The World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) is an international treaty that aims to reduce the demand and supply of tobacco.¹ The WHO FCTC includes a specific obligation, Article 5.3, requiring Parties to protect public health policies from commercial and vested interests of the tobacco industry.²

• More information on Article 5.3, and tobacco industry attempts to undermine the FCTC, can be found on the TobaccoTactics FCTC page.
• A summary and timeline of FCTC regulations can be found on: FCTC Regulations on the Need to Protect Public Health Policies from Tobacco Industry Interference

FCTC parties usually meet every two years at a Conference of the Parties (COP).³

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the 9^th session, or COP 9 as it is called, was postponed from 2020 to November 2021, to be held virtually.

Immediately following COP 9 is the second Meeting of the Parties (MOP 2). This oversees the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products. This treaty was adopted at COP 5 and addresses means of countering illicit trade in tobacco products.⁴

This page summarises interference by the tobacco industry and its allies around the 9^th Conference of the Parties (COP 9).  It also covers the second session of the Meeting of the Parties (MOP2).

Incidents of documented interference at previous COPs are can be found in a timeline on:
History of Interference by the Tobacco Industry and its Allies During COP and MOP

Grants from the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World

The Foundation for a Smoke-Free World (FSFW) is wholly funded by Philip Morris International (PMI). Details of grants noted below can be found in FSFW’s tax returns.⁵⁶

INNCO

• In 2020, the International Network of Nicotine Consumer Organisations (INNCO) received a grant of US$65,000 to: “assist the organization in its work to garner consensus and support for COP 9 to consider harm reduction as integral to tobacco control”.⁵ INNCO received a further US$52,000 for this grant in 2021.⁶ During COP 9, INNCO organised some lobbying activities:
  • Published a report titled “Misinfodemic Dossier” criticising the WHO and Bloomberg Philanthropies.⁷⁸
  • Organised a demonstration outside the UK Parliament.⁹
  • Participated in a parallel event organised by CAPHRA.¹⁰

INNCO again had its application rejected for observer status at COP.¹¹

Knowledge Action Change

• Another major FSFW grantee,⁵⁶  Knowledge-Action-Change (K-A-C), publisher of the Global State of Tobacco-Harm Reduction (GSTHR) reports, has criticised the FCTC and COP. K-A-C  released a GSTHR report titled “Fighting the Last War: The WHO and International Tobacco Control” on 27 October 2021.¹² Fellow FSFW grantees, and now ex-President of the FSFW Derek Yach, spoke at the launch event. Ahead of the launch, GSTHR released a set of briefing papers that criticise the WHO FCTC and sought to use the UK’s stance on harm-reduction to influence international discussions at COP 9.¹³

Analysis of FSFW’s 2020 tax return shows it awarded specific COP 9-related grants to two organisations, in Pakistan and Argentina, in addition to INNCO.⁵

Alternative Research Institute – Pakistan

• Pakistan’s Alternative Research Institute, received US$176,400 in 2020 to “build a momentum to include smokers’ concern in tobacco efforts before the COP 9”.¹⁴ It received a further US$193,760 in 2021.⁶

Asociación Argentina de Servicios Médicos de Avanzada – Argentina

• In 2020, the Argentinian Asociación Argentina de Servicios Médicos de Avanzada, received US$128,850 from FSFW for a project to “garner consensus and support for the ninth session of Conference of the Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (COP 9) to consider harm reduction as integral to tobacco control”.⁵ It received a further US$11,699 in 2021.⁶

Economic Policy Research Foundation of Turkey – Turkey

• In September 2021, the Economic Policy Research Foundation of Turkey (TEPAV), another FSFW grantee, ¹⁵ launched a report titled “The Economics of Curbing Smoking in Turkey: A Scoping Review”.¹⁶ The report argues that the effectiveness of the implementation of WHO FCTC measures in the countries that adopted them have not all been up to expectations.

Tobacco Industry Meeting with Government in Brazil

• In August 2021, there was a collaboration meeting between members of the Brazilian government and the tobacco industry in preparation for COP 9. During this meeting, the tobacco industry asked for the support of the Brazilian government.¹⁷ A summary of tobacco industry positions was sent to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, to “ensure that the government takes into account the views of the tobacco supply chain and act to ensure that COP 9 does not result in harm to their interests”.¹⁸Civil society organisations denounced the industry’s attempts to interfere with the preparations for COP 9. As a result, the Brazilian National Commission for the Implementation of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (CONICQ), called for an open meeting in September. During this meeting, Federal Deputy for Rio Grande do Sul Marcelo Moraes and other government representatives, dismissed CONICQ efforts to discuss the Brazilian positions towards COP 9, arguing that CONICQ’s existence was under legal challenge.¹⁸¹⁹CONICQ was created in 2003, within the scope of the Ministry of Health, and has achieved international acclaimed for its achievements in tobacco control policies. However, along with other institutional spaces, the Commission was extinguished by the Decree No. 9,759/2019, during President Bolsonaro´s administration. The issue was taken to the Federal Supreme Court, where the measure was declared unconstitutional. After this decision, the Ministry of Health reinstated CONICQ´s legitimacy and existence. Over 70 organizations working in tobacco control in Brazil, Latin America and the world supported CONICQ and requested “the urgent and necessary formal reconstitution of the Conicq, by means of a presidential decree” ¹⁹ to prevent the tobacco industry undermining of the institution and any setbacks to the implementation of the FCTC.

COP Enquiry run by UK All Party Parliamentary Group

• In February 2021, the UK All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Vaping, which is made up of MPs with a common interest in the issue but has no legislative power, set up an inquiry into COP 9. The consultation report was published in March 2021 listing several recommendations, including that the UK should consider its options in relation to future funding of WHO and WHO FCTC, and that it should consider withdrawing funds if WHO continues to discourage vaping as a form of smoking cessation.²⁰ It also called for the UK to include harm reduction public health experts in its delegation to COP 9 and to encourage other member states to follow suit.²⁰ Submissions to the inquiry included one from a tobacco company, Japan Tobacco International (JTI); and other individuals and organisations with industry links: the Adam Smith Institute, the International Network of Nicotine Consumer Organisations (INNCO), Mark Pawsey MP, JUUL Labs, the Reason Foundation, the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), the UK Vaping Industry Association (UKVIA), and The Federation of Philippine Industries, which has tobacco company members including Philip Morris International (PMI) and JTI.²¹

COP 9 highlights

Held virtually in 2021, COP 9 provided the opportunity for Parties to meet and for some decisions to be made before 2023. However, most key discussions were postponed until COP10. Tobacco industry interference was detected, as the tobacco control community and several parties had warned.²²

