Image source: Storm Crypt/CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 DEED

Key Points

• The Philippines is an island nation in Southeast Asia consisting of over 7,000 individual islands. It is part of the World Health Organization’s Western Pacific Region.
• Its population was 115.6 million as of 2022. The previous year, adult tobacco use prevalence was 19.5%.
• The Philippines ratified the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control in 2005. It has not signed the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products.
• PMFTC Inc. – a joint venture between Philip Morris International and the Fortune Tobacco Corporation, the tobacco business of local conglomerate LT Group – has the largest share of the Philippine cigarette market. Japan Tobacco International accounts for most other sales.
• Recent tobacco industry tactics in the Philippines include attempting to influence the committee responsible for overseeing tobacco control in the country; corporate social responsibility, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic; and establishing relationships with public officials, including at the very top of government.

The Philippines has made some progress on tobacco control, especially since the introduction of the reforms known as the Sin Taxes in 2013. These both greatly simplified tax structures and significantly increased excise on tobacco and alcohol products, with a substantial share of the new revenue being channelled into universal healthcare.¹ Tobacco use prevalence, which stood at 29.7% in 2009, had fallen to 23.8% by 2015, and again to 19.5% by 2021.²³ However, rising incomes and subsequent smaller increases in tobacco taxes have made cigarettes more affordable, slowing further progress.⁴ Other challenges include an illicit tobacco market larger than the global average;⁵ the growing popularity of newer nicotine and tobacco products (particularly e-cigarettes) amongst young people;⁶ and ongoing tobacco industry presence on the inter-agency committee responsible for implementing tobacco control regulation in the country.⁷ Philippine domestic law continues to fall short of what is required by the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) across a number of areas.⁸

Tobacco Use in the Philippines

In 2022, the population of the Philippines was 115.6 million.⁹ According to the 2021 Global Adult Tobacco Survey (GATS), tobacco use prevalence amongst Filipino adults was 19.5%.³ Prevalence is much higher amongst males (nearly 35%) than females (just over 4%).³ Amongst adolescents aged between 13 and 15, 12.5% were using some form of tobacco in 2019.¹⁰ Again, prevalence for males (over 18%) is higher than for females (nearly 7%).¹⁰

In the 2021 GATS, just over 2% of Filipino adults reported current use of e-cigarettes (3.6% males; 0.5% females).³ However, use of e-cigarettes is considerably higher amongst youth. In the 2019 Global Youth Tobacco Survey, the corresponding figure was over 14% – higher than for conventional cigarettes (10%).¹⁰ More than 20% of boys aged between 13 and 15 reported using e-cigarettes, compared to 7.5% of girls.¹⁰ Smokeless tobacco use in the Philippines also appears to be greater amongst the young: in 2019, 3% of young people reported current smokeless tobacco use, compared to 1.5% of adults in 2021.¹⁰³

There were an estimated 95,600 deaths attributable to tobacco use in 2019, accounting for nearly 15% of all mortality in the Philippines that year.¹¹ According to a 2018 study, the economic burden of tobacco use in the Philippines in 2012 was just under PHP₱270 billion (US$15.1 billion according to the purchasing power parity exchange rate) – equivalent to 2.5% of national GDP. This includes both direct costs resulting from tobacco use (e.g., hospitalisations and medication) as well as indirect costs (reduced productivity due to disability and mortality). The same study found that diseases attributable to tobacco use accounted for nearly 5% of total health expenditure.¹²

Tobacco in the Philippines

Market share and leading brands

PMFTC Inc. (PMFTC) dominates the Philippine cigarette market, with a market share of around 61% in 2022.¹³ PMFTC is a joint venture between Philip Morris International (PMI) and the Fortune Tobacco Corporation, the tobacco business of local conglomerate LT Group.¹⁴

Japan Tobacco International (JTI) has a market share of 38%, thanks to its 2017 acquisition of local company Mighty Corporation.¹³¹⁵ Together, PMFTC and JTI account for virtually all of the licit cigarette sales in the country.¹³

PMI’s flagship brand Marlboro is the most popular brand of cigarette, with a share of nearly 33% in 2022. In second place is another PMFTC brand, Fortune International, with a share of nearly 17%. JTI’s Winston is third, with a market share of around 14%. All other brands have market shares of less than 10%.¹⁶

• For more information on the tobacco industry in the Philippines, please see the Tobacco Supply Chain Database.

At nearly 23%, the Philippines has one of the largest market shares for menthol cigarettes in the world.¹⁷¹⁸ Menthol cigarettes have been marketed in the Philippines since at least the 1970s, including in campaigns targeting young women.¹⁹ In more recent times, the menthol market share has increased year on year since 2014. Similarly, though the market for flavour capsule cigarettes is much smaller than for menthol, it has also been growing steadily, with yearly increases since 2015.¹⁷ These products are often more attractive to youth and young adults than conventional cigarettes; menthol in particular is associated with increased smoking initiation.¹⁸

• For more information, please see the page on Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco in LMICs.

Tobacco farming and child labour

Since the early 1960s, tobacco production in the Philippines has remained roughly stable, at between 40,000 and 70,000 tonnes a year. However, between 1981 and 1993 it increased to between 74,000 and 118,000 tonnes. Conversely, between 2006 and 2009 it dipped below 40,000, to a low of 32,000 tonnes in 2008.²⁰

Figure 1: Tobacco production, 1961 to 2021.²⁰ Source: UN Food and Agriculture Organization/Our World in Data | CC BY

Research has demonstrated that tobacco growing is not a profitable enterprise for most farmers. Despite this, farmers continue to grow tobacco due to a belief in its profitability and the reliability of the tobacco market; its perceived resilience to bad weather compared to other crops; and, in particular, access to credit.²¹ Filipino farmers interviewed for a study published in 2019 stated that tobacco farming allowed them to take out loans to which they would not have had access had they been growing other crops. Loans were also used to cover non-agricultural expenses such as school fees, buying food, and paying off other loans.²¹

As part of the Sin Tax reforms, 15% of the revenue collected from tobacco taxes is allocated to tobacco-growing communities to promote economically viable alternatives.²² However, this remains a challenge. Farmers have cited lack of capital, difficulties accessing credit, an absence of technical support and a perceived lack of markets for other crops as reasons for not transitioning away from tobacco.²¹

Tobacco is also one of 13 commodities produced in the Philippines which feature on the U.S. Department of Labor’s 2022 List of Goods Produced by Child Labor or Forced Labor.²³ However, comprehensive and up-to-date information on child labour in Philippine tobacco farming is not available.

Tobacco and the economy

The Philippines is a net importer of raw tobacco, importing about US$243 million of raw tobacco in 2022, compared to exports of around US$184 million.²⁴²⁵ However, the country is a net exporter of cigarettes, with exports in the same year of over US$232 million, compared to about US$22.6 million in imports.²⁶²⁷

Illicit trade

Illicit tobacco was estimated to form around 16% of the market in the Philippines in 2018.⁵ Though this is above the likely global average of 11 to 12%, it has changed little since 1998.⁵²⁸ Though industry-funded studies found significant increases in the Philippine illicit tobacco trade following the introduction of the Sin Taxes in 2013, there is no independent evidence to support this.⁵

Tobacco and the environment

The WHO reports that curing in tobacco agriculture is a leading cause of demand for wood from native forests in the Philippines.²⁹

Farmers cultivating the native batek variety of tobacco in the southern Philippines have been documented as using several toxic agrochemicals to control pests. These include some listed as hazardous by the WHO, such as cypermethrin and methomyl.³⁰

It has been estimated that between 30 and 50 billion cigarette butts are littered every year in the Philippines – 12.5 million on the resort island of Boracay alone.³¹ Boracay was closed for six months in 2018 for environmental rehabilitation, resulting in billions in lost revenues for both government and the private sector.³¹³²

• For more information on the tobacco industry’s environmental impact, please see Tobacco and the Environment and the long read on Plastics, the Environment and the Tobacco Industry.

