Image source: © Guillaume Piolle/CC BY 3.0

Key Points

• Lebanon is located on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea. It is served by the World Health Organization’s Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean (EMRO).
• It has a population of 5.5 million, with an estimated tobacco use prevalence for those aged 15 and over of 39%.
• Lebanon ratified the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) in 2005. It has not ratified the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products.
• Lebanon has a state-owned tobacco monopoly, the Regie Libanaise de Tabacs et Tombacs, known as the Regie, which controls the domestic market. Transnational tobacco companies only have access to the Lebanese market through the Regie.
• In recent years, tobacco industry lobbying has prevented the introduction of graphic health warnings; the Regie has sought to influence Lebanon’s delegation to the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the WHO FCTC; and the industry has conducted extensive corporate social responsibility activities, some of which have involved Lebanese state institutions.

Lebanon has some of the highest rates of tobacco use in the world. It is ranked third in the world for cigarette consumption per capita.¹ A 2019 survey also suggested that waterpipe use prevalence is particularly high, and higher amongst women than men.² Tobacco products were easily affordable until the start of Lebanon’s economic crisis in 2019.¹ Though they have become less affordable since then, the decline in affordability has been weaker compared to that for other goods.³ At just 9.9% of the retail price, the tax imposed on tobacco products falls well short of the 75% recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO).⁴⁵ Though a comprehensive tobacco control law was introduced in 2011, there have been major challenges with implementation and enforcement.⁶

Tobacco Use in Lebanon

In 2022, the population of Lebanon was 5.5 million.⁷ In 2019, the WHO estimated overall tobacco use prevalence to be 39% amongst the population aged 15 and over, based on all national survey data from 1990.⁸ An academic study carried out in 2019 found similar results. Based on a cross-sectional household survey, it found prevalence of cigarette smoking among adults aged between 18 and 69 of just over 35% (49% males; 21.5% females).² It also found overall waterpipe use prevalence of 39.5%, and at over 46%, prevalence for women was higher than for men (nearly 33%).² Almost half of current cigarette smokers reported smoking more than 20 cigarettes per day, while most waterpipe users smoked at least three sessions per week.²

In 2017, Lebanon reported tobacco use among boys aged 13-15 of 35% – the highest amongst the 19 EMRO countries which carried out the Global School-based Student Health Survey between 2001 and 2018.⁹ The corresponding figure for Lebanese girls that year was 28%.⁹ A study carried out amongst Lebanese adolescents aged 11 to 18 between 2016 and 2017 found ever use of waterpipe of 34%.¹⁰

There were an estimated 7,810 deaths attributable to smoking in 2019, accounting for over 23% of all mortality in Lebanon for that year.¹¹ A study published in 2014 put the economic burden of tobacco use in Lebanon in 2008 at US$326.7 million, or 1.1% of national GDP.¹²

A 2019 study on e-cigarette use amongst school and university students aged from 17 to 23 found that 14.5% reported ever use, with 8% reporting current use.¹³ However, at the time of writing, data on e-cigarette use amongst Lebanese adults remains scarce.

Tobacco in Lebanon

The Lebanese state tobacco monopoly

The Lebanese tobacco industry is controlled entirely by a state-owned company, the Regie Libanaise des Tabacs et Tombacs (referred to here as “the Regie”).¹⁴¹⁵ The Regie has exclusive rights to tobacco manufacturing and distribution, tobacco imports and exports, and to the purchase of locally grown tobacco leaf. It also oversees an anti-smuggling unit.¹⁶ The Regie distributes local and imported tobacco products to licensed wholesalers, at prices it determines with the Ministry of Finance (MoF).¹⁶¹⁷ These wholesalers then sell the tobacco products to retailers across Lebanon.¹⁶ Though these retailers are also licensed by the Regie, they are not under its direct control and largely depend on the wholesalers for their tobacco supply.¹⁶ The Regie sets the profit margin and weekly quota of sold tobacco for both wholesalers and retailers.¹⁶

Overseen by the MoF, the Regie’s performance has a direct impact on the public treasury.¹⁶ Not only does this provide the Regie with significant access to policy makers, it also creates conflict with other government departments (such as Health), as the MoF may oppose measures which damage the Regie’s profitability.¹⁶⁶

Market share and leading brands

As of 2022, the Regie had a share of over 55% of the tobacco market, up from 45% in 2017.¹⁸ The leading transnational tobacco company (TTC) in Lebanon was Philip Morris International (PMI), with a market share of nearly 15%, followed by Japan Tobacco International (JTI) on over 11%, Imperial Brands on almost 10%, and British American Tobacco (BAT) on 6.5%.¹⁸

Transnational tobacco companies (TTCs) only have access to the Lebanese market via the Regie. In return for purchasing Lebanese tobacco leaf, the Regie imports manufactured tobacco products to sell on the Lebanese market and buys Virginia tobacco leaf for the manufacture of local brand cigarettes.¹⁶ Since 2016, international brands have also been made in Lebanon at Regie manufacturing facilities, as per agreements with the Big Four TTCs.^19202122

The Regie brand Cedars is by far the most popular brand of cigarettes in Lebanon, with a market share of 55% in 2022.²³ PMI’s Marlboro is in second place with a share of around 14%.²³ JTI’s Winston is third (8%), followed by BAT’s Kent and Imperial Brands’ Gitanes (both around 5%).²³ All other brands have a market share of 3% or less.²³

Tobacco farming and child labour

In 2020, tobacco was being cultivated on 1.32% of Lebanon’s agricultural land.²⁴ In 2021, tobacco production was just over 10,000 tonnes, down slightly from a high of 12,800 tonnes in 2001.²⁵ This makes Lebanon the fifth-largest tobacco producer amongst the 14 EMRO countries for which data is available.²⁶

Lebanese tobacco leaf is purchased exclusively by the Regie via a price support programme, under which the Regie purchases from farmers at a given yearly price and quantity which is determined by the MoF.¹⁶ According to Hamade (2014), the price paid is well over the average paid to farmers in other sectors in Lebanon; essentially, it is a subsidy which reinforces farmers’ dependence on tobacco growing and disincentivises any transition towards other crops.¹⁴¹⁶

Lebanese tobacco featured on the 2022 List of Goods Produced by Child Labor or Forced Labor produced by the U.S. Department of Labor.²⁷ Tobacco production is very labour intensive and involves all or most members of the household, which includes women and children.¹⁴ On top of enduring poor wages and working conditions, female workers are also at risk of sexual violence in tobacco-growing communities.²⁸

• 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

Lebanon is a net importer of raw tobacco. According to Comtrade data, in 2022, it imported over US$40.5 million in raw tobacco, compared to under US$16.4 million in exports.²⁹³⁰

Lebanon is also a net importer of cigarettes. In 2022, Lebanese cigarette imports were nearly US$16.5 million, compared to less than US$1 million in exports.³¹³²

It is also a net importer of waterpipe tobacco. Its imports were worth US$17.3 million in 2022, compared to exports of under US$70,000.³³³⁴

Illicit trade

Industry documents suggest that illicit trade was used by the TTCs as a means of building market share and furthering regional expansion during the Lebanese Civil War (1975-1990).³⁵ With governance weak and legal cigarette production in decline, the TTCs flooded the Lebanese market with cheap contraband products.³⁵ Though the government made direct appeals to these companies, requesting that they stop supplying distributors involved in this illicit trade, it had little effect.³⁵ The documents also show that the TTCs sought to use the issue of illicit trade as leverage in negotiations on establishing manufacturing presence in the country.³⁵

Today, reliable data on the scale of the illicit trade in Lebanon are not available. An industry-funded report by the consultancy Oxford Economics (OE) indicated that by the first quarter of 2019 the illicit trade accounted for 28.1% of the market in tobacco products.³⁶³⁷ However, this data may not be reliable given OE’s long relationship with the tobacco industry. Not only was this particular study funded by PMI, BAT and JTI, but also prepared according to terms of reference agreed with all three companies.³⁷ These terms of reference are not disclosed, while the methodology used is highly susceptible to industry interference.³⁸

Exaggerating the scale of illicit trade is a well-documented tactic which has been used by the tobacco industry all over the world as a means of opposing tobacco control regulations. See Illicit Tobacco Trade for further details.