Interference Within the Conference of Parties

Statements by the delegations of some parties argued for the  inclusion of “all” stakeholders in tobacco control discussions.²³ and for investment in harm reduction efforts. Delegations that were more actively using pro-industry statements were mostly coming from low-and middle-income countries (LMICs),²⁴²⁵ and from non-parties to the FCTC.²⁶ Evidence shows that the tobacco industry puts even higher pressure into LMICs, where the FCTC implementation is often in its initial phases.²⁷²⁸

Noise around COP

Tobacco industry allies that could not attend COP 9 sessions, did not miss the opportunity to advocate on behalf of the industry´s interests on social media and through small scale street demonstrations²⁹³⁰ Attacks on WHO, COP and FCTC by tobacco industry allies aimed at undermining the importance of the work of WHO, the COP and the relevance of the FCTC, while at the same time requesting observer status to officially join COP.³¹³²³³ Side events were organized to discuss what was happening at COP including parallel stream called “sCOPe” broadcast on YouTube.³⁴

More detail on FSFW grantee activities during COP 9 can be found in the STOP FSFW COP 9 Monitoring Brief

Relevant Links

• World Health Organization’s (WHO) Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC)
• FCTC COP website
• WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control: Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products
• FCTC MOP website
• The tobacco epidemic has not gone away (WHO news, 1 November 2021)

TobaccoTactics Resources

• COP & MOP
• Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
• Protocol to Eliminate Illicit trade in Tobacco Products
• Illicit Tobacco Trade

References

The post Interference around COP 9 & MOP 2 appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

Link to the Tobacco Industry

Funded by the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World

In 2020, the Asociación Argentina de Servicios Médicos de Avanzada received funding from the  Foundation for a Smoke-Free World (FSFW), which is wholly funded by Philip Morris International. This was FSFW’s first grantee in Latin America and the Caribbean .

The organisation received $128,850 from FSFW for a project to “Garner consensus and support for the ninth session of Conference of the Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (COP9) to consider harm reduction as integral to tobacco control³⁶ It received a payment of US$11,699 for this work in 2021.⁶ This is one of a number of grants awarded by FSFW that focusses on influencing COP.³⁶⁶

Tobacco Industry Interference around COP

The tobacco industry has a history of funding interference with the Conference of the Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), including through its use of third party allies For more information and recent examples, see Interference around COP 9 & MOP 2 and TCRG research on Investigating Twitter Activity Around COP8.³⁷

Argentina is one of the four countries in Latin America and the Caribbean that, as of 2021, are not signatories of the WHO FCTC.  The South American country has many tobacco control regulations in place. However, there is a high level of tobacco industry interference,  amongst the highest in the region, according to the Global Tobacco Industry Interference Index 2020.³⁸

Tobacco Tactics Resources

• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World
• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World Grantees
• Philip Morris International

TCRG Research

L.Robertson, A. Joshi, T. Legg et al, Exploring the Twitter activity around the eighth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, Tobacco Control, Published Online First: 11 November 2020, doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2020-055889

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

References

The post Asociación Argentina de Servicios Médicos de Avanzada appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

In reality, the ECLT Foundation is both funded and governed by tobacco companies, and is a vital part of their Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) strategy.

All four major Transnational Tobacco Companies (TTCs) have been part of ECLT’s board from its creation in 2000: British American Tobacco (BAT), Imperial Brands (IMB), Japan Tobacco International (JTI), and Philip Morris International (PMI). Other organisations that are, or have been, on the ECLT board include Swedish Match, Gallaher (now JTI), Scandinavian Tobacco and the International Tobacco Growers Association, as well as other national tobacco companies and tobacco growers.⁴¹For a full list of current ECLT Board members, see the section below.

In 2001, the year after it was formed, ECLT reported income from members, the bulk of its income source, as CHF247,000 (approximately USD$247,000). Twenty years later, in 2021, its reported income had grown to USD $5,737,521, which came entirely from “donor contributions”.^42434445 According to the ECLT’s internal regulations, organisations and companies represented on the Board “must commit themselves to a financial contribution in favor of the Foundation”.⁴⁶

ECLT states that its “sole purpose and mandate is to prevent and protect children from child labour wherever tobacco is grown”.⁴⁰ It promotes itself, and its public-private partnerships (PPPs) with the United Nations (UN), as part of the solution to tackling child labour in low and middle-income countries.

History

The ECLT Foundation was set up in Geneva in September 2000 as part of a wider strategy by the major tobacco companies, particularly BAT, to protect their corporate reputations and position themselves as “socially responsible”.⁴⁷

Its establishment followed high profile exposés of child labour on tobacco farms in the late 1990s, notably in Malawi, and the adoption of International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention No. 182 in June 1999, which outlawed the “worst forms of child labour”.⁴⁸

ECLT grew out of a joint agreement in 2000 between BAT and the tobacco industry front group the International Tobacco Growers Association (ITGA),⁴⁹ with The International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers’ Associations (IUF), to develop a programme of research and education aimed at eradicating child labour.⁵⁰

BAT: “A Good Opportunity to Move to the Moral High Ground”

A peer-reviewed 2006 academic study on the ECLT Foundation’s pilot project in Malawi concluded, after analysing relevant BAT internal documents from 1998-2002, that the tobacco giant was using child labour projects as a means of enhancing its reputation. It argued that:

“rather than actively and responsibly working to solve the problem of child labour in growing tobacco, the company acted to co-opt the issue to present themselves over as a ‘socially responsible corporation’ by releasing a policy statement claiming the company’s commitment to end harmful child labour practices, holding a global child labour conference with trade unions and other key stakeholders, and contributing nominal sums of money for development projects largely unrelated to efforts to end child labour.”⁴⁷

The study, by Otañez et al, revealed how the IUF, ILO and International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) had commissioned a film that showed children as young as five working on tobacco farms in Malawi during the spring harvest in 1999. The idea was to put pressure on the companies and the Confederation of European Community Cigarette Manufacturers (CECCM, now Tobacco Europe) over its denials that child labour was occurring there. However, internal BAT documents released to the public through a litigation settlement in the United States and now online at the Truth Tobacco Industry Documents database show that IUF General Secretary Ron Oswald had promised that the film would not be anti-tobacco and “would be consigned to the archives” if the CECCM and companies cooperated and acknowledged the child labour problem in Malawi.⁵¹⁴⁷

The IUF signed a joint declaration on child labour in June 1999 with the ITGA, witnessed by ILO Executive Director Kari Tapiola.⁵² Correspondence that year between BAT and Hallmark, its UK public relations agency, showed a series of revised draft statements between IUF and ITGA. The final published version on the conference website⁵³ – drafted by Hallmark and BAT – notably dropped the IUF’s proposed inclusion of “respect for worker’s rights to freedom of association (as defined in ILO Convention 97)”.⁵⁴