Roadmap to Tobacco Control

The Philippines ratified the WHO FCTC in 2005 and the treaty entered into force later that year.³³³⁴ WHO FCTC ratification was a catalyst for strengthening tobacco control laws in the country and reducing industry influence on policy.³⁴ However, the Philippines is not a party to the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products.³⁵

The Tobacco Regulation Act of 2003 (RA 9211) is the country’s main tobacco control law, covering areas such as smoking in public places; tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship; and sales restrictions. Subsequent legislation built on the 2003 law, introducing further regulation on issues such as designated smoking areas, advertising and the packaging and labelling of tobacco products.³⁶

However, given that RA 9211 was enacted just three months before the Philippines signed the WHO FCTC, Filipino tobacco control advocates have argued that the law was both timed and designed to pre-empt the Convention. This has resulted in tobacco control regulations which, nearly 20 years later, still fall some way short of WHO FCTC requirements.⁷³⁷ Designated smoking areas are still permitted in indoor offices and workplaces; restaurants; and cafés, pubs and bars. Restrictions on tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship remain incomplete. And at 50.6% of the retail value of the most popular brand of cigarettes, tobacco taxation is significantly below the 75% threshold recommended by the WHO.⁸

The tobacco industry, led by the Philippine Tobacco Institute (PTI), has also used RA 9211 as justification for delaying the introduction of more WHO FCTC-compliant measures (such as graphic health warnings), arguing that such measures contravene existing Philippine law.³⁷³⁸

In August 2020, the joint House Committees on Trade and Industry and on Health approved a bill regulating manufacture, sale and use of e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products (HTPs).³⁹ This bill reversed an earlier decision to raise the purchase age from 18 to 21 and restrict flavourings to tobacco and plain menthol. It also shifted responsibility for regulation of these products from the Food and Drug Administration to the Department of Trade and Industry. Eight days after the bill was approved, the first of four stores dedicated to PMI’s flagship HTP IQOS opened for business.⁴⁰

This bill was a precursor to the Vaporized Nicotine and Non-Nicotine Products Regulation Act, which eventually became law in July 2022. E-cigarettes in hundreds of different flavours reportedly flooded the Philippine market in the months following the passage of the law.⁴¹ Leading Filipino tobacco control advocates argue that the law has undermined recent gains in tobacco control.⁴⁰

For more details, please see the following websites:

• Legislation by country/Jurisdiction – Philippines, Tobacco Control Laws, Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids
• Philippines, WHO FCTC Implementation Database, WHO FCTC Secretariat
• Country profile – Philippines, World Health Organization, WHO report on the global tobacco epidemic 2023

Tobacco Industry Interference in the Philippines

Recent tobacco industry tactics in the Philippines include attempting to influence the committee responsible for overseeing tobacco control in the country; corporate social responsibility, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic; and attempts to influence policy, including by establishing relationships at the very top of government.

Conflict of interest

The Philippines’ main tobacco control law, RA 9211, requires the government to implement a “balanced policy”, given that:

“It is the policy of the State to protect the populace from hazardous products and promote the right to health and instill health consciousness among them. It is also the policy of the State, consistent with the Constitutional ideal to promote the general welfare, to safeguard the interests of the workers and other stakeholders in the tobacco industry.”⁴²

However, the first principle of the implementation guidelines for Article 5.3 of the WHO FCTC states that “There is a fundamental and irreconcilable conflict between the tobacco industry’s interests and public health policy interests.”⁴³ Any requirement for “balance” can only therefore hinder progress on tobacco control and undermine public health.

This may be seen in the composition of the Interagency Committee on Tobacco (IAC-T), a multisectoral body established by RA 9211 responsible for overseeing implementation of the legislation.⁴² One seat on the IAC-T is reserved for the National Tobacco Administration (NTA) – a government agency that sits within the Department of Agriculture – which has a mandate to “Promote the balanced and integrated growth and development of the tobacco industry to help make agriculture a solid base for industrialization.”⁴⁴

Another seat is reserved for a representative of the tobacco industry, specifically the Philippine Tobacco Institute (PTI), an association whose members over the years have included PMFTC and JTI, among others.^42454647 The PTI has a long history of undermining tobacco control measures, including successfully managing to reduce the size of graphic health warnings on tobacco products, opposing tobacco tax reforms and litigating over tobacco control regulations against public bodies such as the City of Balanga and the Department of Health.⁴⁶⁴⁸⁴⁹

Tobacco control advocates have called repeatedly for the removal of the PTI from the IAC-T, citing conflict of interest and alleging that it uses its position to actively weaken tobacco control policies.⁴⁶⁵⁰⁵¹ The WHO has supported this position, stating that the composition of the Philippine IAC-T “is blatantly in conflict with WHO FCTC Article 5.3”, which requires parties to protect their public health policies against the commercial and other vested interests of the tobacco industry.⁵²

Corporate social responsibility

As of 2023, there was still no ban on tobacco industry corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the Philippines.⁸ The tobacco industry has taken advantage of this shortcoming to try to enhance its reputation and influence both policy makers and the general public.

From 2017 to 2021, PMI spent nearly US$38 million on CSR in the Philippines. Nearly US$31 million of this total was spent in 2020 and 2021 alone.⁵³ Much of this funding is channelled through the Jaime V. Ongpin Foundation (JVOFI), a development NGO and partner of “Embrace”, PMFTC’s CSR programme.⁵³⁵⁴ During 2020, in the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic, JVOFI distributed ambulances, ventilators, PCR machines for COVID-19 testing, personal protective equipment, food supplies and rapid test kits throughout the country.⁵⁴

PMI was far from the only tobacco industry player carrying out this kind of work: by mid-April 2020, the LT Group – PMI’s partner in joint venture PMFTC – had spent PHP₱200 million (around US$4 million) on COVID-19 assistance.⁵⁴ The LT Group implements such initiatives in the Philippines via its CSR arm, the Tan Yan Kee Foundation.⁵⁵ Also in April 2020, Japan Tobacco International (JTI) donated 20,000 face masks to hospitals in the province of Batangas, where its manufacturing facilities are located.⁵⁴

An investigation published by the media and business intelligence organisation Eco-Business in 2021 revealed that a number of congressional representatives were involved in the distribution of COVID-19 relief donated by the tobacco industry and its associates.⁴⁰ These donations also coincided with several debates in Congress which addressed regulation for newer nicotine and tobacco products (see section “Roadmap to Tobacco Control”).⁴⁰³⁷

Both PMI and JTI also lobbied the Philippine Ministry of Finance for permission to continue their operations as normal during lockdown, though cigarettes were not considered to be an essential item.⁵⁴ In an April 2020 press release, JTI argued that lockdown restrictions were forcing smokers to buy illicit tobacco; were resulting in lower tax revenues for government; and were harming retailers, especially small and family-run businesses.⁵⁶ Restrictions on the transport and delivery of tobacco products were subsequently lifted.⁵⁷

This shows how industry arguments around the illicit trade were accepted by Filipino policy makers, allowing tobacco companies to operate even during an outbreak of a lethal respiratory disease to which smokers are more vulnerable.⁵⁸

• For more on tobacco industry activity during the pandemic, please see the COVID-19 Tobacco Tactics page and the COVID-19 monitoring database.

Unnecessary interaction with high level officials

Hailing from the Ilocos region, where tobacco is a major cash crop, President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. has met with PMI at least twice since becoming president in June 2022.⁴¹⁵⁹ The most recent of these meetings was a lunch he and First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos hosted for PMI executives – including CEO Jacek Olczak – at the Malacañang Palace in November 2022, the first time a company CEO has been received at the Philippine presidential palace. Also present were PMFTC president Denis Gorkun and LT Group CEO Lucio Tan III.⁴¹

PMFTC’s director for global communications stated that the aim of the meeting was to outline the company’s plan “to expand our economic footprint in the Philippines.”⁴¹ PMI is reportedly investing US$150 million in the expansion of a manufacturing plant in Tanauan, Batangas. The new wing of the factory is to be used for the production of BLENDS, tobacco sticks used exclusively in PMI’s BONDS, a more affordable version of its flagship HTP IQOS.⁴¹

In 2012, the then Senator Marcos was photographed during a Senate debate on the Sin Taxes speaking to a lawyer representing PMFTC.⁶⁰⁶¹

Relevant Links

• The Toll of Tobacco in the Philippines, Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, 2023
• Tobacco Industry Interference Index 2022: The Philippine Report on the Implementation of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, HealthJustice, 2023
• Global Adult Tobacco Survey, Fact Sheet, Philippines 2021, Republic of the Philippines Department of Health, Philippine Statistics Authority, WHO Philippines et al
• Global Youth Tobacco Survey, Fact Sheet, Philippines 2019, Republic of the Philippines Department of Health, Epidemiology Bureau, WHO Western Pacific Region et al
• Tobacco Industry Monitor – Philippines, Southeast Asia Tobacco Control Alliance, 2024

Tobacco Tactics Resources

• Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco in LMICs

References

The post Philippines Country Profile appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

Image source: Luis Barrios/CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

