on grantees

• The Influence Foundation, which owns and operates Filter magazine, has received funding directly from PMI in 2018, 2019 and 2020.¹⁶⁵
• Law Enforcement Action Partnership, a fiscal sponsor of the Influence Foundation, which in turn is a sponsor of Filter magazine, has received FSFW grants.¹⁶⁵. By September 2020 it had spent all its US$2220,000 grant to “share stories” about harm reduction.¹⁶⁶
• Jed Rose, President and CEO of Rose Research Center has received funding from Philip Morris.¹⁶⁷ Rose is also on the Science Advisory Board of Embera Neurotherapeutics, Inc., another FSFW grantee.¹⁶⁸
• In July 2019, it was revealed that BRAC was returning this funding.¹⁶⁹
• The University of Cape Town has put a policy in place to not accept further tobacco industry or FSFW funding.¹⁷⁰
• In September 2020, TCRG received confirmation that Telenor Health had returned its funding.¹⁷¹

Relevant Links

• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World homepage
• Tobacco Free Kids’ Industry Watch on the Foundation
• Stopping Tobacco Organizations and Products (STOP) Analyses of the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World’s Tax Returns

TobaccoTactics Resources

• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World
• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World: People
• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World: Centres of Excellence
• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World: How it Frames Itself
• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World: Research Database
• Philip Morris International
• Front Groups
• Ogilvy
• Kantar
• Influencing Science
• Influencing Science: Funding Scientists
• Knowledge-Action-Change (KAC)
• Centre for Research Excellence: Indigenous Sovereignty and Smoking (COREISS)
• NOSMOKE Institute
• Centre of Excellence for the Acceleration of Harm Reduction (CoEHAR)
• Centre for Health Research and Education (CHRE)
• Centre for Agricultural Transformation
• International Network of Nicotine Consumer Organisations (INNCO)
• Centre for Substance Use Research (CSUR)
• Alternative Research Initiative (ARI)
• Jed E. Rose

TCRG Research

• The Philip Morris-funded Foundation for a Smoke-Free World: tax return sheds light on funding activities, T. Legg, S. Peeters, P. Chamberlain, A. Gilmore, The Lancet, 6 June 2019
• Big Tobacco is funding the anti-smoking lobby but leaked documents reveal the real reason why, A. Rowell, The Conversation, 13 March 2018

References

The post Foundation for a Smoke-Free World Grantees appeared first on TobaccoTactics.