In October 2000, BAT co-organised a conference in Nairobi, Kenya, with the IUF and ITGA, titled “Eliminating Child Labour: Establishing Best Practices in Tobacco Farming”.⁵⁵⁵⁶⁵⁷ According to the event brochure, the ILO’s Kari Tapiola was a keynote speaker, alongside two BAT staff, the ITGA’s president and the IUF’s Ron Oswald.⁵⁵⁵⁸ A BAT executive later deemed the conference “a huge success” in countering rising international concern among the UN, OECD, ILO and EU over human rights and labour standards – an agenda BAT described as being pushed by NGOs and other stakeholders “who seemed to be winning”. BAT’s international development affairs manager Shabanji Opukah wrote on 9 November 2000:

“Clearly, the successful launch of the ECLT has given us an excellent and rare opportunity to engage with our stakeholders on major platforms around what are today amongst some of the high profile and contentious global issues affecting reputation of international business.”

adding that:

“Our partnership with the IUF and ITGA gives us a good opportunity to move to the moral high ground on this particular issue and we would like to make use of it in line with the BAT CORA Consumer and Regulatory Affairs strategy for recognition as a responsible tobacco company. This strategy identifies corporate conduct and accountability as one of the six reputation management initiatives. Stakeholder engagement and communication is in this platform.”⁴⁷⁵⁹

According to the minutes of an October 2001 Tobacco Workers Trade Group Meeting at which ECLT’s first Executive Director Marc Hofstetter and project manager Alain Berthoud introduced themselves, the IUF was to hold the rotating presidency of the ECLT Foundation for the first two years. Ron Oswald was its first president.⁶⁰

The IUF is no longer a board member of the ECLT Foundation. An ILO document on its tobacco industry partnerships in 2017 stated:

“the IUF served as ECLT’s President until 2013, when it withdrew, citing the viability and success of the Foundation as reasons for its decision to direct its capacity devoted to eliminating child labour elsewhere”.⁶¹

In explaining their decision to withdraw, the IUF also cited the time and resources needed to ensure “our totally uncompromising position that child labour should not be used in any form stay a core feature of the ECLT’s work”, given ECLT’s inclusion of “all major industry players” on its executive board.⁶²

Funding Agreements with the ILO

From 2002 until 2018, the ECLT Foundation had a Public-Private Partnership agreement with the International Labour Organization (ILO). The ILO acted as advisor to the Foundation’s board alongside Save the Children Switzerland.

In March 2017, the ILO disclosed that it had received more than US$5.3 million from ECLT since 2002, but did not provide details on how this funding had been spent.⁶¹Its relationship with ECLT, beyond acting as an advisor and observer to ECLT’s board, included the following agreements:

• The first agreement between ILO and ECLT covered the period 2002 to 2010 and aimed to fund research on child labour practices in Indonesia, the Dominican Republic, East Africa, and specifically, to eliminate child labour in Tanzania.⁶³
• The second agreement, covering the period between 2011 and 2015, focused on child labour in Malawi.⁶³
• The third agreement from 2015 until June 2018 was aimed at reducing child labour practices in Malawi, Uganda and Tanzania, promoting dialogue among tobacco growers’ organisations, and developing advice on hazardous tobacco farming work.⁶¹

Following sustained pressure from the World Health Organization and more than 100 global groups, the ILO finally announced in November 2018 that it would stop accepting tobacco industry funding for its projects and would also not renew ECLT’s contract, which had expired in June of that year.⁶⁴⁶⁵

However, the ILO remains listed as “non-executive advisor” to the ECLT Board, as of 2022.⁴³⁶⁶

Membership of the UN Global Compact

As of June 2022, the ECLT Foundation remains a member of the Child Labour Platform of the voluntary UN Global Compact (UNGC) Human Rights and Labour Working Group – for which the ILO provides the secretariat. It became a member in 2015.⁶⁷

This is despite the UNGC’s decision in 2017 to permanently sever ties with tobacco companies, following the adoption of a breakthrough United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) resolution (E/2017/L.21) that encouraged UN agencies to develop policies to prevent tobacco industry interference.⁶⁸

The UNGC Integrity policy review, published in October 2017, stated:

“the UN Global Compact will de-list participating companies which fall under the tobacco exclusion. This new exclusionary criterion is strictly limited to companies that produce and/or manufacture tobacco or are part of a joint venture, have a subsidiary or affiliate stake in a company that produces and/or manufactures tobacco.”⁶⁹

Relationship with UNICEF

From 2003 to 2005, ECLT funded a programme to prevent child labour in tobacco growing in the Philippines, in which UNICEF acted as an advisor.⁷⁰

In a study published in the journal Paediatrics on the tobacco industry and children’s rights, the authors described ECLT as one of several front groups used by the industry to successfully engage with UNICEF:

“After UNICEF’s corporate engagement guidelines were loosened in 2003, tobacco companies successfully engaged with UNICEF directly and via front groups, including the Eliminating Child Labour in Tobacco Growing Foundation. This was part of an overall tobacco industry strategy to improve its corporate image, infiltrate the United Nations, and weaken global tobacco-control efforts.”⁷¹

The ECLT Foundation rejected these allegations as “baseless” and “false”.⁷²

UNICEF also published a rebuttal, in which it stated that it had not worked on ECLT projects in an advisory capacity, that its only interactions with the Foundation had been limited to “sharing information and increasing awareness about child rights issues related to the industry’s supply chain,” and that it had not received tobacco industry funding.⁷³

Questionable impact on child labour practices

After almost two decades of work by the ECLT Foundation, child labour remains entrenched in many tobacco-growing regions.

ECLT has pointed to its success in removing over 195,000 children from tobacco farms since 2011 and sending over 32,000 to school and vocational training.⁷⁴However, critics of the Foundation and its tobacco industry members argue that it has done little to redress or target the structural issues afflicting these regions, instead publicising the positive, and often individually-focused, stories.⁷⁰

In 2018, a series of Guardian investigations revealed “rampant” child labour in Indonesia, Malawi, Mexico and the United States.^757677787980 The ILO similarly noted in 2017 that “surveys indicate that child labour is rampant in impoverished tobacco-growing communities”.⁶¹ Following the Guardian investigations, a legal claim was launched in the UK in December 2020 against BAT and Imperial Brands, alleging they profited from child labour in Malawi.⁸¹

• For more information on Child Labour in Tobacco growing, see our page CSR: Child Labour

Professor Marty Otañez, an anthropologist from the University of Colorado, and lead author of the previously mentioned 2006 study on BAT and ECLT in Malawi, is a long-standing observer of tobacco farming in that country. Otañez told The Guardian that welfare projects were “pushing out goodwill on behalf of tobacco companies to address some of the problems but avoid the harder issues of leaf prices and living and earnings”.⁷⁵ Tenant farmers on tobacco estates in Malawi, for example, earn just US$224 a year.⁷⁷

In September 2017, the Malawi tobacco farmers’ union TOAWUM wrote “on behalf of hundreds of thousands of Malawi farmers” to the ILO’s Governing Body, asking it to ban public-private partnerships with the tobacco industry at its upcoming 331st meeting. In its letter, TOAWUM stated that initiatives such as the ECLT Foundation,

“insufficiently address root causes of tobacco-related child labour, which is endemic poverty among tobacco farmers. That poverty is exacerbated by contracting schemes developed by the very companies funding some projects for ECLT.”⁸²

TOAWUM’s criticism echoed that of the Southeast Asia Tobacco Control Alliance (SEATCA), which wrote to ILO Director Clarence Thomas in 2013 following its own research into child labour and ECLT’s projects in the ASEAN region. It highlighted the hypocrisy of an industry whose business model perpetuates child labour in its supply chain:

“Unlike other industries that have a zero tolerance for child labour, the tobacco industry has set no such polices or target date for complete eradication of child labour. The tobacco industry, while publicly condemning child labour, continues to purchase and use leaves that are produced by child labour and profits from them.