Key Points

• Mexico is a country in North America, covered by the World Health Organization’s Regional Office for the Americas.
• It has a population of over 127.5 million with current smoking prevalence of 19% amongst the population aged 20 and over.
• Mexico ratified the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control in 2004. It has not joined the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products.
• The Mexican tobacco market is dominated by the big transnational tobacco companies, particularly Philip Morris International and British American Tobacco.
• Recent tobacco industry tactics in Mexico include the use of third parties; the targeting of youth with marketing for newer nicotine and tobacco products, particularly on social media; and corporate social responsibility, including during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Mexico significantly reduced smoking prevalence between 2002-2009, in the years around ratification of the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC).⁶²⁶³⁶⁴ However, between 2009 and 2016 there was no further progress. This may be explained by ongoing industry interference, such as on price and tax; the introduction and rapid growth of flavour capsule cigarettes; as well as challenges involved with implementation of Mexico’s main tobacco control law.⁶⁴⁶⁵ In more recent years, Mexico has redoubled its efforts, passing a major amendment to its tobacco control law in 2021 which significantly increased compliance with the WHO FCTC.⁶⁶ Mexico now has some of the most comprehensive tobacco control regulation in the world.⁶⁶⁶⁷

Tobacco Use in Mexico

In 2022, the population of Mexico was over 127.5 million.⁶⁸ According to the 2021 National Health and Nutrition Survey on COVID-19 (ENSANUT), prevalence of current smoking in the Mexican population aged 20 and over was just over 19%. There is significant difference between males and females, with nearly 30% of men reporting current smoking compared to around 9% of women. Prevalence of current smoking amongst Mexican youth aged from 10 to 19 was less than 5%, with 7.5% of males in this age range smoking compared to less than 2% of females.⁶⁹

There were an estimated 48,400 deaths attributable to smoking in 2019, accounting for 6.6% of all mortality in Mexico that year.⁷⁰ A study published in 2021 estimated the total cost of tobacco use to the Mexican economy at US$8.2 billion per year. US$5.1 billion is spent on treating diseases associated with tobacco use – equivalent to 9.3% of the annual health budget. The US$1.9 billion that Mexico receives in revenue from the tobacco industry covers just 38% of the burden of tobacco use.⁷¹

Since 2008, Mexico has prohibited sale, distribution and promotion of any product that resembles a cigarette, which has been applied to e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products (see section “Roadmap to Tobacco Control”).⁷²⁷³ Even so, in the 2021 ENSANUT survey, current use of e-cigarette by adults aged 20 and over was 1.6% (2.5% for males; 0.7% for females). Amongst youth aged 10 to 19, prevalence was slightly higher, at 1.8% (2.4% for males; 1.1% for females).⁶⁹ A 2022 survey by the National Commission Against Addictions estimated that five million Mexicans between the ages of 12 and 65 had used e-cigarettes at some point, with 975,000 being current users.⁷⁴

Tobacco in Mexico

Market share and leading brands

In 2022, market research company Euromonitor International estimated the Mexican tobacco market to be worth nearly 89 billion Mexican pesos (US$4.5 billion), mostly accounted for by cigarette sales.⁷⁵ The market is dominated by the big transnational tobacco companies (TTCs), particularly Philip Morris International (PMI) and British American Tobacco (BAT), and to a much lesser extent Japan Tobacco International (JTI). Between them, these three companies accounted for virtually all legal cigarette sales in 2022. PMI is the market leader with just over 60%, followed by BAT with just under 36%. JTI’s share was 4%.¹³

As of 2022, the top six brands in Mexico were all manufactured by either PMI or BAT. By far the most popular cigarette was PMI’s premium brand Marlboro, with a market share of over 48%. This was followed by BAT’s mid-range cigarette Pall Mall, with under 22%. All other brands had a share of less than 10%.⁷⁶

• For more information on the tobacco industry in Mexico, see the Tobacco Supply Chain Database.

The use of flavour capsule cigarettes is particularly high in several Latin American countries, including Mexico, where their share of the market has risen year on year since 2012.⁷⁷ Although they were only introduced in 2011, flavour capsule cigarettes accounted for nearly 28% of the cigarette market in 2022 – amongst the highest proportions in the world.⁶⁴⁷⁸ Research has shown that flavour capsules increase the appeal of cigarettes and stimulate a desire to try them, particularly amongst young people.⁷⁸⁷⁹

• For more information, see Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco in LMICs.

Tobacco farming and child labour

Tobacco growing in Mexico has fallen considerably since 1980, when it produced nearly 94,000 tonnes of leaf, to under 7,000 tonnes in 2010 (see Figure 1). However, in 2010 production started to increase again, rising to over 15,000 tonnes by 2012, since when the figure has remained roughly stable.²⁰

Figure 1: Mexican tobacco production, 1961 to 2020.⁸⁰ Source: UN Food and Agriculture Organization/Our World in Data | CC BY

Similarly, in 1980 the harvested area was 42,000 hectares, falling to 4,000 hectares in 2010, but up to 7,000 in 2020.²⁰

A series of exposés in the 1990s revealed widespread use of child labour on Mexico tobacco farms, as well as the use of banned agrochemicals and poor living and working conditions for tobacco pickers. While the industry claims much has changed since then, an investigation by The Guardian in 2018 found children working on seven out of the ten farms the report visited in the state of Nayarit, Mexico’s main tobacco growing region. The farms featured in the investigation were supplying PMI, BAT and Universal Leaf Tobacco.⁸¹

• For information on tobacco industry responses to accusations of complicity in child labour, please see the pages on CSR: Child Labour and the Eliminating Child Labour in Tobacco-Growing Foundation (ECLT).

Tobacco and the economy

Mexico is a net exporter both of tobacco leaf and cigarettes. According to UN Comtrade, it exported approximately US$7.1 million in raw tobacco in 2022, compared to around US$2.4 million in imports.⁸²⁸³

A 2021 report on the impacts of tobacco tax, published by the Center of Research on Food and Development (CIAD), which bases its calculations on the Secretariat of Economy’s Online Tariff Information System, puts the figure for cigarette exports in 2019 at close to US$180 million, compared to imports of over $10 million.⁸⁴ This corresponds to customs data from Descartes Datamyne, which put cigarette exports for 2020 at over $168 million, compared to imports of US$10.7 million.⁸⁵ However, the Comtrade figure for cigarette exports in 2020 is much lower.⁸⁶ No import data is available on Comtrade for that year.

According to the CIAD report, seventy per cent of Mexican cigarette exports served the Canadian market, 15% the Colombian market, and 11% Central American markets.⁸⁴ Customs data also indicates these are the main export destinations for cigarettes manufactured in Mexico.⁸⁵

The CIAD report also states that the tobacco industry is a relatively small sector of the Mexican economy, employing just 0.1% of the national workforce in 2018.⁸⁴

Illicit trade

In a 2021 study which measured the Mexican illicit tobacco trade using two methodologies, illicit cigarettes accounted for 8.8% of total consumption based on an analysis of discarded packs, and 7.6% based on a survey of smokers. Both results are significantly lower than the figure of 16.6% which is widely publicised by the tobacco industry.⁸⁷ While the figures obtained via both methodologies represent an increase from previous estimates of illicit cigarette consumption – 0.5% in 2009 and 2.7% in 2015 – they are lower than the global average and lower than the figure for other countries in Latin America such as Brazil, Chile and Uruguay.⁸⁸⁸⁹ A previous study also found wide geographical variation across the country: for example, in Hermosillo, Sonora, just 0.3% of total cigarette consumption was illicit, while in León, Guanajato, the figure was as high as 27.5%.⁸⁸

There is also an illegal e-cigarette market. Between January 2021 and June 2022, Mexican authorities seized over 60,000 devices, suspending the activities of nearly 180 retail outlets.⁹⁰

Tobacco and the environment

Mexico produces around 40 billion cigarettes annually. This consumes between 109 and 205 billion litres of water and between 73 and 114 million kilowatts of energy. It also generates CO₂ emissions of between 20,000 and 29,000 tonnes. Around 55 million cigarette butts are discarded every day in Mexico, at an estimated cost of close to US$140 million annually.⁹¹

• For more information, please see the page on Tobacco and the Environment and the long read on Plastics, the Environment and the Tobacco Industry.