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

Roadmap to Tobacco Control

Lebanon ratified the WHO FCTC in 2005.³⁹ It has yet to ratify the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products.⁴⁰

In August 2011, Lebanon passed Law No. 174, its first ever tobacco control law.⁶ This was the result of years of advocacy led by the National Tobacco Control Program (NTCP) (a government organisation within the Ministry of Public Health), alongside academics, tobacco control advocates, civil society organisations, local and international NGOs, and policy makers.⁶ Law No. 174 banned smoking in all indoor public spaces; banned tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship; and introduced larger text warnings on tobacco products, with the potential to add graphic health warnings at a later date.⁶

However, enforcement remains a challenge, particularly regarding the provision for smokefree spaces. This measure was properly enforced for just three months, thanks in part to strong lobbying from restaurants and other establishments offering waterpipe.⁶ There has also been a lack of political will to enforce the law.⁶ In late 2012, the then Minister of the Interior implied that the police would be flexible about enforcing the law during the holiday period.⁴¹ The Ministry of Tourism also stopped enforcing the law, alleging a negative impact on Lebanon’s tourist industry and stating that it did not have the resources necessary to monitor implementation.⁶⁴²

For more details, please see the following websites:

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

Tobacco Industry Interference in Lebanon

Tobacco industry tactics in Lebanon include lobbying, which has prevented the introduction of graphic health warnings; attempting to influence Lebanon’s delegation to the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the WHO FCTC; and corporate social responsibility.

Portraying tobacco as a symbol of resistance

Part of the revenue the Regie collects from imported tobacco products is used to cover the subsidies given to tobacco growers in rural areas, particularly in the south of the country.¹⁶⁶ Given that this area was previously occupied by Israel, keeping farmers on this land is seen by the state as an important geopolitical objective.⁶ Indeed, both Nassif Seklaoui, Chairman and General Manager of the Regie, and the speaker of the Lebanese parliament, have explicitly linked tobacco growing to the struggle of the Lebanese people and their resistance to foreign occupation.⁴³ Such strategies aim to instil the belief that tobacco is a strategic industry and a source of national pride. As the opening statement of a Regie pamphlet from 2011 reads, “The tobacco crop has become a symbol of resilience, resistance and people’s attachment to the Nation’s land.”¹⁴

Influencing policy: health warnings

Law 174 significantly increased the size of the textual health warnings on tobacco products in Lebanon, from 15% to 40% of the principal surface areas.⁶⁴⁴ A further decree in 2012 defined the text of the warnings, though implementation was delayed, reportedly due the Regie lobbying the Minister of Finance.⁴⁵⁴⁶ Since then, the larger text warnings have been widely implemented – though the measure still falls short of the 50% or more coverage recommended by the WHO FCTC.⁴⁷⁴⁸

Law 174 did also allow for the introduction of graphic health warnings (GHWs) at a later date, subject to the signing of an implementation decree by the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Finance.⁴⁷ According to Lebanese tobacco control advocates, of all provisions in Law 174, this was the hardest to obtain, due to fierce opposition from the tobacco industry, including the Regie.⁴⁶ During discussions on Law 174 in 2011, some members of the Lebanese parliament objected to the inclusion of GHWs, echoing industry positions on the issue.⁴⁶ Though the implementation decree for GHWs was elaborated in 2011 and updated in 2016, it has still not been approved, reportedly due to industry interference and lobbying.⁴⁷ As of 2021, GHWs had yet to be implemented.⁴⁹

Interacting with the Lebanese delegation to the COP

In 2018, the Regie hosted a meeting attended by six government officials at its headquarters, ahead of the Eighth Session of the Conference of the Parties (COP8) to the WHO FCTC. In the Regie’s own words, the meeting aimed to define a position that “addresses the threats that the items on COP8 agenda for next October pose to tobacco sector”.⁵⁰ There was also a presentation laying out the Regie’s positions on decisions made at the previous COP, as well as the proposals to be discussed at COP8.⁵⁰

Delivering this presentation, Mariam Hariri, the Regie’s Head of General Management, stated:

“We cannot look at tobacco sector only from the perspective of health damage; we must rather look at it with a comprehensive and impartial view. We must take into consideration the economic benefits it offers and the specificity of Lebanon.”⁵⁰

This meeting contravened the implementation guidelines for Article 5.3 of the WHO FCTC, which urge parties to limit interactions with the tobacco industry to those strictly necessary for effective regulation of the industry and its products.⁵¹

The Regie has also lobbied foreign diplomats. In May 2022, the German ambassador to Beirut visited Regie headquarters in Hadath. He was briefed on “the Regie’s achievements in agricultural, industrial, and commercial fields, among others, as well as about the societal role that it had played during the recent years.”⁵²

• For more on the relationship between diplomats and the tobacco industry, please see Diplomats Lobbying for Tobacco Companies.

Corporate social responsibility

In 2016, the Regie launched its sustainable development plan, entitled “Development Vision for a Brighter Tomorrow”. Its stated aim was “promoting economic development, environment protection, fighting illicit trade & child labor, and improving the living of workers & farmers and the communities where we operate.”⁴³ The plan was launched at a ceremony which was supported by the speaker in the Lebanese parliament, and attended by notable figures from business, politics, finance and the trade union movement.⁴³ These included senior civil servants from government departments including the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Economy and Lebanese customs.⁴³

Since then, the Regie has conducted extensive CSR activities, including some directed at or involving Lebanese state institutions. For example, it donated US$2.6 million to the Lebanese Army in 2021.¹⁶ It also engaged in CSR during the COVID-19 pandemic, donating US$1 million to the Lebanese government to support repatriating Lebanese students abroad and to buy ventilators for COVID-19 patients.⁵³

The Regie has also organised “women empowerment training sessions” for the daughters of tobacco farmers in different areas of Lebanon. These sessions had the support of local authorities; for example, some were held in municipal buildings or involved the participation of local councillors.⁵⁴⁵⁵

The Regie has also carried out CSR in partnership with TTCs. In 2017, in an initiative financed by PMI Lebanon, the Regie offered scholarships to 136 children of tobacco farmers in the north of the country – the fourth consecutive year it had done so.⁵⁶

• 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

• AUB tobacco researchers and Lebanese activists press conference on economic impacts of Law 174: The tobacco control law is good for the economy and public health, American University of Beirut
• Prevalence of cigarette and waterpipe tobacco smoking among adults in three Eastern Mediterranean countries: a cross-sectional household survey, R. Nakkash, Y. Khader, A. Chalak, R. Abla, N. M. E. Abu-Rmeileh, A. Mostafa, M. Jawad, J. H. Lee and R. G. Salloum, BMJ open, 2022, 12(3), e055201
• The passage of tobacco control law 174 in Lebanon: reflections on the problem, policies and politics, R.T. Nakkash, L. Torossian, T. El Hajj, J. Khalil and R.A. Afifi, Health Policy and Planning, 2018, Volume 33, Issue 5, pp. 633–644
• K2P COVID-19 Series: Prompting Government Action for Tobacco Control in Lebanon during COVID-19 Pandemic, R. Saleh, R. Nakkash, A. Harb and F. El-Jardali, 2020, Knowledge to Policy (K2P) Center, Beirut, Lebanon
• The Economics of Tobacco in Lebanon: An Estimation of the Social Costs of Tobacco Consumption, Salti, J. Chaaban and N. Naamani, Substance Use & Misuse, 2014, 49:6, 735-742

Tobacco Tactics Resources

• Eastern Mediterranean Region
• Oxford Economics
• Tobacco Farming

TCRG Research

• The Lebanese Regie state-owned tobacco monopoly: lessons to inform monopoly-focused endgame strategies, H. Alaouie, J.R. Branston and M.J. Bloomfield, 2022, BMC Public Health, 22, 1632.
• 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.
• Tobacco industry commissioned reports on illicit tobacco trade in the Eastern Mediterranean Region: how accurate are they? Sandberg, A.W.A. Gallagher and R. Alebshehy, 2020, Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal, 26(11):1320–1322.