“The tobacco industry’s miniscule contributions through so-called corporate social responsibility activities including the ECLT are a whitewash of the problem. The more serious issue is that these CSR activities provide a convenient platform for tobacco companies to gain access to policy makers who are responsible to approve and implement tobacco control measures. The endorsement from IPEC (Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour) and ILO of ECLT only serves to strengthen and protect the tobacco industry.”⁷⁰

Legal Threats Against International Tobacco Control Groups

In July 2018, amid a concerted campaign by the WHO and 100 global NGOs to get the ILO to terminate all its tobacco-related partnerships, the ECLT Foundation instructed a Swiss law firm to issue a “formal notice before legal proceedings” against the US-based NGO Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids (CTFK).⁸³

The legal notice from Capt & Wyss, solicitors for ECLT, emphasised the organisation’s “independence” as a registered non-profit Swiss organisation, and demanded that CTFK “immediately” delete from a press release posted on its website the “defamatory”, “untrue and misleading” references to ECLT as a:

• “tobacco-industry-dominated group”;
• “front group for tobacco industry interests under the guise of a corporate social responsibility initiative” and;
• that it “represents an alliance of tobacco companies and growers – led exclusively by the tobacco industry”.

In addition, the legal notice stated that ECLT “seeks a public and online apology, respectively rectification, relating to this unlawful publication.”⁸³

In his response, CTFK’s President Matthew L. Myers noted that his organisation’s descriptions of ECLT were “well-documented based on the best publicly available information”, “factually accurate” and furthermore were already in the public domain. CTFK received no subsequent response to its reply from either the lawyers or ECLT.⁸⁴

ECLT also published an online rebuttal to an October 2017 press release by the global NGO Framework Convention Alliance on Tobacco Control (FCA) in which it rejected FCA’s “false” assertions that “Reports have repeatedly claimed that ECLT’s work aims to keep farmers dependent on aid from the tobacco industry to avoid them abandoning the sector.(sic)” and that “ECLT allows the tobacco industry to promote a positive public image while continuing the practices that cause labour exploitation in the first place”.⁸⁵ The rebuttal was reprinted in Tobacco Reporter.⁸⁶

Following emails from ECLT’s executive director that same month, the FCA later received a ‘cease and desist’ notice from Capt & Wyss in January 2018 specifically noting the first point above and the FCA’s public “Letter to the UN Secretary General on Cooperation between the Tobacco Industry and the ILO”, signed by over 180 organisations in October 2017.⁸⁷ Although the FCA did take down both documents as a precautionary response, no further action was taken⁸⁸and these remain in the public domain.⁸⁹

ECLT Team

From its inception, the ECLT Foundation has typically employed highly experienced human rights and development professionals, many of them with solid track records of working within the UN system either as staff or consultants. This strategy appears to have been critical to tobacco companies’ insistence on the organisation’s “independence” and for its dealings with the ILO and other UN agencies such as UNICEF.

Internal BAT documents now online at the Truth Tobacco Industry Documents archive show that BAT, when setting up ECLT in 2000, was “looking for an executive with experience in the UN and NGO sectors and ability to raise funds on a global scale. The individual will also need to have high diplomatic campaigning and lobbying skills and a good span of experience in these areas. Knowledge of French and other UN languages is also desired…”⁵⁹

In one case, ECLT’s new executive director in 2008 came directly from working with the ILO in Tanzania.

Leadership

A list of current staff can be found on the ECLT website.

• Karima Jambulatova, Executive Director (from May 2019). Has worked with ECLT since 2013.³⁹
• David Hammond, Executive Director (2017-2019). Barrister and founder of a marine human rights organization.⁹⁰
• Sonia C. Velázquez, Executive Director (2012-2017). Previously worked with Plan International, America Humane and Save the Children, among others. Was instrumental in gaining ECLT its ECOSOC consultative status and UN Global Compact membership from 2015.⁹¹
• Marilyn Blaeser, Executive Director (2008-2011), joined ECLT after working for ILO as Chief Technical Advisor (Child Labour) in Tanzania. CV includes six years with UNICEF and UNHCR.⁹²
• Mark Hofstetter, (2000-2005). Was Head of Delegation at the International Committee of the Red Cross for 13 years before becoming ECLT’s first director.⁹³

Board Members

ECLT’s board is mostly made up of industry executives from cigarette manufacturers and tobacco leaf growers. The following individuals formed the ECLT Board in 2022:⁶⁶

• Mike Ligon, ECLT President, from the Universal Leaf Tobacco Company, a regular speaker at the Global Tobacco and Nicotine Forum (GTNF) (succeeded Antonio Abrunhosa from the International Tobacco Growers Association)
• Elaine McKay, ECLT Vice-President, from JTI and Japan Tobacco Inc.
• Michiel Reerink, treasurer, from tobacco-leaf manufacturer Alliance One International, previously affiliated with JTI and a regular attendee at the GTNF.
• Mauro Gonzalez, from PMI.
• Surinder Sond, from Imperial Brands.
• Mercedes Vazquez from the International Tobacco Growers Association.
• Mathew Wilde, from Contraf-Nicotex-Tobacco GMBH.
• Jennie Galbraith, from British American Tobacco, an attendee at the Global Tobacco and Nicotine Forum in 2013 when she was group head of sustainability at BAT.
• Emmett Harrison, from Swedish Match.
• Itsanne Fokkema, from Hail & Cotton Inc., a tobacco leaf dealer, with purchasing and processing capacity to provide Flue Cured, Burley, Dark Fired, Oriental and other tobacco manufacturers.
• Glyn Morgan, from Premium Tobacco.
• Mette Valentin, from the Scandinavian Tobacco Group.
• Simon Steyne, independent expert.