Roadmap to Tobacco Control

Mexico was the first country in the Americas to ratify the WHO FCTC in 2004.⁶³ However, it has not joined the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products.⁹²

In 2008, The General Law on Tobacco Control came into force, containing most of the provisions established in the WHO FCTC.⁹³ However, it left some significant loopholes. While smoking was completely prohibited indoors in primary and secondary schools, and in federal government facilities, workplaces and other buildings with public access were permitted to provide designated smoking areas. Similarly, the law banned most forms of tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship, but made an exception in cases where it was aimed exclusively at adults.⁹⁴ Some stricter regulation was introduced at subnational level. For example, Mexico City passed its own 100% smokefree law in February 2008 and in the following years 14 states followed suit.⁹⁵⁹⁶

In 2021, the Mexican Senate unanimously approved a key amendment to the 2008 General Law, which banned smoking in all enclosed public spaces and workplaces, as well as banning all forms of tobacco advertising.⁶⁶ A further update, which came into force in January 2023, extended smoke-free legislation even to open-air environments where there may be public gatherings, such as parks, beaches and restaurant terraces. It also bans the display of tobacco products in all retail outlets.⁶⁷⁹⁷⁹⁸ With these two measures, Mexico made important progress towards full compliance with the WHO FCTC.⁶⁶

Mexico has taken a tough stance on newer nicotine and tobacco products. Since 2008, there has been a ban on any product that resembles a cigarette.^99100101 Regulators have applied this law to e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products (HTPs), but it has been contested by both retailers and tobacco companies.⁷²⁹⁹ In 2020, the government banned imports of e-cigarettes and HTPs, bringing customs law into line with existing health regulations.¹⁰² Though a decree published by the Secretariat of Economy in July 2021 created an exception for HTPs, this was reversed by a new presidential decree in October of the same year.¹⁰³¹⁰⁴

Finally, on World No Tobacco Day in May 2022, President Andrés Manuel López Obrador signed a decree imposing a total ban on “circulation and marketing” of e-cigarettes and HTPs. This effectively makes the import and sale of these products illegal in Mexico.⁹⁹¹⁰⁵

For more details, please see the following websites:

• Legislation by country – Mexico, Tobacco Control Laws, Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids
• Mexico, WHO FCTC implementation database, WHO FCTC Secretariat
• Country Profile – Mexico, World Health Organization, WHO report on the global tobacco epidemic 2023

Tobacco Industry Interference in Mexico

Tobacco industry tactics in Mexico include the use of third parties; the targeting of youth with marketing for newer nicotine and tobacco products, particularly on social media; and corporate social responsibility, including during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Use of third parties

Tobacco companies often lobby via industry and trade associations, think tanks, front groups and other third parties, including public relations (PR) companies and professional lobbyists.

In Mexico, the Confederación Patronal de la República Mexicana (COPARMEX) is an employers’ union, which brings together businesses of all sizes and from all sectors.¹⁰⁶ In 2021, Philip Morris International (PMI) listed COPARMEX as one of the business and trade organisations in which it held a leadership role.¹⁰⁷

In May 2022, Mexico held a public consultation on an update to its revised tobacco control law, regarding proposals to completely ban the display of tobacco products at points of sale, and to further restrict designated smoking areas to limited open-air environments.⁹⁷ COPARMEX’s submission to the consultation argued that cost of implementing these measures would be high and adversely impact the owners of small businesses; that the proposals violated the right to free trade; and that they would fuel the growth of the illicit trade.¹⁰⁸

The National Tobacco Industry Council (CONAINTA) – of which PMI, BAT and JTI are all members – also opposed these measures, arguing that they would have a negative impact on the national economy, including on tobacco growing communities; that they violated consumer rights; and that they would endanger jobs and investment.¹⁰⁹ In 2023, the president of CONAINTA warned that there would be a “storm” of legal appeals against the updated tobacco control law.¹¹⁰

Controversial marketing: targeting youth

The tobacco industry has long seen young people as a vital target market; tobacco use generally starts in adolescence. According to the 2016-7 National Survey of Drugs, Alcohol and Tobacco Consumption, the average age of initiation for daily tobacco consumption in Mexico was less than 20 years old.¹¹¹

Mexican media have documented tobacco companies targeting young people with marketing for newer nicotine and tobacco products via social media. From around 2018, industry hashtags – such as #FuturoSinHumo (“#SmokeFreeFuture”) and #EligeElCambio (“#ChooseChange” – both PMI) and #vypefriends and #govype (both BAT) began to appear on posts by popular Mexican actors, influencers, comedians and others.¹¹²¹¹³ Products such as PMI’s HTP IQOS and BAT’s e-cigarette Vype (since rebranded as Vuse) featured visibly in this content, though often company sponsorship was not made explicit.¹¹²

Even before the General Law on Tobacco Control was amended in late 2021, it prohibited tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship in all but three circumstances: in adult magazines, in adult-only establishments, or in personal correspondence to adults via post. It also specifically prohibited the online marketing of tobacco products.⁹⁴ According to a lawyer at the Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas, “these products must comply with the General Law on Tobacco Control, which clearly establishes a near-total ban on this publicity.”¹¹²

A 2022 study on exposure to e-cigarette advertising and the social acceptability of e-cigarette use in Mexico identified online advertising as one of the channels of exposure most significantly associated with a higher likelihood of perceiving e-cigarettes as socially acceptable.¹¹⁴ According to a researcher at the National Institute of Public Health – one of the authors of the study – the industry’s aim is the “renormalization” of nicotine consumption amongst young people.¹¹²

• See also the page on PMI’s Futuro Sin Humo campaign.

The tobacco industry has also sponsored motorsports in Mexico. In the 2022 Mexico City Grand Prix, held in October, the McLaren cars displayed BAT’s Vuse branding – in an apparent violation of the comprehensive ban on e-cigarettes brought in just months beforehand.¹¹⁵ Motorsport sponsorship is a longstanding and well-documented promotional strategy aimed at young people, particularly boys and young men.¹¹⁶

Corporate social responsibility

Tobacco companies often use corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives to enhance their public image and corporate reputation.

In 2018, PMI’s local subsidiary Philip Morris México (PMM) set up a partnership with a local start-up, Eco Filter, which uses biotechnology to recycle cigarette butts.¹¹²¹¹⁷ This partnership involves clean-up and collection initiatives which target young people, with events taking place at concerts, parks and universities. Eco Filter also delivers presentations to young people in which it displays PMI logos, and has used the social media hashtag and PMI slogan #FuturoSinHumo.¹¹²¹¹⁸ Eco Filter states that it does not promote PMI’s products or encourage nicotine consumption amongst young people.¹¹²

In 2021, Eco Filter opened a new factory in Guadalajara, Jalisco, with support from PMM.¹¹⁷¹¹⁹ It will process waste from PMM’s manufacturing facility near Guadalajara, as well as cigarette butts from the street.¹²⁰¹²¹

• See also Cigarette Filters.

Both PMI and BAT carried out extensive corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities in Mexico during the COVID-19 pandemic. In May 2020, PMI donated electric beds, vital signs monitors and ventilators to a hospital in Guadalajara. PMI also donated money for personal protective equipment (PPE) for healthcare professionals, and meals to a public welfare institution.¹²² BAT joined a programme called UNIR y DAR (“UNITE and GIVE”) with other local companies in Nuevo León, where BAT México is headquartered. As part of an initiative called #RespiraNL, these companies made donations for PPE.¹²³ BAT also provided food supplies in Guadalupe, Nuevo León.¹²⁴

There are also CSR initiatives on child labour in Mexico. For example, since 2001 BAT has run a programme called “Florece” (meaning “Blossom” or “Flourish” in English), which provides day centres for the children of workers in the tobacco fields of Nayarit.¹²⁵¹²⁶

• For more on tobacco industry activity during the pandemic, please see the COVID-19 Tobacco Tactics page and the COVID-19 monitoring database.

Relevant Links

• III Índice Regional de Interferencia de la Industria Tabacalera en países de América Latina y el Caribe 2023, Corporate Accountability, Global Center for Good Governance in Tobacco Control
• Mexico – Tobacco Industry Interference Index 2021, Global Center for Good Governance in Tobacco Control
• Interferencia de tabacaleras en México: reporte de índice regional, Salud Justa, 2021
• Mexico: the long road to Tobacco Control, Pan American Health Organization (PAHO)
• Mexico – Cigarette Tax Scorecard, Tobacconomics
• Tobacco Industry Interference in Mexico, STOP
• México, Organización Panamericana de la Salud

Tobacco Tactics Resources

• E-cigarettes: British American Tobacco
• Futuro Sin Humo
• Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco in LMICs
• PMI’s IQOS: Use, “Switching” and “Quitting”

TCRG Research

• Developing more detailed taxonomies of tobacco industry political activity in low-income and middle-income countries: qualitative evidence from eight countries, B.K. Matthes, K. Lauber, M. Zatoński, L. Robertson, A.B. Gilmore, BMJ Global Health 2021;6:e004096.