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 Lebanon Country Profile appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

Image source: SavoryCrowdad/CC BY-SA 4.0

Key Points

• India is a country located in South Asia, part of the World Health Organization’s South-East Asia Region.
• It had a population in 2022 of 1.42 billion. Amongst those aged 15+, tobacco use prevalence is 28.6%.
• Smoking prevalence in India is 10.7%. However, the most popular form of tobacco in India is smokeless tobacco, with use prevalence of 21.4%.
• India ratified the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control in 2004, and the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products in 2018.
• The Indian cigarette market is dominated by four companies, which together accounted for 98% of sales in 2022. ITC Limited holds by far the largest market share, at over 73%.
• The tobacco industry has deployed a wide range of tactics in India in recent years, including mobilisation of front groups and third parties; litigation against tobacco control measures such as graphic health warnings; and corporate social responsibility, including in partnership with government.

Since the early 2000s, India has made significant progress in tobacco control, introducing a comprehensive tobacco control law in 2004, reducing the affordability of tobacco products, and introducing graphic health warnings (GHWs) consistent with best practice worldwide.⁵⁷⁵⁸ However, major challenges persist. The wide range of tobacco products available in India makes regulation and enforcement particularly complicated. The Indian state is also a major shareholder of ITC Limited, which has by far the largest share of the Indian market. This means that the government has an interest in socio-economic issues – such as ensuring the welfare of farmers and manual labourers working in the Indian tobacco industry, and protection of exports – as well as in public health.⁵⁹

India remains the world’s second largest consumer, producer and exporter of tobacco.⁶⁰⁶¹

Tobacco Use in India

In 2022, the population of India was 1.42 billion.⁶² In the 2016-17 Global Adult Tobacco Survey (GATS), approximately 29% of the population aged 15+ reported current tobacco use – over 42% of males, and over 14% of females.⁵⁸⁶³ This means that in absolute numbers, there were almost 267 million tobacco users in India aged 15 and over.⁶⁰ In the 2019 Global Youth Tobacco Survey (GYTS), amongst adolescents aged from 13 to 15, 8.5% reported using some form of tobacco – nearly 10% of males, and over 7% of females.⁵⁸⁶⁴

Amongst India’s smokers, the most popular product was not factory-made cigarettes but bidis: cigarettes rolled by hand in a dried leaf of the tendu tree. 7.7% of Indian adults reported smoking bidis, compared to 4% who smoked cigarettes.⁶³

However, the most popular tobacco product in India overall is smokeless tobacco (SLT). More than 21% of Indians aged 15 and over reported being SLT users, compared to less than 11% who smoked, whether cigarettes, bidis, or both.⁵⁸⁶³ SLT use is also significant amongst women and girls: nearly 13% of females aged 15 and over were SLT users, compared to 2% who smoked.⁵⁸⁶³ The majority of female tobacco users in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are SLT users in India and Bangladesh.⁶⁵ However, amongst adolescent tobacco users, smoking is more common than SLT use. Over 7% of adolescents reported current smoking, compared to just over 4% who were SLT users.⁵⁸⁶⁴

India has the second highest number of oral cancer cases globally, accounting for a third of the total.⁶⁶ More than 90% of India’s oral cancer cases are caused by tobacco use and of these, more than half are caused by SLT.⁶⁷ The poor and less educated are worst affected, with much higher SLT use prevalence amongst these sections of the population.⁶⁷ There were also over a million deaths attributable to smoking in 2019, accounting for nearly 11% of all mortality in India that year.⁶⁸

A 2020 study put the economic cost of all illness and death attributable to tobacco use between 2017 and 2018 for those over 35 years of age at US$27.5 billion.⁶⁹ Smoking accounted for 74% of this cost; smokeless tobacco 26%.⁶⁹ Direct medical costs alone amounted to 5.3% of all health expenditure.⁶⁹ However, the excise tax revenue from tobacco the previous year was just 12.2% of its economic cost.⁶⁹ In simple terms, the economic burden of tobacco use is more than eight times the value of revenue the Indian government receives in excise from tobacco products.⁶⁹ This economic burden accounts for over 1% of India’s GDP.⁶⁹

Tobacco in India

Market share and leading brands

The Indian cigarette market is dominated by four companies:  ITC Limited, Godfrey Phillips India Limited (GPI), VST Industries Ltd., and Philip Morris International (PMI), which together accounted for 98% of sales in 2022.¹⁸

India banned foreign direct investment in tobacco manufacturing in 2010, which means that the transnational tobacco companies (TTCs) can only access the Indian market via shareholdings and licensing agreements with local producers.⁷⁰⁷¹

ITC Limited

ITC Limited (formerly India Tobacco Company Limited), dominates the Indian tobacco market, with a share of over 73% in 2022.¹⁸ Its largest shareholder is British American Tobacco (BAT), which held just under 30% of shares until March 2024.⁷²⁷³ The Indian state is also a major shareholder, via various state-owned insurance corporations and investment portfolios.⁷³ Its products include India’s three bestselling brands of cigarettes: Gold Flake, Wills and Scissors.²³

In a presentation to investors in June 2023, BAT CEO Tadeu Marroco stressed the importance of the company retaining at least a 25% shareholding in ITC, given that this provides BAT with seats on the ITC board and the right to veto company resolutions.⁷⁴ Marroco also highlighted the potential of the vast Indian market in terms of newer nicotine and tobacco products, particularly oral products such as nicotine pouches.⁷⁴ In March 2024, BAT reduced its holdings in ITC to 25.5%.⁷⁵For more details see ITC Limited.

Godfrey Phillips India Limited (GPI)

GPI had a market share of almost 10% in 2022, the second largest after ITC.¹⁸ PMI is the second-largest shareholder with a stake of just over 25%.⁷⁶ Major brands include Four Square, Cavenders and Tipper.²³

VST Industries Ltd

VST, formerly Vazir Sultan Tobacco Company, had a market share of over 9% in 2022, the third largest.¹⁸ With a stake of over 32%, BAT is its largest shareholder.⁷⁷ Its major brands include Total, Charms and Charminar.²³

TTCs’ licensing agreements

PMI has a licensing agreement with GPI, under which GPI manufactures and sells the brands Marlboro and Red & White in India, though PMI retains brand ownership internationally.¹⁸²³⁷⁸ This gives PMI a 5.4% market share from a global ownership perspective.¹⁸ Similarly, ITC manufactures and sells the brands Berkeley and Benson & Hedges in India, though Japan Tobacco International and British American Tobacco are the global owners, respectively.¹⁸²³ Both companies have a market share of less than 2%.¹⁸

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

Smokeless tobacco and bidis

The Indian smokeless tobacco industry is based largely on small scale, rural production, for which accurate data is not available.⁷⁹ Local manufacturers account for significant segments of the market in several regions of India.⁷⁹ Similarly, bidi production depends largely on small home-based manufacturing operations and accurate data is not available.⁷⁹

At the national level, the biggest companies in the chewing tobacco/gutkha (see section “Undermining the gutkha ban”) market are believed to be Dhariwal Industries, Dharampal Satyapal (DS Group) and Som Sugandh Industries, which together accounted for around a quarter of sales in 2010.⁷⁹ There is also interest from the big cigarette companies in smokeless tobacco; Godfrey Phillips launched its own range of chewing products in 2010.⁸⁰ A 2021 paper found that 93% of SLT products bought in India were non-compliant with packaging regulations: either they did not have graphic health warnings, or the warnings were too small.⁸¹

Tobacco farming

India is the world’s second biggest tobacco producer after China, producing over 766,000 tonnes of leaf in 2020.⁸² This accounts for 9% of all global production.⁶¹ Though tobacco production in India has increased significantly in recent decades – from 438,500 tonnes in 1980 – it has fallen slightly from a high of 830,000 tonnes in 2011.⁸³