Projects and partners

ECLT provides details of its activity on its website and in its annual reports. In 2021 it was active in nine countries; in some it worked directly with communities and NGOs, while in others it worked with government, industry, and other stakeholders.⁴²

Argentina

With the Provincial Commission for the Prevention and Eradication of Child Labour, a public entity, on an awareness-raising campaign in the northern, tobacco-growing province of Misiones. ECLT also provided input for a training curriculum on child labour in Buenos Aires.⁴²⁹⁴

Guatemala

With Defensa Niños y Niñas Costa Rica, in the municipality of San José La Máquina, providing “market-driven youth employment training”.⁴²⁹⁵⁹⁶

Indonesia

Part of the ‘Partnership in Action Against Child Labour in Agriculture’ (PAACLA), a multi-stakeholder initiative coordinated by the Ministry of National Development Planning. With Jaringan LSM Penghapusan Pekerja Anak (JARAK), Lembaga Pengkajian Kemasyarakatan dan Pembangunan (LPKP) and Yayasan Tunas Alam Indonesia (SANTAI).⁴²⁹⁷

Malawi

With CARE Malawi, the MicroLoan Foundation, and Rays of Hope.⁴²⁹⁵

Mozambique

With IDE Mozambique and Fundação Apoio Amigo. From 2018 to 2021 ECLT had a Memorandum of Understanding with the government of Mozambique.⁴²⁹⁵⁹⁸

Tanzania

With Tabora Development Foundation Trust (TDFT) and the Tanzania Association of Women Leaders in Agriculture and Environment (TAWLAE).⁴²⁹⁹

Uganda

With Uganda Women’s Effort to Save Orphans (UWESO) and ECLA Uganda.⁴²⁹⁵

United States

With state and federal authorities, academia, and other stakeholders on research into child labour in agriculture.⁴²

Zimbabwe

Participated in a survey on child labour in tobacco growing carried out by the Zimbabwe National Statistical Agency and disseminated by the Ministry of Labour, Public Service and Social Welfare. Supported the creation of a working group on child labour by the Tobacco Industry and Marketing Board.⁴²

The ECLT also worked in Kyrgyzstan until 2017.¹⁰⁰

Tobacco Tactics Resources

• CSR: Child Labour
• Greenwashing
• International Labour Organization
• International Tobacco Growers Association
• Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
• CSR Strategy
• United Nations Global Compact
• Legal Strategy

Relevant Links

• ECLT Foundation website
• Child labour in the tobacco industry TCRG blog
• STOP brief on ECLT (2019)

References

The post Eliminating Child Labour in Tobacco-Growing Foundation (ECLT) appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

• See International Tax and Investment Center for an overview of ITICs links to the tobacco industry as well as contemporary evidence of how ITIC has represented tobacco industry interests and lobbied governments on the industry’s behalf.

Significant Changes to Tax Code in Russia

In 1995, ITIC’s 1995 Annual report noted the following activities in Russia:

* Invited by the Russian Ministry of Finance to be the only private sector representative to the new Tax Code drafting team. ITIC’s comments, provided by company representatives, have resulted in significant changes being made in the draft Tax Code.

* At the request of the Russian Deputy Minister of Finance, formed a three-person team which assisted the Ministry in rewriting the draft Tax Code to conform with the Russian Civil Code.

* Along with other international advisors, successfully worked with the Ministry of Finance and State Tax Service to repeal the excess wage tax and reduce the VAT rate.¹⁰¹

The Threat of Specific Excise has been “Diverted”

BAT’s monthly report for Russia for November 1996 noted:

“The threat of specific excise appears to have been diverted for the time being. ITIC and their sponsors (PMI, RJR, Rothmans), although foiled on this occasion, will not give up. We will not be sure of the minimum, however, until the Duma actually votes. We are developing our follow-up strategy with the Center”.

The document also stated:

“This month in official bodies, including the State Duma, BAT was lobbying jointly with Tabakprom on ad valorem excise system. The lobbying was against the specific excise system, proposed by Philip Morris and other international manufacturers and promoted through the International Tax and Investment Center (ITIC)”.¹⁰²

A “Quiet Lobbying Opportunity” with ITIC

A 1996 RJ Reynolds (RJR) Monthly Report highlighted the role of ITIC regarding the progress on harmonisation of excise tax rates for tobacco products in Russia:

“The debate between specific excise versus ad valorem excise tax calculation has left parliamentary committee and will now be taken to the State Duma floor this week, as discussions over the 1997 budget continue. Since our last report, the Ministry of Finance has come around to the arguments in favour sic of a specific taxation system, a position defended by RJRI, PMI and Rothmans.”

“An influential Position Paper funded by Philip Morris and prepared by the Russian Scientific and Research Institute of Market Research (VNIKI by its Russian acronym) was submitted to the Taxation Committee of the Duma. According to PMI in Moscow, this document weighed heavily in favour of the specific taxation system, along with the International Tax and Investment Center’s (ITIC) earlier submissions.”

“A further quiet lobbying opportunity will be provided in late January 1997, when Duke University and ITIC host an RJRI-sponsored taxation conference on Russia, which will take place at Duke University in Durham (NC). Key Russian decision-makers in the legislative and executive branches, including Deputy Finance Minister Sergei Shatalov, are expected to take part. One day of the conference program will take place in Winston-Salem and will be devoted to excise taxation. We hope to include a tour of Tobaccoville and provide entertainment opportunities to Russian visitors.”¹⁰³

Meeting “Under the Aegis of ITIC”

A 1997 RJR memo describes ITIC’s role in assisting RJR and PMI in favourable tax reform in Russia:

“The new Russian excise tax structure that came into effect this year differentiates between different types of tobacco products based on Russian State Standards (GOST) specifications. Anything that was not a traditionally-made Russian cigarette was taxed at a higher rate (including imports and American blend products made in Russia, like North Star and Peter 13`). Russia is now moving to fully reform the cigarette classification and standardization system, and thus get rid of the GOST cigarette class system.”

The memo continued:

“BAT has gone to the highest level at the Duma (the Speaker), a Communist, and has appealed to his nationalistic leanings to save the local industry from the foreign hordes. Under the aegis of the International Tax and Investment Center (ITIC) in Moscow, we are meeting with PMI this week to map out a response strategy, which may include a new campaign to protect the gains of the current system, while at the same time capitalizing on the opportunity of GOST reforms to further simplify the existing system.”¹⁰⁴

An “Injustice” to Raise Cigarette Taxes

A 1997 RJR memo suggested that ITIC was used to promote the tobacco industry’s position that increases in tax result in increases in illicit trade:

ITIC along with the IMF were urged “to address the contraband problem – perhaps to form a study group, or ask for a report to be prepared for IMF consideration. Objective: the IMF is doing a grave injustice to emerging Democracies and third-world countries when it advises them to raise cigarette taxes — as this will only encourage organized criminal groups to get into trafficking contraband. These countries need to build a tax base — not encourage an underground economy.”¹⁰⁵

Philip Morris and Argentina

In 1998, a Philip Morris document noted that PM hired ITIC to:

“conduct an economic impact study and to sponsor a project supporting the conversion from an ad valorem tax system to a specific tax system for cigarettes and other products. ITIC will use data from other countries to create a financial model for Argentina and will work to develop a proposal by mid-year in conjunction with the UK-based Oxford economic forecasting group and FIEL, an Argentine think-tank.”¹⁰⁶

TobaccoTactics Resources

• Third Party Techniques
• Lobby Groups
• International Tax and Investment Center

References

The post International Tax and Investment Center – A History of Tobacco Industry Facilitation appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

Background

TRACIT was established in April 2017 and formally launched in New York in September 2017. It received endorsements from representatives of the American Department of Homeland Security, the UN Office of Drugs and Crime and the OECD.¹⁰⁷

Its first public event appears to have been a two-day conference in London on combatting illicit trade sponsored by the Financial Times and the Philip Morris campaign on illegal trade Impact.¹⁰⁸ As well as Tracit Director General Jeffery Hardy, the were several members of the PMI Impact panel: Suzanne Hayden, Alain Juillet, Paul Makin, Luis Moreno Ocompo, Navi Pillay and Jurgen Storbeck. PMI CEO Andre Calantzopoulos was also a guest speaker.

Membership

TRACIT’s website has fluctuated between disclosing and not disclosing its membership. As of July 2021, TRACIT’s membership page listed Philip Morris International (PMI) while British American Tobacco (BAT) and Japan Tobacco International (JTI) have been listed as members on a previous version of the webpage. Also previously listed as a project partner is Crime Stoppers International, which has tobacco company support.¹⁰⁹¹¹⁰

Partners

TRACIT is partnered with several other similar organisations including the Anti-Counterfeiting Group and is part of the UN Global Compact (UNGC).¹¹¹

Activities

Overview and tobacco funding

The organisation breaks its focus down into 12 sectors, of which one is tobacco. It says:

“Overall, for the tobacco industry the illicit trade in cigarettes results in lost revenue, reputational damage and loss of consumer trust, and increased costs in supply chain monitoring and the implementation of technologies that enable companies to track and trace their products.”¹¹²

TRACIT accepts sponsorship from tobacco companies to help in the production of reports and quotes uncritically from industry documents as part of its analysis. In its lobbying it will often share platforms with industry officials and their allies. For instance, in its introductory analysis of the the tobacco sector, TRACIT quotes from a KPMG report called Project Sun which was produced in 2015 and looks at the illicit cigarette market in the European Union, Norway and Switzerland. The report was produced on behalf of BAT, Imperial, JTI and PMI.¹¹³ Nowhere does TRACIT reference the multiple reports, supported by evidence, of the involvement of tobacco companies in the illicit trade.

In March 2019 TRACIT was awarded funding from PMI IMPACT – a $100 million initiative from Philip Morris International to support projects against smuggling. The award, one of 31 in a second round of funding worth $21 million in total, was for the:

“Development of a Global Illicit Trade Business Report, drawing upon private sector experiences and identifying solutions to supply chain vulnerabilities common to all forms of illicit trade. It examines transportation modalities, customs, free trade zones, human trafficking, criminal activity, financial fraud, and regulatory gaps. Findings will be shared with all stakeholders in response to their calls to significantly upgrade the availability and exchange of information.”¹¹⁴¹¹⁵

Work programmes

Global Illicit Trade Environment Index

The Global Illicit Trade Environment Index, released in June 2018, was produced by the Economist Intelligence Unit and evaluates 84 countries on their “structural capability to guard against illicit trade, highlighting specific strengths and weaknesses”. The objective is “to improve the knowledge and understanding of the regulatory environment and economic circumstances that enable illicit trade.¹¹⁶ It is a key report which, with its regional and country subsets and recommendations, is the foundation for TRACIT policy proposals and lobbying. The report’s sponsors include Philip Morris International (platinum sponsor), British American Tobacco, Japan Tobacco International and Crime Stoppers International (bronze sponsors).

Mapping impact of illicit trade and sustainable development goals

In an area which has seen increasing interest by tobacco companies, TRACIT maps the impact of illicit trade against the UN sustainable development goals. It released a report in July 2019.

The report has chapters for each of its sectors and how illicit trade has a negative impact on specific goals. For tobacco it lists the goals of good health and well-being; decent work and economic growth; peace, justice and strong institutions and partnerships for goals as being affected. Again, no mention is made in the chapter on any culpability that tobacco companies have for the illicit trade.¹¹⁷

Involvement with UNCTAD

In July 2019, as part of its launch on the report, TRACIT co-hosted a meeting on illicit trade and the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) in partnership with the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).¹¹⁸ TRACIT Director General Jeffrey Hardy addressed the meeting with contributions from UN officials.¹¹⁹TRACIT’s engagement with the UN organisation reflects the attempts of tobacco companies to use third parties to ingratiate themselves with governments as partners in reducing illicit trade. Other UN organisations have been targeted by groups with close tobacco company affiliations such as Concordia and the International Chamber of Commerce.¹²⁰

Regional and Country Activities

TRACIT has been active in a number of countries representing industry interests at governmental level backed by its own reports. The principal report is the Illicit Trade Environment Index from which various regional versions have been produced.

Asia

• Produced regional policy recommendations in 2018 for the region which in summary were: ¹²¹
• Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) play leadership roles on combatting illicit trade
• Establishing an antic-illicit trade coordinator and inter-agency task force
• partnerships with the private sector
• Protect Free Trade Zones from illicit traders
• Launch public awareness campaigns
• “rationalize tax policies and subsidies to ensure that they do not incentivize illicit trade, smuggling, adulteration and theft, by adopting simple, single tier specific tax structures, and accounting for various demand-related factors including overall consumption, price, income levels and the ensuing affordability of products.”¹²¹ The tobacco industry often uses these types of arguments regarding taxes, to prevent raises and further regulations. See Tobacco Tactics Price and Tax for more details on this aspect.
• Establish joint investigations on illicit trade/trafficking and criminal organisations
• Study the patterns of illicit trade flows
• Produced a regional version of its Global Illicit Trade Index.¹²¹ Among those who were interviewed for the Asia report were:
• Ali Salman, director of research, at Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (IDEA). The Malaysia-based think tank has lobbied against tobacco control measures and has received funding from tobacco companies
• Etienne Sanz de Acedo, CEO, International Trademark Association, which has Barry Gerber from Philip Morris International on its board.¹²²
• Seth Hays, chief representative—Asia-Pacific, International Trademark Association

Myanmar

• Produced regional policy recommendations in 2018:¹²³ The recommendations were similar to the report for Asia but also included:
• Tackle pervasive corrupt practices
• “Increase effectiveness of customs procedures to block the flow of illicit and parallel (grey) market products”
• Partnerships with international organisations such as World Customs Organization, Interpol and the European Anti-Fraud Office.
• Produced a regional version of its Global Illicit Trade Index.¹²⁴