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 Mexico Country Profile appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

BOTEC Analysis is a research and consultancy firm based in the US, which works on nicotine and tobacco harm reduction, cannabis, drug policy, transportation and community corrections.¹²⁷  Its website states that “BOTEC combines the capabilities of a consultancy and a think tank, resulting in service that is nimble and responsive but also grounded in evidence and ethical accountability”.¹²⁸

BOTEC Analysis has received funding from Philip Morris International (PMI) and the Foundation for a Smoke Free World (FSFW).

People

Samuel Hampsher-Monk has been the Managing Director of BOTEC Analysis since 2017.¹²⁹¹³⁰ BOTEC Analysis has developed its tobacco harm reduction work since he took on this role.¹³¹

A list of other current employees can be found on the BOTEC Analysis website.

Relationship with the Tobacco Industry

Funded by the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World

BOTEC Analysis has received funding from the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World (FSFW) since 2019.

In 2019, It received a grant of US$299,767 to “Investigate the drivers of smoking cessation in five countries with alternative nicotine delivery device markets”.¹³²

In 2021, it received a further two grants totalling US$401,349 to “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”.¹³³

In 2022 BOTEC received its largest grants to date, two grants totalling US$937,023 to “Investigate the drivers for smoking cessation and tobacco harm reduction in five countries with alternative nicotine delivery systems markets” and “Develop journal articles, econometric studies, and a full-length book regarding the drivers of smoking cessation in five countries with legalized alternative nicotine delivery systems”.¹³⁴

PMI IMPACT grant

BOTEC analysis received a grant from PMI through its PMI IMPACT initiative in 2017 to conduct research on the “Impact of e-cigarette regulation on illegal trade in tobacco products in the European Union”.¹³⁵

As part of this project, a paper found that “the more available e-cigarettes become, the less ITTP [illicit trade in tobacco products] market share rises in response to tax-driven price increases for conventional cigarettes”,¹³⁶ an argument beneficial to PMI’s business strategy of pushing heated tobacco products, not as an alternative but a supplement to its cigarette business.

For more information see List of Successful PMI IMPACT Applicants.

Other activities

Hampsher-Monk and Jamer Prieger, Senior Researcher at BOTEC Analysis,¹²⁹ are listed as co-authors of a book due to be published in 2024 titled ‘Clearing the Air on E-Cigarettes and Harm Reduction, Volume I: Tobacco Regulation, Economics, and Public Health’.¹³⁷ The other co-author is Sudhanshu Patwardhan, Medical Director of the Centre for Health Research and Education (CHRE).

Hampsher-Monk was listed as a speaker at the 2023 ‘New Approaches’ conference, held at the Harvard Club of New York City, in the same week as the United Nations General Assembly.¹³¹ For more details see Healthy Initiatives (a FSFW grantee).

Relevant Link

• BOTEC Analysis website

TobaccoTactics Pages

• Foundation for a Smoke-Free World
• PMI IMPACT
• List of Successful PMI IMPACT Applicants

References

The post BOTEC Analysis appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

Image source: eltpics/CC BY-NC 2.0

Key Points

• Viet Nam is a country located in South East Asia, part of the World Health Organization’s regional office for the Western Pacific (WPRO).
• It has a population of 98.2 million, with tobacco use prevalence of 24.9%.
• Viet Nam ratified the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) in 2004. It has not joined the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products.
• The Vietnam National Tobacco Corporation (Vinataba), a state-owned company, has the largest share of the national cigarette market, at nearly 58% in 2022.
• Of the transnational tobacco companies (TTCs), British American Tobacco (BAT) has by far the largest share of the market in Viet Nam, with Imperial Brands in second place. Philip Morris International (PMI), Japan Tobacco International (JTI) and others have smaller market shares.
• The tobacco industry has deployed a range of tactics to protect its interests in Viet Nam, including lobbying policy makers, use of third parties, complicity in the illicit trade in tobacco products, and spreading misleading information.

Although Viet Nam has made significant progress on tobacco control in recent years, it continues to face major challenges. Tobacco prevalence amongst men remains very high.⁸ There is ongoing industry influence on policymaking, particularly on issues such as price and tax of tobacco products.¹³⁸ The state-owned company Vinataba enjoys special privileges from the Vietnamese state, and has long claimed a position as an affected stakeholder on matters of tobacco control.¹³⁹¹⁴⁰ There has also been interaction between the transnational tobacco companies (TTCs) and the Vietnamese state, including during the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the WHO FCTC.¹⁴¹

Tobacco Use in Viet Nam

In 2022, the population of Viet Nam was 98.2 million.¹⁴² According to a WHO age-standardised prevalence estimate, based on all national survey data between 1990 and 2019, overall prevalence of current tobacco use was just over 25%.⁸ There is a major gender difference, with current male tobacco use at over 48%, compared to just over 2% for females.⁸ Smoking has been an important aspect of social behaviour amongst Vietnamese men for many decades; offering cigarettes is considered to be a show of good manners.¹³⁸

As of 2019, less than 3% of adolescents aged 13 to 17 were current tobacco users (i.e. they had either smoked cigarettes or used waterpipe on at least one day of the 30 days prior to the survey).¹⁴³

In the Global Adult Tobacco Survey (GATS) 2015, overall prevalence for traditional bamboo waterpipe was 6.7%. This was higher for people aged between 45-64 (8.9%) and those living in rural areas (8.3%).¹⁴⁴ Smoke from Vietnamese waterpipes tends to have very high nicotine content: the tobacco typically used is Nicotiana rustica, known locally as thuốc lào, which can contain up to 9% nicotine compared to 1-3% in standard tobacco leaves.¹⁴⁵

There were an estimated 97,100 deaths attributable to smoking in 2019.¹⁴⁶ This means that smoking accounted for over 15% of mortality in the country for that year.¹⁴⁶ In 2011, the last year for which figures are available, the cost of tobacco use to the Vietnamese economy was estimated at nearly US$1.2 billion.¹⁴⁷ This was almost 1% of national GDP that year and around US$425 million more than the tax revenue the government received from the industry.¹⁴⁷

A 2022 study suggested that use and awareness of e-cigarettes in Viet Nam is relatively low.¹⁴⁸ However, the Vietnamese market for newer nicotine and tobacco products is expanding. According to market analysis by Statista, in 2022 the e-cigarette market was worth around US$22 million, up from US$7.7 million in 2014, and projected to reach US$24.7 million by 2027.¹⁴⁹ Research conducted in June 2020 indicated that e-cigarettes were being sold mainly by speciality retailers and most of the brands available were Chinese imports. Brands popular in Western countries – such as BAT’s Vuse, Imperial Brands’ Blu and JUUL – were rare.¹⁵⁰

According to Tobacco Control Laws – an archive of global tobacco control legislation maintained by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids – as of May 2023, there were no restrictions on use; advertising, promotion and sponsorship; or packaging and labelling of e-cigarettes.¹⁴⁹¹⁵¹ This lack of regulation, combined with Viet Nam’s relatively large population and high tobacco prevalence, make it an extremely attractive target for transnationals selling e-cigarettes and other newer nicotine and tobacco products.¹⁵¹¹⁵⁰

Tobacco in Viet Nam

Market share and leading brands

In 2022, market research company Euromonitor International estimated the Vietnamese tobacco industry to be worth VND₫104,094.9 billion – approximately US$4.4 billion.¹⁵² The state-owned Vietnam National Tobacco Corporation (Vinataba) has the largest market share, accounting for nearly 58% of the cigarette market in 2022.¹³ Vinataba’s range of brands includes Vinataba, Viet Nam’s most popular cigarette.⁷⁶ Established in 1985, Vinataba has long enjoyed special privileges and recognition from the Vietnamese government.¹³⁹ In addition, the government retains the right to appoint Vinataba’s chair and CEO.¹⁴⁰

Transnational tobacco companies (TTCs) producing and distributing tobacco products in Viet Nam are required to establish joint ventures with Vinataba.¹⁴⁰ Amongst the TTCs, British American Tobacco (BAT) has by far the largest market share, accounting for nearly 29% of the cigarette market in 2022.¹³ BAT has more than doubled its share of the market since 2001, and dominates the mid-range and premium market sectors with brands such as Craven A, White Horse and State Express 555.^76153154 Imperial Brands has a market share of 7% with one brand, Bastos. Similarly, Philip Morris International (PMI) has a share of 3% with one brand, Marlboro. The remaining companies account for another 3.5% of the market.¹³⁷⁶

• For more information on the tobacco industry in Viet Nam, see the Tobacco Supply Chain Database.