Child labour

Indian bidis feature on the U.S. Department of Labor’s 2022 List of Goods Produced by Child Labor or Forced Labor.⁸⁴ While information on child labour in the bidi industry is not widely available, a study published in 2009 found that more than 1.7 million children worked rolling bidis in India.⁸⁵ This disproportionately affects girls, who are often drawn into the industry to support their families. Bidi rollers may work 10 to 14-hour days to produce over 1,000 bidis, in what a BBC report from 2012 described as “slave-like working conditions”.⁸⁵

Tobacco and the economy

India is the world’s second largest exporter of tobacco leaf, after Brazil.⁶¹ According to UN Comtrade, India exported nearly US$816 million in raw tobacco in 2022, compared to nearly $21 million in imports.⁸⁶⁸⁷ Export figures for 2021-2022 from the Indian Brand Equity Foundation (IBEF) – a trust established by the Indian Department of Commerce – were slightly higher, at US$842 million.⁶¹

India exports tobacco to more than 115 countries around the world, the biggest recipient of which is Belgium, which accounts for around 18% of India’s total tobacco exports. Other major export destinations for Indian tobacco include the United Arab Emirates, Singapore and the United States.⁶¹

India is also a major net exporter of cigarettes. According to UN Comtrade, it exported over US$100 million in cigarettes in 2022, compared to nearly $26 million in imports.⁸⁸⁸⁹

According to IBEF, the tobacco industry in India employs about 36 million people in farming, processing, manufacturing and export activities.⁶¹

Illicit trade

The Tobacco Institute of India, an industry body established by ITC, GPI and VST in 1992, puts the scale of the illicit tobacco trade at a quarter of the market.⁹⁰ However, independent studies put that figure much lower, at around 3% to 6%.⁹¹ This makes illicit trade in India relatively small by global standards.⁹² A 2018 study, which found that 2.73% of the empty cigarette packs collected in India were illicit, noted significant differences across the country.⁹³ Areas with greater illicit trade penetration are often targeted by studies funded by the tobacco industry to exaggerate overall levels of illicit trade.⁹⁴

Studies have also cast doubt on industry claims that tobacco tax increases have led to expansion of illicit trade. For example, according to ITC, tax increases during the period 2012 to 2017 resulted in rapid growth of illicit trade, making India the fourth largest illicit market globally.⁹⁵ However, a study published in 2020 by experts from the WHO and the Indian government put the illicit cigarette trade at 6% of the market in 2016-17 – an increase of just 0.9% from 2009-10.⁹²

Similarly, a joint report published in 2017 by the accountancy firm KPMG and the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) argued that illicit trade – driven in part by higher taxes on cigarettes – was providing funds for terrorism and organized crime.⁹⁶ However, both ITC and GPI are members of FICCI, which has a history of opposing tobacco control measures in India (see Influencing policy: graphic health warnings). Similarly, KPMG has strong ties with the tobacco industry going back decades, and its work on illicit trade has been strongly criticised elsewhere. Critics argue that KPMG’s research has exaggerated the scale of illicit trade and has been used to oppose tobacco control regulations such as plain packaging.

• For more information, please see STOP’s database of Tobacco Industry Allies.

Tobacco and the environment

A 2018 study estimated that in order to produce 100 billion cigarettes, nearly 67,500 tonnes of CO₂ equivalent were emitted in India in 2010 – the equivalent of 14,544 petrol-powered vehicles driven for a year.⁹⁷⁹⁸ The industry has also been a major cause of deforestation: it is estimated that 680 square kilometres of scrub forest were destroyed and degraded for tobacco curing and the manufacture of cigarettes and other smoking consumables between 1962 and 2002.⁹⁹

A 2022 study estimated that 170,000 tonnes of waste is produced by the packaging of tobacco products annually in India, two-thirds of which correspond to smokeless tobacco (SLT) products.¹⁰⁰ Analysis of segregated waste revealed that 73,500 tonnes of plastic, 6,100 tonnes of foil and 1,350 tonnes of used filters are discharged annually into the environment.¹⁰⁰ Cleaning up this waste costs Indian taxpayers roughly US$766 million every year.¹⁰¹

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

Roadmap to Tobacco Control

India was the eighth country to ratify the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) in 2004.¹⁰² It ratified the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products in 2018.¹⁰³¹⁰⁴

The Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act (COTPA), passed in 2003, is the main comprehensive tobacco control law in India. Amongst other provisions, it banned smoking in most public places, prohibited the advertising of cigarettes and other tobacco products, and banned sales to anyone under the age of 18.¹⁰⁵ Since then, a number of rules have been introduced to aid implementation of COTPA and provide definitions.⁵⁷ In 2007-08, the government launched the National Tobacco Control Programme (NTCP), which aimed to reinforce COTPA and facilitate implementation of the tobacco control strategies contained within the WHO FCTC.¹⁰⁶

In 2020, an amendment to COTPA was drafted by the Ministry of Health.¹⁰⁷ Aiming to further strengthen the original legislation and boost compliance with WHO FCTC, it will abolish designated smoking areas, prohibit the sale of individual cigarettes (single sticks), and raise the legal age required for purchase of tobacco products from 18 to 21.¹⁰⁷¹⁰⁸ However, as of September 2023, this amendment has yet to become law.

Citing concerns about the health impacts of vaping on young people, the Indian government introduced a ban on electronic cigarettes in 2019. The law prohibits the production, manufacture, import, export, transport, sale, distribution, storage and advertisement of e-cigarettes.⁵⁷¹⁰⁹ Though their use remains rare in India as of 2023, the law closes off a huge potential market for e-cigarette companies.¹¹⁰

For more details, please see the following websites:

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

Tobacco Industry Interference in India

Tobacco industry tactics in India include mobilisation of front groups and third parties; litigation against tobacco control measures, such as graphic health warnings; and corporate social responsibility, including in partnership with government.

Delaying rollout of larger graphic health warnings

In October 2014, the Indian Ministry of Health and Family Welfare announced its intention to increase the area covered by graphic health warnings (GHWs) on tobacco products, from 40% to 85%.¹¹¹ GHWs are a well-established, evidence-based and cost-effective measure of reducing tobacco use.¹¹² They may also be particularly effective in India, given both the country’s linguistic diversity and its literacy rate (as of 2018, over a quarter of the population was unable to read or write).¹¹³¹¹⁴

The tobacco industry deployed various tactics in an attempt to block this legislation. These included mobilising third parties and front groups, spreading misleading information, and submitting more than 30 legal challenges in state-level courts throughout India.¹¹⁵¹¹⁶

Third parties and front groups which mobilised against the legislation included the following:

• The All India Bidi Federation
• The Tobacco Institute of India
• The Confederation of Indian Industry (CII)
• The Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI)
• The Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India (ASSOCHAM)
• The Federation of All India Farmer Associations (FAIFA)
• The Retailers Association of India (RAI)
• The International Tobacco Growers Association (ITGA)

These groups wrote letters to and met with policy makers, launched campaigns in the media against the proposal, and filed legal challenges.¹¹⁵¹¹⁶

For example, FAIFA bought full-page advertisements in leading national newspapers, claiming that larger GHWs would be detrimental to the livelihoods of tobacco farmers and fuel the illicit trade.¹¹⁵¹¹⁷ FAIFA, CII and FICCI all wrote letters to the Minister of Health, J.P. Nadda, echoing these arguments.¹¹⁸¹¹⁹ The Tobacco Institute of India filed a legal challenge against the government in the High Court of Karnataka.¹²⁰ Finally, ASSOCHAM addressed a communiqué to the government, stating that the GHWs would endanger the livelihoods of more than 45 million people and lead to a flood of illicit imports.¹²¹

These industry strategies succeeded in delaying the rollout of the 85% GHWs for a year, from April 2015 until April 2016.¹²² However, the legal challenges continued even after implementation. In 2017, the High Court of Karnataka ruled that India should revert to the pre-2016 40% warnings. This decision was overruled in 2018 by the Indian Supreme Court and the 85% warnings have remained in force ever since.¹¹⁶