Latin America

• Produced regional policy recommendations in 2018:¹²⁵. The recommendations were similar to the report for Asia but also included:
• Pursue law enforcement and customs cooperation through expanding the Pacific Alliance (Alianza del Pacifico) or “through projects sponsored by Ameripol, the InterAmerican Development Bank (IDB) or the World Customs Organization (WCO).”
• Intensify public-private coordination and uses examples from Argentina and Costa Rica (see below)
• Strengthen copyright protection enforcement
• fully adopt anti-money laundering regulations
• raise public awareness about the threat of illicit trade “to help shift public perception … that contraband is not a minor issue but a national security problem, with links to organized crime.”¹²⁵
• In September 2019 TRACIT participated in the 7th INTERPOL Global Conference on Human Trafficking and Migrant Smuggling, in Buenos Aires.¹²⁶ This had 750 people attending from 97 countries.
• In June 2019 TRACIT was in Buenos Aires at the Regional Summit on Security and Illicit Trade hosted by the business newspaper’ “El Cronista”. The panels included discussions on public-private cooperation and the vulnerabilities of Free Trade Zones.¹²⁷ Director-General Jeffrey Hardy particularly highlighted the need to curb illicit trade in Free Trade Zones. Philip Morris International had a strong presence at the event with representatives from its PMI Impact anti-illicit project as well as providing media support.¹²⁸

Argentina

• In June 2019 TRACIT highlighted how fighting illicit trade is essential for attracting investment and creating growth opportunities during a National Roundtable for Fair Trade hosted by the Argentina Medium Business Confederation (CAME). A press release from TRACIT said that Director-General Jeffrey Hardy “called on Latin American governments to rationalize tax policies that can incentivize illicit trade”.¹²⁹

Colombia

• Produced policy recommendations which repeated many of those from the Latin American policy report (see above).¹³⁰ In particular it says “Colombia should simplify its current structure following OECD standards + VAT and reduce the tax burden to decrease the current high incentives for the illicit market.”¹³⁰

The Ministry of Health of Brazil and the National Commission overseeing the implementation of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control have provided solid arguments on this issue of taxation and these have become useful for the rest of the countries in the region, as well as Colombia.

“There is solid evidence that reducing tobacco tax is an inappropriate initiative to reduce illicit trade. Studies, including a recent World Bank review, point out that the main determinant of the illegal tobacco product market is not the difference in taxation of tobacco products between countries but the dominance of this market by organized crime factions, attracted by profitability and impunity, resulting from the soft penalties applied to this offense. In addition, countries that have reduced tobacco taxes to try to reduce illicit trade have experienced reduced tax collection, smoking growth, especially among young people, and no positive effect on smuggling. This was the case of Canada and Sweden in the 1990s. In Brazil, also in the 1990s, the Federal Revenue Service lowered taxes on cigarettes to limit smuggling. However, tax revenues fell, and illicit trade continued to grow”¹³¹

• In October 2018 at a meeting in Bogota, TRACIT urged Colombia to work with the private sector to develop a comprehensive and effective anti-illicit trade program to curb illicit goods that harm legitimate businesses, workers, consumers and governments. Colombia ranks 43 out of 84 on TRACIT’s Global Illicit Trade Environment Index, primarily because of issues around transparency and governance of its Free Trade Zones (FTZs).¹³²

Costa Rica

• Produced policy recommendations which repeated many of those from the Latin American policy report (see above).¹³³ In addition it recommends strengthening the Comision Mixta de Lucha Contra el Comercio Ilicito, composed by representatives from the Ministries of Health, of Finance, of Home Affairs, from the Customs Office and the Police force. This Commission was created in 2014 and later on, representatives from the chambers of commerce and industry were added as members as well. ¹³⁴ Costa Rican Civil Society have exposed the conflict of interest of this Commission and made a formal claim to the government in 2016, given that the representatives of the industry come from the Costa Rican-American Chamber of Commerce (AmCham), whose members include British American Tobacco and Philip Morris International.¹³⁵
• In August 2018 TRACIT addressed government officials and industry stakeholders during a conference on Illicit trade, hosted by AmCham, which has tobacco industry members.¹³⁶ The conference featured a presentation on TRACIT’s Global Illicit Trade Environment Index, which ranks Costa Rica 46th of 84 countries evaluated on the extent they enable or prevent illicit trade. Gerardo Lizano, AmCham’s representative to the Comision Mixta de Lucha Contra el Comercio Ilicito, and Nogui Acosta, vice minister of income in the Ministry of Finance, spoke at the event.¹³⁷

Dominican Republic

• Produced a country briefing based on its Global Illicit Trade Environment Index (see above).¹³⁸ The report quoted Manuel Cabral as an expert on local markets for alcohol and tobacco products as saying “frequent and piecemeal changes in tax policy create distortions that ultimately the use of illegal products”. Cabral worked for Philip Morris International from the country from 2011 to 2017, ending up as director of corporate affairs for the Dominican Republic and Caribbean¹³⁹ Among those listed as sponsors and contributors to the country report were British American Tobacco, Crime Stoppers International, Japan Tobacco International, and Philip Morris International
• Produced policy recommendations which repeated many of those from the Latin American policy report (see above).¹⁴⁰
• In May 2019 TRACIT addressed government officials and industry stakeholders during a conference on Illicit trade. It was hosted by the Association of Industries of the Dominican Republic, the British Embassy and the British Chamber of Commerce of the Dominican Republic. The Chamber of Commerce has BAT subsidiary BAT Republica Dominicana and Imperial Tobacco subsidiary Tabacalera De Garcias.¹⁴¹
• TRACIT’s Director-General, Jeffrey Hardy, called for more public-private partnerships saying they are “essential to the design and implementation of effective programs to prevent illicit, contraband and counterfeit products.”¹⁴² Such partnerships could provide a means for tobacco companies to engage with governments and circumvent the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control article 5.3.