Tobacco farming and child labour

From 2000 to 2020, the area of land dedicated to growing tobacco in Viet Nam fell by nearly 49%.¹⁵⁵ However, crop yield per hectare has more than doubled, meaning that in 2020 Viet Nam produced over 29,000 tonnes of tobacco leaf – around 200 tonnes more than in 2000.¹⁵⁵ Nonetheless, this is a steep drop from 2010, when Viet Nam harvested 56,530 tonnes of tobacco from an area of 31,484 hectares.¹⁵⁵

Viet Nam’s most recent National Child Labour Survey, conducted in 2018, identified more than a million children in a situation of child labour.¹⁵⁶ Of these, more than half were working in the agriculture sector – though the report does not mention tobacco growing specifically.¹⁵⁶ However, Vietnamese tobacco was one of the products identified in 2022 by the U.S. Department of Labor as having been produced by child labour, in violation of international standards.¹⁵⁷

• For information on tobacco industry responses to accusations of complicity in child labour, please see the pages on CSR: Child Labour and the Eliminating Child Labour in Tobacco-Growing Foundation (ECLT).

Tobacco and the economy

Viet Nam is a net importer of tobacco leaf. According to UN Comtrade, in 2021, it imported US$242 million in unmanufactured tobacco, compared to just over US$9 million in exports.¹⁵⁸¹⁵⁹ Comtrade data also states that Viet Nam is a net exporter of cigarettes: US$182 million in 2020, compared to just over US$63,000 in imports.¹⁶⁰¹⁶¹

However, these figures differ significantly from customs declarations found on Datamyne, which suggest that Viet Nam is a net importer of cigarettes. According to Datamyne, the value of Vietnamese cigarette imports in 2020 was nearly US$537 million, compared to exports of nearly US$270 million.⁸⁵ The import and export figures for raw tobacco are also different: according to Datamyne, Viet Nam imported close to US$337 million in raw tobacco in 2021, compared to around US$17.6 million in exports.⁸⁵

Illicit trade

According to the Vietnamese government, 54.7 million packs of illicit cigarettes were seized between 2013 and 2018.¹⁶² It estimates that the illicit tobacco trade accounts for 15% of the national market.¹⁶² This is roughly consistent with research conducted in late 2017 by the Development and Policies Research Center, which concluded that illicit cigarettes accounted for nearly 14% of total cigarette consumption in Viet Nam.¹⁶³

By far the most popular illicitly traded cigarettes in Viet Nam are the brands Jet and Hero, which together account for around 85% of the illicit market. Both are manufactured by the Indonesian company Sumatra Tobacco Trading Company and then smuggled to Viet Nam.¹⁶⁴¹³⁸ Both Jet and Hero sell for significantly higher prices – between 30% and 60% – than the average legal brand of cigarettes in Viet Nam.¹³⁸

• For more information on the tobacco industry in Viet Nam, please see the Tobacco Supply Chain Database.

Roadmap to Tobacco Control

Viet Nam ratified the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) in 2004.¹⁶⁵ However, it has not yet joined the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products.

The main tobacco control law in Viet Nam is the Law on Prevention and Control of Tobacco Harm, passed in 2012. It is the country’s first ever comprehensive tobacco control law and a major public health milestone.¹⁶⁶ It established smokefree spaces; increased the size of graphic health warnings on tobacco products; restricted tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship; and set up the Tobacco Control Fund, a sustainable source of funding for tobacco control initiatives paid for by a dedicated tax on tobacco.¹⁶⁶¹⁶⁷ More than ten subsequent decisions, decrees and joint circulars have built on this law and further strengthened tobacco control.¹⁶⁸ This includes the National Strategy on Tobacco Harm Prevention and Control, which set specific targets to reduce tobacco use prevalence from 2013 to 2020.¹⁶⁹

For more details, please see the following websites:

• Legislation by country – Viet Nam, Tobacco Control Laws, Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids
• Viet Nam, WHO FCTC Implementation Database, WHO FCTC Secretariat
• Country profile – Viet Nam, World Health Organization, WHO report on the global tobacco epidemic 2021

Tobacco Industry Interference in Viet Nam

Tobacco industry tactics used in Viet Nam include lobbying policy makers, use of third parties, complicity in the illicit trade in tobacco products, and spreading misleading information.

Influencing policy

For the Southeast Asia Tobacco Control Alliance (SEATCA), the Vietnamese state’s majority ownership of Vinataba clashes with its duty to regulate the tobacco industry.¹⁴⁰ Vinataba has long claimed a position as an affected stakeholder on tobacco regulation, allowing it a seat at the table in discussions on issues such as taxation and illicit trade.¹⁴⁰

There has also been some exchange of personnel between the government and Vinataba, with high-ranking executives at Vinataba appointed to powerful positions in government – particularly at the Ministry of Industry and Trade (MOIT) – and vice-versa. Several senior officials left government to subsequently assume roles in Vinataba.¹⁷⁰ Vinataba’s General Director (as of August 2023) was formerly deputy director of the Department of Light Industry, which is controlled by the MOIT.¹⁷¹ Vinataba’s Secretary of the Party Committee and Chairman of the Member’s Council is a former vice director of the Industrial Policy and Strategy Institute, a government entity.¹⁷¹

Vinataba’s influence is most obvious when it comes to price and tax. Cigarettes in Viet Nam are among the cheapest in the world: as of 2020, the price of a 20-pack – even of a premium brand – was less than one U.S. dollar.⁸ In 2021, taxes accounted for under 39% of the retail price of the most popular brand of cigarettes – well short of the 75% recommended by the WHO.⁸ Research by the World Bank has concluded that Viet Nam’s tobacco taxation policies have made cigarettes more affordable. Per capita income in Viet Nam has risen considerably in recent decades, outpacing the increase in the price of cigarettes, and increases in tobacco taxes have not been sufficient to close the gap.¹³⁸

In 2017, the Ministry of Finance proposed switching to a mixed excise tax system, with a flat rate of VND₫1,000 – around four U.S. cents – imposed on top of the usual ad valorem tax on the factory price of tobacco products.¹³⁸ This would have made little difference to the affordability of cigarettes; health officials had argued for increase of between VND₫2,000 and VND₫5,000.¹³⁸ Vinataba, along with the Vietnam Tobacco Association, opposed the move, claiming it would lead to difficulties in tobacco production and business operations and increase the risk of smuggling.¹³⁸ At the time of writing, Viet Nam had yet to introduce the mixed tax regime.¹⁷²

The industry has also lobbied for the diversion of funding away from the Tobacco Control Fund – which is supposed to be used for public health purposes – and towards combatting illicit trade. Vinataba has made requests of this nature to various ministries and local governments.¹⁴⁰ In 2017, the International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease (The Union) sent a letter to the U.S. Ambassador in Viet Nam, urging him to reconsider the Embassy’s facilitation of meetings between Philip Morris International (PMI) and Vietnamese government ministers, on the grounds that PMI would attempt to raise fears over illicit trade and seek diversion of funds away from the Tobacco Control Fund and towards anti-smuggling measures.¹⁷³ SEATCA reported the same year that the MOIT had endorsed a recommendation from the tobacco industry to divert half of the Tobacco Control Fund towards enforcement activities against illicit trade.¹⁷⁴

The tobacco industry has also interacted with the Vietnamese delegation to the Conference of the Parties to the WHO FCTC.¹⁴¹ During COP6, held in Moscow in October 2014, PMI executives met with the Vietnamese delegation. Analysis of the delegation’s interventions by tobacco control groups observing the COP showed that they frequently mirrored positions held by PMI.¹⁴¹ For example, they argued that higher tobacco taxes would fuel the illicit trade and that the FCTC should be excluded from trade disputes, as well as opposing uniform parameters on legal liability for tobacco companies.¹⁴¹ Likewise, at COP7, held in Delhi in November 2016, PMI held meetings with members of the Vietnamese delegation away from the conference venue.¹⁴¹

Use of third parties

In June 2020 the R Street Institute, an American public policy thinktank, sent a letter to the Vietnamese prime minister and deputy prime minister urging them “to consider pragmatic regulations that allow Vietnamese citizens broad access to reduced-risk products.”¹⁷⁵ It also argued that inserts in cigarette packets should be permitted in order to market such products to current smokers; that it should be possible to place “relative-risk labels” on these products; and that maximum nicotine levels should be high enough “to achieve nicotine delivery similar to combustible cigarettes”.¹⁷⁵

Endorsing the use of e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products (HTPs) as cessation tools, the letter refers specifically to IQOS – PMI’s flagship HTP brand (though PMI has also sold e-cigarettes under the IQOS brand).¹⁷⁵ From 2014 until at least 2022, R Street received funding from Altria – the primary asset of which is Philip Morris USA, the largest tobacco company in the United States.^{176177178179180}