The eventual introduction of the 85% GHWs saw India jump from 136^th to third position in the global ranking for size of health warnings on tobacco products.¹²³

Undermining the gutkha ban

Gutkha, one of India’s most popular smokeless tobacco (SLT) products, is a mix of crushed Areca nut (a well-known risk factor for several cancers even when consumed without tobacco), with tobacco, catechu, paraffin, slaked lime and flavourings.¹²⁴¹²⁵ Highly addictive and very cheap, gutkha is popular amongst women and young people.¹²⁶

Since 2012, there have been state-level bans throughout the country in an attempt to reduce its prevalence, but it remains widely available.¹²⁷¹²⁸ Producers have found ways to circumvent the bans, such as by packaging and selling the constituent ingredients of gutkha separately.¹²⁸¹²⁹

In the state of Tamil Nadu, gutkha remained widely available despite being banned in 2013.¹³⁰¹³¹ In 2016, officials from India’s Income Tax Department discovered details of a series of suspected bribes worth nearly US$6 million made by leading manufacturer MDM to public officials, allegedly to facilitate the storage, transport and sale of gutkha.^115130132

Alleged recipients of bribes included a government minister, police officers and senior civil servants.¹³³ In November 2022, after four years of investigations in three states, India’s Central Bureau of Investigation filed charges against 21 individuals.¹³³¹³⁰

Corporate social responsibility: partnerships with government

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

In the implementation guidelines for Article 5.3 of the WHO FCTC, the WHO states that these activities fall within its definition of tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship – and should therefore not be endorsed by Parties to the treaty.¹³⁴ However, in India, under the Companies Act 2013, all large corporations are required to spend at least 2% of their average net profit in the previous three years on CSR.¹³⁵ This helps to legitimise tobacco industry CSR, as companies argue they are only fulfilling their legal duties.⁵⁹In its sustainability reporting, ITC states that its CSR initiatives fall within the scope of the 2013 legislation.¹³⁶

ITC has contributed frequently to government programmes and has worked with government institutions.⁵⁹ For example, in 2017, ITC contributed to a fund set up by the Indian government to attract funding from corporations and private donors for the provision of sanitation and clean drinking water; and to the Clean Ganga Fund, established by the government to rehabilitate the River Ganges.¹³⁶ In his speech to shareholders at the 2017 AGM, the then ITC CEO cited several public-private partnerships with state governments in India on water management projects, stating that they aligned with a national programme which aimed to expand irrigation coverage and improve efficiency of water use.¹³⁷¹³⁸

This type of public-private CSR was particularly widespread during the COVID-19 pandemic. In total, between March and June 2020, the Indian tobacco industry contributed around US$36.7 million in donations to various government funds, both at federal and state level.¹³⁵ The industry also partnered with other stakeholders, including NGOs, other private sector actors and even popular Bollywood singers. ITC was the biggest cash and in-kind contributor.¹³⁵¹³⁹

Corporate trademarks were widely visible during these CSR activities, and the initiatives were publicised in leading newspapers and by senior politicians.^135140141

• 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

• Global Adult Tobacco Survey GATS 2 India 2016-17, Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), Mumbai and Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India
• Report on Tobacco Industry Interference in India – Case Studies, S. Goel, S. Sekhar Kar, Resource Centre for Tobacco Control
• Interference by Big Tobacco and Affiliates in Tobacco Control in South Asia, Institute of Public Health Bengaluru and the International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease
• Crooked Nine: Nine Ways the Tobacco Industry Undermines Health Policy, Vital Strategies
• National Report: The Environmental Burden of Tobacco Products Wastes in India. Tobacco Use Makes You Ugly, Your Habitat Uglier, SPH AIIMS Jodhpur, ICMR-NICPR, The Union

Tobacco Tactics Resources

• Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India (ASSOCHAM)
• Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI)
• ITC Limited

TCRG Research

• Advancing whole-of-government approaches to tobacco control: Article 5.3 and the challenge of policy coordination in Bangladesh, Ethiopia, India and Uganda. R.A. Barry, S.M. Abdullah, A. Chugh, S. Hirpa, P. Kumar, D. Male, R. Ralston, T. Wagner-Rizvi, J. Collin, Tobacco Control 2022;31:s46-s52.
• Institutional tensions, corporate social responsibility and district-level governance of tobacco industry interference: analysing challenges in local implementation of Article 5.3 measures in Karnataka, India. P. Kumar, R.A. Barry, M.M. Kulkarni, V.G. Kamath, R. Ralston, J. Collin, Tobacco Control 2022;31:s26-s32.
• 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 India Country Profile appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

Key Points

• Bangladesh is a country in South Asia, part of the World Health Organization’s South-East Asia Region.
• It has a population of 171.2 million, with tobacco use prevalence of 43.7%.
• Smoking prevalence is high, at 23.5%. However, smokeless tobacco (SLT) use prevalence is even higher, at 27.5%.
• Bangladesh ratified the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) in 2004. It has not ratified the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products.
• The Bangladeshi cigarette market is dominated by British American Tobacco Bangladesh, followed by Japan Tobacco International’s local subsidiary United Dhaka Tobacco Company Limited. There are also local cigarette, bidi and SLT producers.
• Recent tobacco industry tactics in Bangladesh include direct lobbying of civil servants, which successfully obtained an exemption to lockdown restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic; using diplomats to lobby in its interests; and the mobilisation of third-party organisations against tobacco control.

In 2016, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina declared her intention to make Bangladesh tobacco free by 2040.¹⁴² Bangladesh has in recent years increased its compliance with the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC), created a dedicated tobacco control cell and introduced a health surcharge on all tobacco products.¹⁴²¹⁴³ However, according to a study published in 2022, no measures have been adopted to implement Article 5.3 of the WHO FCTC.¹⁴⁴ Industry interference in public policy – particularly by British American Tobacco Bangladesh (BATB), in which the state holds a share of over 9% – is an ongoing challenge.¹⁴⁴¹⁴⁵ The study’s authors argue that progress in minimising such interference is essential if the commitment to a creating a tobacco-free Bangladesh by 2040 is to be met.¹⁴⁴

Tobacco Use in Bangladesh

In 2022, the population of Bangladesh was 171.2 million.¹⁴⁶ Among adults aged from 18 to 69, overall tobacco use prevalence was nearly 44% as of 2018 (almost 60% of men and over 28% of women).¹⁴⁷

As of 2018, 23.5% of Bangladeshi adults smoked.¹⁴⁷ Cigarettes were the most popular product: amongst current tobacco smokers, over 99% reported using cigarettes, compared to 32.5% who reported smoking bidis (cigarettes rolled by hand in a dried leaf of the tendu tree).¹⁴⁷ There was a major gender difference, with nearly 47% of men reporting current smoking at the time of the survey, compared to 1% of women.¹⁴⁷

At 27.5%, smokeless tobacco (SLT) use is even more common than smoked tobacco.¹⁴⁷ This is due in part to the high prevalence of SLT use amongst Bangladeshi women. Over 28% of Bangladeshi women used SLT, compared to nearly 27% of men.¹⁴⁷Most female tobacco users in low- and middle-income countries are SLT users in India and Bangladesh.¹⁴⁸ Popular SLT products include betel quid with zarda, betel quid with sadapata, pan masala with tobacco and gul.¹⁴⁷

Amongst adolescents aged from 13 to 17, nearly 10% used tobacco in some form as of 2014, with almost 14% of boys using tobacco compared to 2% of girls.¹⁴⁹ The rate for cigarette smoking was nearly 8%, with 11% of boys smoking compared to 1.5% of girls.¹⁴⁹