Ecuador

• Produced policy recommendations which repeated many of those from the Latin American policy report (see above).¹⁴³ It highlighted the need for “strong and proactive measures” in strengthening the protection of Free Trade Zones
• In November 2018, TRACIT addressed government officials and industry stakeholders during a conference on Illicit trade, hosted by Cámara de Industrias y Producción (CIP). The current vice- president of CIP worked previously as Corporate Affairs Director for Ecuador and Peru at Philip Morris International for 2 and a half years, before taking on her current position at CIP. ¹⁴⁴ The conference featured a presentation on TRACIT’s Global Illicit Trade Environment Index, which ranks Ecuador 60th of 84 countries evaluated on the extent they enable or prevent illicit trade. “The country serves as a major transit point for illicit goods in the region, including … illicit trade in tobacco…”¹⁴⁵

Panama

• In 2017, Ulrike Bonnier from TRACIT participated in a session exploring actions to combat human trafficking and other forms of illicit trades at the 38th Annual Crime Stoppers International Conference.¹⁴⁶ Crime Stoppers International regularly engages with the tobacco industry. Among the speakers at the Panama conference were Nicholas Otte and Arturo Fernandez from Philip Morris’s Illicit Trade Strategies and Prevention for Latin America and Canada region. The silver sponsor for the event was British American Tobacco.¹⁴⁷

Europe

• Produced a regional briefing based on its Global Illicit Trade Environment Index (see above).¹⁴⁸ Among those listed as sponsors and contributors to the country report were British American Tobacco, Crime Stoppers International, Japan Tobacco International, and Philip Morris International
• Produced policy recommendations for the region including rationalising tax policies, subsidies and tax exemptions, encouraging partnerships with companies and have stronger criminal penalties. It highlighted the 2016 Administrative Cooperation Arrangement between the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and the State Customs Committee of Belarus aimed at helping investigative cooperation between them, specifically on the illicit trade in tobacco products.¹⁴⁹

Serbia, Bosnia and Montenegro

• Produced a regional briefing based on its Global Illicit Trade Environment Index (see above).¹⁵⁰ Among those listed as sponsors and contributors to the country report were British American Tobacco, Crime Stoppers International, Japan Tobacco International, and Philip Morris International
• Produced policy recommendations for the region which echoed much of those in the Europe report (see above).¹⁵¹

Middle East

• Produced a country briefing based on its Global Illicit Trade Environment Index (see above).¹⁵² The report says:
  

  “illicit tobacco trade has steeply increased due to high excise taxes (accounting for about 27% of the market) and new regulations that standardize tobacco packaging can further increase the demand for counterfeit and illicit products.”

  This echoes industry arguments against plain packaging and tax increases. The evidence used to support this is a news story which is itself based on a PMI-funded study.¹⁵³

• Produced policy recommendations for the region which echoed much of those in the Europe report (see above).¹⁵⁴

United Arab Emirates

• Produced a country briefing based on its Global Illicit Trade Environment Index (see above).¹⁵⁵The report recommends the UAE sign and ratify the five illicit trade treaties including the WHO Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products. Among those listed as sponsors and contributors to the country report were British American Tobacco, Crime Stoppers International, Japan Tobacco International, and Philip Morris International
• Produced policy recommendations for the region including strengthening co-operation in the region, having tougher oversight of free trade zones, rationalising tax policies and subsidies and improving public awareness. ¹⁵⁵

Africa

Tunisia

• Produced a country briefing based on its Global Illicit Trade Environment Index (see above).¹⁵⁶The report says
  

  “Stopping tobacco smuggling, in particular, must be a top priority for policy makers given the significant fiscal leakages and the large profits that organized crime and armed militias in the region amass from the illicit tobacco trade.”

• Produced policy recommendations for the region including strengthening co-operation in the region, having tougher oversight of free trade zones, rationalising tax policies and subsidies and improving public awareness. On the issue of taxation the report says:
  

  “excessive tax levels can reduce affordability of legitimate products and drive demand for illicit substitutes. Organized crime groups also may practice “tax arbitrage” to gain profits by smuggling products from relatively lower to higher taxed markets.”¹⁵⁶

  As in other TRACIT reports there is no mention of the involvement of tobacco companies in illicit activity.

South Africa

• In October 2019, TRACIT’s Director General Jeffrey Hardy addressed the 12th International Law Enforcement Intellectual Property Crime Conference in Cape Town. The conference was organised by INTERPOL, the International AntiCounterfeiting Coalition and South African Police Service.
• TRACIT used the conference to launch its policy recommendations for South Africa, including tackling illict tobacco which, according to a paper in Tobacco Control, is estimated to compromise a third of the market.¹⁵⁷.¹⁵⁸ TRACIT’s recommendations echoed those for its other country reports including tying activiy to achieve Sustainable Development Goals, tackling corruption, “rationalize tax policies”, promoting track & trace and similar technology and promoting private-public partnerships.¹⁵⁹ As examples of “valuable partners” it offers the American Chamber of Commerce in South Africa and the Consumer Goods Council of South Africa. The former has Philip Morris SA as a member,¹⁶⁰ while the latter has Soraya Zoueihid, the Area Director for British American Tobacco in Southern Africa, as a board member.¹⁶¹

Staff

Senior Management

The senior management team is made up of the following people:¹⁶²

• Jeffrey P Hardy – Director-General. Hardy previously served as the Director of the International Chamber of Commerce’s Business Action to Stop Counterfeiting and Piracy. The group has consistently produced reports sympathetic to its tobacco industry members and lobbied against Plain Packaging measures. Hardy is founder and managing director of IDA Consulting, a management consultancy.¹⁶³ Hardy is listed in the EU lobbying register.¹⁶⁴
• Stefano Betti – Deputy Director General
• Louis Bonnier – Director of Programs. Co-author of the report on illicit trade and SDGs
• Ulrika Bonnier – Director of Programs. Co-author of the report on illicit trade and SDGs
• Suriya Padmanaabhan – Director of Programs
• Cynthia H Braddon – Head of Communications and Public Policy
• Esteban Giudici – Senior Policy Advisor

Directors

TRACIT gives its mailing address as One Penn Plaza in New York City, but it is registered in Fort Myers, Florida, as not-for-profit organisation under US tax code 501(c)(6). Its corporate filing on 19 April 2019 listed three directors: ¹⁶⁵

• Jeffrey Hardy
• David Benjamin
• Shelley Duggan. UK-based trademark lawyer who is a director at Proctor & Gamble. Duggan is chair of the Anti-Counterfeiting Group (ACG), a not-for-profit global trade association which tackles counterfeiting and is partner of TRACIT.¹⁶⁶ One of the founders of the ACG was British American Tobacco. It is no longer listed as a member but Philip Morris, Japan Tobacco International, Imperial Tobacco and the Tobacco Manufacturers’ Association all are.¹⁶⁷

Advisory Council

The organisation’s Advisory Council is made up of independent experts providing advice in a personal capacity.¹⁶⁸ Among its members are:

• Karl Lallerstedt, from the Confederation of Swedish Enterprise, contributed a chapter to a book on organised crime which grew out of a BAT-funded project.¹⁶⁹.
• Leonard McCarthy, founder of integrity and risk management firm LFMcCarthy Associates, prior to that an investigator at the World Bank.¹⁷⁰ McCarthy came to prominence as the head of South Africa’s Directorate of Special Operations, or so-called Scorpions, which investigated organised crime, including tobacco smuggling. The unit was disbanded in 2009.¹⁷¹

Relevant Links

TRACIT homepage: https://www.tracit.org/

TobaccoTactics Resources

• Tobacco Smuggling
• Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products
• Tobacco-funded group TRACIT tries to influence tobacco control policy, 28 July 2020

References

The post TRACIT appeared first on TobaccoTactics.