In the same month, Factasia also sent a similar letter to the Vietnamese prime minister.¹⁷¹ Factasia describes itself as “an independent, not-for-profit, consumer-oriented advocate for rational debate about – and sensible regulation of – the rights of adult citizens throughout the Asia-Pacific region to choose to use tobacco or other nicotine related products.”¹⁸¹ It acknowledges receiving funding from PMI, as well as the Tobacco Vapor Electronic Cigarette Association (TVECA), an e-cigarette trade association. However, it denies acting as a mouthpiece for the tobacco industry.¹⁸²

Complicity in smuggling

There is evidence that the tobacco industry has smuggled its own products into Viet Nam. Internal British American Tobacco (BAT) documents from the 1990s show how BAT and its subsidiary smuggled State Express 555 (SE555) cigarettes manufactured in the UK into Viet Nam.¹⁸³¹⁸⁴

BAT had been attempting to establish a presence in Viet Nam since the late 1980s, though with considerable difficulty. Negotiations on the terms of a joint venture with Vinataba were extremely slow, while a ban on foreign imports in 1990 meant that BAT would either have to license a Vietnamese company to manufacture its products locally or purchase equity in a local factory.¹⁵³

Smuggling facilitated BAT’s entry into the Vietnamese market in two ways.¹⁵³ Firstly, by circumventing the import ban, BAT managed to create brand awareness amongst Vietnamese smokers and obtain a competitive advantage prior to any opening of the market.¹⁵³ Secondly, by highlighting loss of tax revenue due to illicit trade, BAT was able to use smuggling as leverage in its negotiations with Vinataba.¹⁵³ An internal BAT document from 1993 states “We have the high ground [in negotiations with Vinataba] given the excellent quality of distribution, presence, and value of the GT [i.e. smuggled] product.”¹⁸⁵

The same BAT document states that “Both versions [i.e. licit and illicit cigarettes] will have a role to play in the further building of the brand and the ‘system’ profitability”.¹⁸⁵¹⁸⁶ Indeed, BAT continued to smuggle its own products into Viet Nam even after signing an agreement in 1994 which licensed Vinataba to manufacture SE555 locally.¹⁵³ BAT carefully controlled the price of both the licit and illicit SE555, with the smuggled cigarettes fetching higher prices because they were perceived to be of higher quality.¹⁸³ BAT finally signed a US$40 million joint venture with Vinataba in 2001, for construction of a brand new leaf-processing plant in Dong Nai province.¹⁵³¹⁸⁷ This was followed by a further agreement in 2006, under which 150 million packs per annum of Pall Mall and Viceroy would be manufactured for the domestic market, as well as another 50 million packs per annum for export.¹⁵³ Even then, illicit BAT products did not disappear from the Vietnamese market. As recently as 2017, illicit SE555 were still selling at 169% of the value of the licit version.¹⁶³

Spreading misleading information

Most existing estimates of the illicit tobacco trade in Viet Nam are based on industry data and rely on methods which are opaque, undisclosed or difficult to replicate over time.¹³⁸ While the government estimated in 2020 that illicit trade accounted for 15% of the national market, and independent research from 2017 put that figure at 13.72%, tobacco industry estimates are significantly higher.¹⁶²¹⁶³ Japan Tobacco International Vietnam, for example, states that “the rate of smuggled cigarettes is quite high (more than 20%) on the market”.¹⁸⁸

Oxford Economics (OE) put the share of total illicit consumption at 23.4% in 2017.¹³⁸ An economic advisory agency with links to the tobacco industry going back to the early 2010s, OE produced yearly reports on the illicit trade in Asia between 2012 and 2017 which were funded by PMI and based on PMI-approved terms of reference.^{189190191192193194}

These reports have been criticised in the strongest terms by Dr Hana Ross of the University of Cape Town, writing for the Southeast Asia Tobacco Control Alliance (SEATCA):

“The common denominator to all pieces of this study is PMI and its TORs [terms of reference] with all of the multiple parties in the report’s chain of production. This is a way for PMI to control the final results—by controlling the input, the data analysis, as well as publication, distribution, and promotion.”¹⁹⁵

This exaggeration of the scale of illicit trade is a well-documented means of fighting tobacco control measures such as graphic health warnings, plain packaging and increased tobacco taxes. However, there is no evidence to show that tax increases have led to an increase in the illicit trade in Viet Nam; on the contrary, the illicit trade declined even after a 5% increase in the ad valorem tax rate in January 2016.¹⁶³

• For more information see Illicit Tobacco Trade

Relevant Links

• Global Adult Tobacco Survey (GATS) Viet Nam 2015, GATS Viet Nam Working Group
• Vietnam 2023 Tobacco Industry Interference Index, Global Center for Good Governance in Tobacco Control
• Vietnam 2021 Tobacco Industry Interference Index, Global Center for Good Governance in Tobacco Control
• Asian State-Owned Tobacco Enterprises: Challenges & Opportunities in Implementing WHO FCTC Article 5.3, Southeast Asia Tobacco Control Alliance (SEATCA)
• Vietnam: Overview of tobacco control legislation, use and taxation, World Bank Group
• Evidence Matrix: Vietnam, Tobacconomics
• Inside Philip Morris’ campaign to subvert the global anti-smoking treaty, A. Kalra, P. Bansal, D. Wilson, T. Lasseter, The Philip Morris Files, Reuters

Tobacco Tactics Resources

• Western Pacific Region
• Waterpipe
• Price and Tax
• Tobacco Smuggling
• Oxford Economics
• R Street Institute
• Factasia

TCRG Research

• Developing more detailed taxonomies of tobacco industry political activity in low-income and middle-income countries: qualitative evidence from eight countries, B.K. Matthes, K. Lauber, M. Zatoński, L. Robertson, A.B. Gilmore, BMJ Global Health 2021;6:e004096.
• Gaining access to Vietnam’s cigarette market: British American Tobacco’s strategy to enter ‘a huge market which will become enormous’, K. Lee, H.V. Kinh, R. Mackenzie, A.B. Gilmore, N.T. Minh & J. Collin, 2008, In: Global Public Health. 3, 1, p. 1-25.

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 Viet Nam Country Profile appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

• In 2012, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) published guidance for assessing tobacco and nicotine products proposed by manufacturers as less harmful alternatives to conventional cigarettes.
• Transnational tobacco companies have developed similar multi-stage approaches to scientifically assess these newer products.
• There is evidence to suggest the industry’s approach does not guarantee good quality research or prevent the industry from using strategies to influence science.
• The Framework Convention on Tobacco Control calls for regulatory decisions on tobacco products and the scientific assessment of tobacco products to be made independent of the tobacco industry

Background

In 2003 and 2004, the World Health Organization’s Scientific Advisory Committee on Tobacco Product Regulation (SACTob) and Study Group on Tobacco Product Regulation (TobReg) issued principles and guidance on the type of evidence required to scientifically assess newer tobacco and nicotine products that were purportedly less harmful than cigarettes.¹⁹⁶¹⁹⁷ Both emphasised the need for a range of study types and independent verification of industry studies. In 2012, the US Institute of Medicine (IOM, now The National Academy of Medicine), an independent, evidence-based advisor on scientific, medical and health-related matters,¹⁹⁸ outlined the types of studies and appropriate designs, which would be necessary to demonstrate whether newer nicotine and tobacco products could reduce the harms associated with smoking. The IOM grouped the evidence required into three categories: health effects, addictive potential, and perceptions of the newer product.¹⁹⁹

In 2015, the Tobacco Product Assessment Consortium (TobPRAC – an independent body funded by the US National Cancer Institute)²⁰⁰ reviewed the WHO’s and IOM’s recommendations for scientific evaluation of purportedly less harmful tobacco products.²⁰¹ In 2011, the consortium had developed a four-staged framework for scientifically evaluating newer tobacco and nicotine products, particularly those claimed by manufacturers to be less harmful.²⁰² The four stages proposed were: pre-market evaluation, pre-claims evaluation, post-market activities, and monitoring and re-evaluation (see image 1).²⁰¹²⁰²

Image 1. Overview of the conceptual framework proposed by the Tobacco Product Assessment Consortium (TobPRAC) to assess newer products.(Source: Shields et al/TobPRAC, 2011, p. 47; Berman, et al, 2015)²⁰¹²⁰²

Designed to inform tobacco product regulators worldwide, the framework was not based on any particular regulatory structure and, according to the TobPRAC, is therefore applicable to any jurisdiction. In line with Article 5.3 of the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC), TobPRAC noted that regulatory decisions on the necessary criteria for scientifically assessing tobacco products should be made independent of the tobacco industry. As the tobacco industry would inevitably fund and conduct its own scientific research on its products, TobPRAC also emphasised the need for accompanying independent research and governance to effectively implement the framework.²⁰¹

The ‘big 4’ transnational tobacco companies²⁰³ have since developed approaches to scientifically evaluate newer products which align with the recommendations of the WHO, IOM and TobPRAC. These companies publicise their scientific approaches and research via dedicated science websites (see External Links below).