There were an estimated 106,000 deaths attributable to smoking in 2019, accounting for over 12% of all mortality in Bangladesh that year.¹⁵⁰ The total annual cost of tobacco use in Bangladesh was estimated at BDT৳305.6 billion (US$3.6 billion) in 2018, which was equivalent to 1.4% of GDP in 2017-18.¹⁵¹ Direct healthcare costs accounted for BDT৳83.9 billion, of which 24% was covered by public health expenditure. This is a significant outlay, representing 8.9% of the healthcare budget in 2018-19.¹⁵¹ However, most of the costs attributable to tobacco use – both direct and indirect – are borne by tobacco users and their families.¹⁵¹ While the economic contribution of the tobacco industry to Bangladeshi GDP was estimated at BDT৳229.11 billion ($US2.7 billion) in 2018, this was still BDT৳76.54 billion (US$911 million) less than the annual costs attributable to tobacco use. Tobacco therefore results in a net loss to the Bangladeshi economy.¹⁵¹¹⁵²

Tobacco in Bangladesh

Market share and leading brands

In 2022, market research company Euromonitor International estimated the Bangladeshi tobacco market to be worth nearly BDT৳420 billion – over US$4.5 billion.¹⁵³¹⁵⁴

British American Tobacco Bangladesh (BATB) dominates the Bangladeshi tobacco market, with a market share of over 84.5% in 2022.¹⁸ Its portfolio includes the three bestselling brands of cigarette in the country: Royal, Derby and Hollywood.²³ The Bangladeshi state holds a stake of more than 9% in BATB, both directly, and through two state-owned assets.¹⁴⁵

BATB’s closest competitor is Japan Tobacco International (JTI), which has a market share of over 9% following its 2018 acquisition of the United Dhaka Tobacco Company Limited (UDTCL), the tobacco business of the Akij Group conglomerate.^18155156 Its leading brands are Sheikh and Navy.²³

Smaller domestic companies include Abul Khair Tobacco Company, Alpha Tobacco Manufacturing Company and Nasir Tobacco Industries Ltd.¹⁵⁷

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

Smokeless tobacco and bidis

Accurate, up-to-date information on the SLT industry in Bangladesh is scarce. SLT producers are mostly home based and work informally, which makes for a fragmented market.¹⁵⁸¹⁵⁹ However, larger companies include Kaus Chemical Works, which sells Hakimpuri Zarda, one of the most popular zarda products (made of dried and boiled tobacco leaves, lime, areca nut, additives, tannins and spices) in the country; and Baba Al-Tajer Dhaka.^158160161

Similarly, reliable and up-to-date information about bidi production is not available. However, a 2012 investigation found 117 bidi factories spread throughout the country.¹⁶² The leading bidi company in Bangladesh is the Akiz Bidi Company; others include Aziz Bidi, Maya Bidi and Bangla Bidi.¹⁶³

Tobacco farming

Large-scale tobacco agriculture began in Bangladesh following independence in 1971, when BATB began growing in the greater Rangpur area.¹⁶⁴ Today, tobacco is grown throughout the country, with significant tobacco-growing regions including Lalmonirhat, Nilphamari, Kushtia, Manikganj, Tangail, Bandarban and Cox’s Bazar.¹⁶⁴

Bangladeshi tobacco production was steady at around 40,000 tonnes annually from the late 1970s until 2009, at which point it began to increase rapidly, peaking at just under 130,000 tonnes in 2019.¹⁶⁵ In 2020 Bangladesh declared nearly 86,000 tonnes, making it the 12^th largest tobacco producer in the world.¹⁶⁵¹⁶⁶

Child labour

Human rights organisations have documented child labour in tobacco fields in Bangladesh.¹⁶⁷ In 2020, a video report published by Unfairtobacco and Bangladeshi NGO UBINIG showed children missing school in order to help their families with the tobacco harvest.¹⁶⁸ Another video report documented the impacts of tobacco farming on Bangladeshi women, including the challenge of combining long hours working on the harvest with domestic tasks; negative health effects, including respiratory problems, fevers, and loss of appetite; as well as poor economic returns.¹⁶⁹

In 2016, the Swedish NGO Swedwatch published a report based on research in three leaf cultivation areas which supply BATB.¹⁷⁰ It documented widespread child labour and negative impacts on the health and wellbeing of farm labourers, both children and adults.¹⁷⁰ It also showed how the use of flawed contracts and uncertain promises contributed to over-indebtedness and trapped many farmers in poverty.¹⁷⁰ In response, BAT conducted an internal review which, according to the company, “did not raise any significant concerns and indicated that the report as a whole is not representative of the reality on the ground.”¹⁷¹ A subsequent investigation BAT commissioned to consulting firm DNV GL supported its internal review.¹⁷²

Bangladeshi bidis feature on the U.S. Department of Labor’s 2022 List of Goods Produced by Child Labor or Forced Labor.¹⁷³ It is estimated that at least half of the workforce in the Bangladeshi bidi industry is aged between 4 and 14; average wages are between US$0.77 and US$1.57 per day.¹⁶³ A 2012 investigation found that most bidi workers were women and children.¹⁶² According to several workers, managers and people in communities around the bidi factories surveyed, this is because their labour is much cheaper and they are less capable of organising for higher wages or better working conditions.¹⁶²

• 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

Bangladesh is a net exporter of tobacco. In 2015, the last year for which data is currently available from UN Comtrade (as of September 2023), Bangladesh exported US$43.5 million in raw tobacco, compared to just over US$8 million in imports.¹⁷⁴¹⁷⁵ However, it is a net importer of factory-made cigarettes. The same year, it imported over US$3 million in cigarettes, compared to just over US$354,000 in exports.¹⁷⁶¹⁷⁷

Illicit trade

A World Bank report published in 2019 found that Bangladesh had a low estimated incidence of illicit trade in cigarettes (2%), compared to estimated global rates of 10-12%.¹⁷⁸ According to the report, annual revenue losses from the illicit cigarette trade are about US$100 million, around 4% of total tobacco revenues.¹⁷⁸ Bangladesh has strong legal and institutional structures to combat illicit trade, including a cigarette stamp and banderol system to ensure compliance with taxation, robust law enforcement and stiff penalties for smuggling.¹⁷⁸

Though the illicit bidi trade is likely to be larger than that for cigarettes, revenue loss has so far been low given that bidis were barely taxed at all until recently.¹⁷⁸ The illicit trade in smokeless tobacco is also likely to be significant, though in the absence of any track and trace system or even tax stamps on SLT products, it is impossible to estimate the illicit share of the SLT market accurately.¹⁵⁸ A 2022 study found that “Almost all ST [smokeless tobacco] products bought in Bangladesh (…) were non-compliant with the local packaging requirements and hence potentially illicit”.¹⁵⁸

Tobacco and the environment

A 2020 study found various forms of contamination due to tobacco growing in Bangladesh, both in the soil and in nearby water sources. The most important parameter found to be significantly higher in tobacco-growing land was the pesticide aldicarb.¹⁶⁶ Classified as “extremely hazardous” by the WHO, this chemical is banned in 125 countries, though its use remains widespread.¹⁷⁹ The same study calculated the environmental cost of tobacco curing (due to carbon emissions) at US$310 per acre used for tobacco cultivation.¹⁶⁶

Another report stated that contamination of water and soil by tobacco farming is endangering the livelihoods of nearly 800,000 people in the Bandarban and Cox’s Bazar districts who depend on the Matamuhuri river for fishing and cultivation of food crops.¹⁸⁰ Swedwatch also documented deforestation and forest degradation linked to farms in Bandarban and Chakoria which supply BATB.¹⁷⁰ It alleged that BATB has contributed to these problems by failing to prevent sourcing of fuel wood from natural forests and by supporting the construction of kilns in forest areas.¹⁷⁰

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

Roadmap to Tobacco Control

Bangladesh was the first country to sign the WHO FCTC on 16 June 2003.¹⁸¹ It ratified the treaty a year later.¹⁸² However, it has not signed the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products.¹⁸³

The Smoking and Tobacco Products Usage (Control) Act (2005) is the principal law governing tobacco control in Bangladesh. The Act is comprehensive and covers smokefree spaces; tobacco advertising; the sale of tobacco to and by minors; and the packaging and labelling of tobacco products, among other areas.⁵⁷ However, the law had some major limitations. For example, it mandated only textual health warnings on smoked tobacco products, which is problematic in Bangladesh given the popularity of smokeless tobacco.¹⁸⁴ Similarly, although it banned advertising of tobacco products, it did not comprehensively cover sponsorship.¹⁸⁴

The Act was amended in 2013 and implementation rules were introduced in 2015, increasing compliance with the WHO FCTC. However, the industry was given a 12-month transition period to fully comply.¹⁸⁴ Even then, industry interference – principally by British American Tobacco Bangladesh (BATB) – has succeeded in delaying full implementation of the Amendment.¹⁸⁴ For example, though the Amendment mandated graphic health warnings (GHWs) on the upper half of all tobacco packaging, as of May 2022 – over seven years since the implementation rules were first published in the country’s official gazette – GHWs were still printed on the lower half of tobacco products.¹⁸⁴ Though this is considered a complete measure by the WHO, it means that the GHWs may be less visible to many Bangladeshi consumers. This is because tobacco products are often sold by mobile sellers out of steel trays which cover the lower half of the products.¹⁸⁴

Other major loopholes remain. Designated smoking areas are still permitted in certain public places; there are no restrictions on the sale of individual cigarettes (single sticks), small packets of cigarettes, or tobacco products via the internet; and there are no restrictions on use, advertising, promotion and sponsorship, or packaging and labelling of e-cigarettes.⁵⁷

However, as of June 2022, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MoHFW) was preparing a new amendment to the Smoking and Tobacco Products Usage (Control) Act, which contains a number of global best practices.¹⁸⁵ If passed, it would eliminate designated smoking areas; ban corporate social responsibility (CSR) by tobacco companies; ban the sale of single sticks; ban the display of tobacco products at points of sale; and increase the size of graphic health warnings (GHWs) on tobacco products from 50% to 90%.¹⁸⁵ It also aims to ban the sale of e-cigarettes.¹⁸⁵

In 2015, the Bangladeshi government began to levy a 1% Health Development Surcharge (HDS) on all tobacco products, which brings in around US$71 million a year, designed to support key government health initiatives including tobacco control.¹⁸⁶ However, this funding has not always been easily accessible to the MoHFW. As of March 2021, the National Tobacco Control Cell (NTCC), which sits within the MoHFW, was working on a long-term tobacco control programme which would have smoother access to HDS funding.¹⁸⁶

For more details, please see the following websites:

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

Tobacco Industry Interference in Bangladesh

Recent tobacco industry tactics in Bangladesh include direct lobbying of civil servants, which successfully obtained an exemption to lockdown restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic; using diplomats to lobby in its interests; and the mobilisation of third-party organisations against tobacco control.

Influencing policy: conflicts of interest

According to a study published in 2022, no measures have been adopted to implement Article 5.3 of the WHO FCTC in Bangladesh.¹⁴⁴ The tobacco industry continues to influence policymaking, particularly BATB, in which the government holds a share of over 9%.¹⁴⁴¹⁴⁵

This incident also demonstrates how much the tobacco industry (particularly BATB) is connected with government in Bangladesh.¹⁴⁴ The Secretary at the MoI, who granted the lockdown exemptions to BATB and UDTCL, simultaneously had a seat on the BATB board as a non-executive director.¹⁴⁴ This arrangement between the MoI and BATB appears to date back to at least 2010.¹⁹²

Several other senior civil servants also sit as independent or non-executive members on the BATB board, including a secretary at the Prime Minister’s Office.^193194195192

A study published in 2022 stressed that the presence of senior government officials on the BATB board leads both to individual and institutional conflicts of interest.¹⁴⁴ However, a former Secretary at the MoI has denied this, stating that tobacco control is not discussed at BATB board meetings.¹⁹⁶

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

Influencing policy: lobbying by diplomats

There have also been cases of lobbying of Bangladeshi authorities by foreign diplomats on behalf of the two main transnational tobacco companies operating in the country. In 2017, the British High Commissioner in Bangladesh intervened on behalf of BATB in a tax dispute between BATB and the NBR. Similarly, in 2021, the Japanese Ambassador sent a letter to the Bangladeshi Finance Minister criticising tax reforms which had impacted JTI, as well as restrictions on the marketing and sale of certain JTI products. The letter also complained of “anti-competitive” behaviour, alluding to BATB’s domination of the Bangladeshi tobacco market.

• For more information, please see the pages on UK Diplomats Lobbying for BAT: Bangladesh and Japanese Diplomats Lobbying for JTI.

Use of third parties

In June 2022, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MoHFW) published another draft amendment to the Smoking and Tobacco Products Usage (Control) Act (2005) – Bangladesh’s main tobacco control law – and asked for input from relevant stakeholders (see section Roadmap to Tobacco Control).¹⁹⁷

In response, the MoHFW received letters criticising the amendment from various trade associations, including the Federation of Bangladesh Chamber of Commerce and Industries (FBCCI) and the Foreign Investors’ Chamber of Commerce and Industry (FICCI), both of which have tobacco industry links.¹⁹⁸¹⁹⁹

In July 2022, a “policy dialogue” event – widely reported in the press – was held at a five-star hotel in Dhaka by the Intellectual Property Association of Bangladesh (IPAB). Speakers argued the amendment would reduce tax revenue, increase illicit trade and threaten livelihoods, reportedly describing it as “unrealistic”, “unimplementable” and “counterproductive”.²⁰⁰ On its website, IPAB lists BATB among its corporate members, from which it acknowledges receiving “extensive support”, and two members of IPAB’s executive committee also hold senior positions at BATB.^201202203204

Another participant at the event was the executive director of FICCI, which lists BATB, Philip Morris Bangladesh and United Dhaka Tobacco Company Ltd (UDTCL) as member organisations.^200205206207 FICCI also includes tobacco industry executives on its board of directors, including the managing director of UDTCL, author of the letter to the Ministry of Industries requesting an exemption from COVID-19 restrictions in 2020 (see Influencing policy: conflicts of interest).¹⁸⁹²⁰⁸

A 2018 investigation by the public health NGO PROGGA concluded that BATB’s infiltration of influential business and trade organisations constituted a major barrier to greater tobacco control in Bangladesh.²⁰⁹

• For more information on business organisations in Bangladesh and neighbouring countries see Trade Associations.

Relevant Links

• Live: Tobacco Industry Interference on Amendment of Tobacco Control Law 2022, Center for Research and Advocacy to Fight Tobacco
• National STEPS Survey for Non-communicable Diseases Risk Factors in Bangladesh 2018, National Institute of Preventive and Social Medicine (NIPSOM)
• The economic cost of tobacco use in Bangladesh: A health cost approach, Bangladesh Cancer Society

Tobacco Tactics Resources

• South East Asian Region
• Trade Associations
• Greenwashing

TCRG Research

• Tobacco industry interference to undermine the development and implementation of graphic health warnings in Bangladesh, M.H. Shahriar, M.M. Hasan, M.S. Alam, B.K. Matthes, A.B. Gilmore, A.B.M. Zubair, Tobacco Control, 2023, doi: 10.1136/tc-2022-057538
• Achieving a tobacco-free Bangladesh by 2040: a qualitative analysis of the tobacco advertising environment and prohibitions in Bangladesh, A. Tselengidis, S. Adams, B. Freeman, S.M. Alam, P.A.S. Astuti, J. Cranwell, BMJ Open 2023;13:e069620, doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-069620
• Advancing whole-of-government approaches to tobacco control: Article 5.3 and the challenge of policy coordination in Bangladesh, Ethiopia, India and Uganda, R. Barry, S.M. Abdullah, A. Chugh, S. Hirpa, P. Kumar, D. Male, R. Ralston, T. Wagner-Rizvi, J. Collin, Tobacco Control, 2022;31:s46-s52
• 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.
• Estimating the magnitude of illicit cigarette trade in Bangladesh: protocol for a mixed-methods study, S. Abjullah, R. Huque, L. Bauld, H. Ross, A. Gilmore, R.M. John, K. Siddiqi, Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(13), 4791

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 Bangladesh Country Profile appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