Below is an outline of the approaches each transnational tobacco company states that it takes to scientifically assess its newer products. An overview is also provided showing the quantity of publications across each stage of each company’s scientific assessment approach. In the final section, some criticisms of the industry’s scientific approaches are summarised.

Philip Morris International

Image 2. PMI’s approach to scientifically assessing newer products.(Source: PMI Science website)²⁰⁴

Philip Morris International’s (PMI) scientific assessment approach has five stages (see image 2).²⁰⁴ The first stage, “product development”, comprises design and aerosol testing of potential newer products. The aerosol analyses aim to determine the physical and chemical properties of product emissions, which indicate the potential risks of the product.

Next, in vitro and in vivo “toxicological assessments” are used to measure the impact of the product emissions on cells and animals.

If this stage indicates that the product has reduced risk potential, the health effects of the products are tested in human users under controlled conditions (“clinical assessment”).

Following this, “perception and behavior” studies investigate consumer’s perceptions of the product, as well as user behaviours and levels of satisfaction.

Finally, in its “long-term assessment”, PMI states it will continue to monitor the biological effects and consumer acceptance of the product via safety surveillance, clinical studies, and epidemiological studies.²⁰⁴

PMI catalogues its scientific publications in a library on the PMI Science website.²⁰⁵ Publications held in this online library include: journal articles, presentations, posters, books, clinical trial registrations, posters, dossiers, reports, data, and methods and protocol documents. Up until May 2022, PMI assigned each publication in its library a tag relating to the relevant stage of its assessment approach. In addition to the five stages described above, two additional tags were used in PMI’s library: ‘Plant Biology’ and ‘Overview’. The number of publications assigned each tag (as of May 2022)²⁰⁶ is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Number of publications tagged with each assessment stage in the PMI Science library as of May 2022. N.B. a single publication can have multiple tags.

British American Tobacco

Image 3. BAT’s approach to scientifically assessing newer products.(Source: BAT Science website)²⁰⁷

British American Tobacco’s (BAT) scientific assessment approach consists of four stages (see image 3),²⁰⁷ fewer than the other transnationals. The preliminary “emissions” stage consists of studies which investigate whether the newer product functions correctly and whether combustion occurs (combustion studies), the chemical properties of the product emissions (emission studies), and then the effects of the product in vitro (toxicological studies).

Next, the product’s effects in human users are investigated. BAT states that “exposure”-related outcomes are assessed via clinical studies which analyse the behaviours exhibited by users (use behaviour), the short-term pharmacological effects of the nicotine in users (clinical: PK), and the levels of biomarkers of potentially harmful chemicals in users (clinical: exposure). “Risk” is assessed via medium-term clinical trials measuring the levels of biomarkers linked to harm and disease (clinical: individual risk), post marketing surveillance surveys to monitor the use of the product by consumers (population risk: PMS), and epidemiological modelling simulating potential impacts of the product on public health.

Finally, BAT states that it will use “long-term epidemiological data” to determine how the product is being used, as well as impacts on disease prevalence and public health.²⁰⁷

BAT catalogues its scientific publications in a library on the BAT Science website.²⁰⁸ Publications held in this online library include: abstracts, method documents, posters, presentations, journal articles, and ‘other’ publications.

Unlike the other transnationals, BAT does not categorise or tag the publications in this library by assessment stage.

Japan Tobacco International

Image 4. JTI’s approach to scientifically assessing newer products. (Source: JTI Science website)²⁰⁹

Japan Tobacco International’s (JTI) scientific assessment approach consists of 6 stages (see image 4),²⁰⁹ the highest number of the four companies. JTI start with testing the design of its prototype products (“product design”) and the chemical properties of the product’s emissions (“aerosol chemistry”).

Next, in vitro and in vivo “toxicological assessments”, as well as in silico simulation studies, are used to assess the toxicity of the product.

“Clinical studies” will then investigate the effects of the product on human users, including risk reduction and pharmacokinetic studies.

The users experience, including satisfaction and patterns of use, are assessed through “perception and behavior” studies.

JTI state that it completes its assessment by monitoring the long-term effects of the newer product (“long-term assessment”).²⁰⁹

JTI catalogues its scientific publications in a library on the JTI Science website.²¹⁰ Publications held in this online library include: journal articles, reports, posters, presentations, booklets, press releases, leaflets and news items. JTI assigns each publication in its library a tag relating to the relevant stage of its assessment approach. In addition to the six stages described above, two additional tags were used in JTI’s library: ‘Indoor Air Quality’ and ‘Other’. The number of publications (as of January 2023)²¹¹ assigned each tag is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Number of publications tagged with each assessment stage in the JTI Science library as of January 2023. N.B. a single publication can have multiple tags.

Imperial Brands

Image 5. Imperial Brand’s approach to scientifically assessing newer products.(Source: Imperial Brands Science website)²¹²

Imperial Brands’ scientific assessment approach consists of 6 stages (see image 5).²¹² It begins with assessing the product’s design and emissions via chemical analyses and preliminary toxicological studies (“product characterisation science”).

Once this has been completed, Imperial Brands moves onto further “biological science”, including in vitro assessments to test the product’s toxicity to human cells.

Then, clinical studies are used to confirm that the reduced risk potential observed in the laboratory-based studies are also observed in actual human users of newer products (“clinical science”).

The “behavioural science” stage comprise studies to investigate the use, perceptions and addictiveness of newer products, both pre- and post-commercialisation.

In the next stage, “computational science”, comprise mathematical and computational modelling to estimate population-level use and health impacts.

Finally, Imperial Brands states that it conducts post-market studies measuring product use, user attitudes, adverse events, health-related outcomes and sales data (“population health science”).²¹²

Imperial Brands catalogues its scientific publications in a library on the Imperial Brands Science website.²¹³ Publications held in this online library include: journal articles, infographics, posters, presentations and videos. Rather than using tags that describe each stage of its assessment approach, Imperial Brands assigns each publication in its library one or more of the following tags: ‘pre-clinical’, ‘clinical’ and ‘post-market’. The number of publications assigned each tag (as of January 2023)²¹⁴ is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Number of publications tagged with each assessment stage in the Imperial Brands Science library as of January 2023. N.B. a single publication can have multiple tags.

Criticisms of the Industry’s Approaches

The tactics the tobacco industry uses to influence scientific research in order to further its economic interests are well documented.^215216217

• For more details see Influencing Science

There is evidence that the industry continues to employ strategies to influence research and its approaches do not prevent bias. For example, the tobacco industry, including PMI and BAT, has used external scientific consultants²¹⁸ and publishes its research in journals with which it has ties.²¹⁹ Such strategies help to influence the volume, credibility, reach and use of science.²²⁰

The industry has a history of designing clinical research to substantiate and develop harm reduction claims, especially those around reduced exposure to harmful chemicals compared to cigarettes.²²¹ A 2022 systematic review critically assessing clinical trials on HTPs, most of which have been conducted by tobacco companies, fall short of what is needed to adequately investigate whether HTPs were beneficial to public health.²²² The same review found most of the industry’s clinical trials on HTPs were at high risk of bias, particularly due to inadequate blinding of participants (concealing information from participants that might influence results)²²³ and selectively reporting results.²²² A systematic review of the e-cigarette literature found studies by independent authors were more likely to report potentially harmful effects of e-cigarettes, while the majority of studies by tobacco, e-cigarette and pharmaceutical companies reported no harmful effects.²²⁴

All the transnational companies include epidemiological or long-term studies in their assessment approaches. However, according to each company’s Science webpages,^209225226227 their own publication library tags (see Figures 1-3), and reviews of both the HTP^228229230 and e-cigarette literature,²³¹²³² it appears that, to date, the industry has conducted few epidemiological or long-term studies.

As noted by TobPRAC, Article 5.3 of the WHO FCTC calls for regulatory decisions on tobacco products and scientific assessment of tobacco products to be made independent of the tobacco industry.²⁰¹

For more details see FCTC Regulations on the Need to Protect Public Health Policies from Tobacco Industry Interference

Relevant links

• PMI Science
• BAT Science
• JT Science
• Imperial Brands Science

Tobacco Tactics Resources

Newer Nicotine and Tobacco Products

Influencing Science

References

The post Industry Approaches to Science on Newer Products appeared first on TobaccoTactics.