• Menthol and flavoured cigarettes are widely available in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) many of which have high smoking rates
• LMICs have young populations – flavours appeal to young people, who may not understand the harms of flavoured tobacco
• Recently high-income countries have put bans in place; at the same time there has been marked growth of menthol market share in some LMICs
• There is a lack of regulation to reduce the appeal of flavours e.g. plain packs and advertising bans at point-of-sale or near schools
• Targets for new and improved bans include flavour capsules, and flavour references on packaging and cigarette sticks
• A ban on all flavourings may be easier and more effective in preventing product substitution
• A lack of data, especially in low-income countries, hinders the development of good regulation
• Multinational tobacco companies can threaten income from tobacco exports if governments attempt to put tobacco controls in place

This page covers flavoured tobacco, including menthol cigarettes, in low and middle-income countries (LMICs).²¹⁰²¹¹

Background

Flavoured tobacco products are available in various forms around the world, including products previously only used in particular regions or countries. For example in Indonesia, the vast majority of smokers use kretek, clove-flavoured cigarettes,²¹²²¹³ and they are now available in other countries.²¹⁴²¹⁵

Flavoured tobacco is used in waterpipe, a device which originated in middle-eastern countries and is increasingly popular elsewhere, including among young people.²¹⁶

Here we focus on what are often called ‘conventional’ products, like cigarettes and cigarillos, which are sold by large transnational tobacco companies (TTCs): Philip Morris International (PMI), British American Tobacco (BAT), Imperial Brands (IMB, previously Imperial Tobacco) and Japan Tobacco International (JTI) (JTI also owns Nakhla in Egypt, which produces flavoured waterpipe) We summarise findings from Tobacco Control Research Group (TCRG) research on the extent of flavoured and menthol cigarette use in LMICs and the development of the market for ‘capsule’ products (cigarettes with flavour capsules in the filter).

We describe specific challenges for LMICs, including flavour regulation and evidence gathering. We then summarise flavour market evidence and research, first relating to LMICs in general and then by World Health Organization (WHO) region and individual countries (where available).

• For general background and evidence, including information on the global market, and details of specific bans and associated industry interference, see Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco.

For details of product regulation at country level, see the searchable database on the Tobacco Control Laws website, published by the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids (CTFK). For countries that are parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) progress towards implementation of relevant articles, including newer products, is detailed in the FCTC implementation database

Specific challenges for LMICs

LMICs with no ban often have other major tobacco control policy gaps that are not necessarily menthol/flavour related but worsen the negative impact of menthol/flavours.²¹⁷ One such policy is plain, or standardised, packaging,  which can include restrictions on flavour descriptors as well as colours on packaging which are known to signify flavour (e.g. green for menthol).²¹⁸ However, plain packaging policies have yet to be implemented in many countries, including some high-income countries, so this would be a significant challenge in LMICs. Another relevant policy is the prohibition of marketing, especially near schools.²¹⁹

Governments have more conflicts of interest in tobacco growing areas as they receive much needed foreign currency for tobacco exports,  and multinational companies can threaten this income stream if governments attempt to put tobacco controls in place.²¹⁷²²⁰  However, apart from rare exceptions the tobacco industry contributes little overall to the balance of payments.²²¹²²²

Regulatory challenges

The WHO published brief guidance on the regulation of menthol and flavoured tobacco which summarised some regulatory options including restrictions on: the sale of menthol branded products,  the use of menthol at noticeable levels (giving a ‘characterising flavour’),  or banning any menthol ingredients.²²³  The report points to likely opposition from the tobacco industry in countries or regions with an established menthol market.²²³ This was the case with the European Union (EU) menthol ban which only came into full force in 2020, after the tobacco industry had successfully lobbied for a delay. Testing for characterising flavour is more difficult and expensive than a ban on ingredients; this makes banning menthol as an ingredient particularly efficient for LMICs.

The WHO noted that:

“A ban on all flavour agents that increase tobacco product attractiveness, rather than focusing on menthol exclusively, can provide an alternate route to restricting menthol, and may prevent the unwanted introduction of menthol substitutes.”²²³

Research and data

As of 2021, when TCRG researchers conducted a review of evidence on menthol/flavour in LMICs,²²⁴ there were very few research papers from countries in Eastern Europe, the Eastern Mediterranean region, and Africa.

Lack of data means that it is hard to monitor markets and company shares in specific countries.  Market research service Euromonitor (which receives project funding from Philip Morris International) includes no low-income countries and is proprietary, making it expensive and hard to access even for the middle-income countries which are included.

More research is needed on menthol and flavour in LMICs to help governments monitor the tobacco industry and its products, as recommended by the WHO: “An evidence base using data collected from the region of interest can provide more direct support for regulation.”²²³

Market in LMICs

Evidence suggests menthol and flavoured tobacco products are widely used in LMICs.  Data from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Policy Evaluation Project suggests that menthol is smoked by more than 20% of smokers in several middle-income countries. Although the dates vary (see the note above on data challenges) this research gives an indication of the scale of the problem. The highest rates were found in Zambia (42% in 2014) and Thailand (35% in 2012). Kenya and India also had over 20% menthol smokers, with China just under just under that level.²²⁵

A study from Johns Hopkins University, between 2015 and 2017, found a range of flavoured and capsule cigarettes on the market in those LMICs with the highest number of smokers: Bangladesh, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Philippines, Russia, Thailand, and Vietnam.²²⁶

The main TTCs operating in these countries (PMI, JTI, and BAT) mostly sold menthol or mint flavours. China National Tobacco Corporation (CNTC) sold  a mix of flavours.²²⁶

There is also evidence from a number of studies that menthol and flavour tobacco use is rising, either as a proportion of the market or substantively.  Evidence from TCRG research shows that after the implementation of the European Union (EU) menthol ban in 2020, there was a marked increase in the share of menthol/flavoured products in some LMICs.²²⁴ A study of cigarette packs in Brazil, Indonesia, the Philippines, Russia, Thailand, and Vietnam, between 2013 and 2016, found that the number of flavour capsule variants on the market was growing.²²⁷ Most were mint and menthol flavour but with others the flavour was unclear from the product name.²²⁷

A number of studies have identified related marketing activities.  Marketing strategies for flavour capsules are likely driving their global growth particularly among young people in LMICs.²²⁸

TCRG’s review  of tobacco industry strategies underpinning the growth of menthol/flavoured tobacco use in LMICs  highlighted widespread marketing in stores (including retailers near schools), on billboards, on TV, online and via brand ambassadors. The packaging of flavoured and menthol products, legally displayed in stores, was  found to be colourful with non-conventional, appealing names for flavours.²²⁴

Tobacco companies also use symbols on cigarette sticks to indicate that they contain capsules.²²⁹ Researchers studying this form of marketing in LMICs have described the space on a cigarette as “valuable communicative real estate” for tobacco companies, which could be better used to display public health messages.²²⁹

Research and data from specific regions and countries is summarised below. We refer in many places to TCRG research based on 2019 cigarette market data from Euromonitor. In this data ‘high market share’ means 20% or more of the total cigarette market in that country in 2019. ‘High market share growth’ means that the share doubled between 2005-19 and was growing from 2017.²²⁴ We link to regional and country profile pages on TobaccoTactics, where available.

Africa

Nigeria has high menthol/flavour market share and high market share growth.²²⁴

Cameroon has high market share, the only other country in the region for which this data was available. (For Egypt see Eastern Mediterranean region below.)²²⁴

Tanzania

JTI sells a menthol cigarette called Sweet Menthol through its subsidiary in Tanzania. It describes this product as “the leading local mainstream menthol brand”.²³⁰

Zambia

JTI owned brand Sweet Menthol is the third most popular cigarette in Zambia.  It is cheap and is usually sold as single sticks.²³¹  On its webpage for Zambia, JTI describes itself  as a leaf farming company, and does not mention that it sells cigarettes in the country. A locally owned company, Roland Imperial,  also sells menthol cigarette brands.²³²

ITC survey data showed a high prevalence of menthol smokers in Zambia, with 43% of smokers choosing the product.²³³ Menthol was most commonly used among younger smokers, those with a middle income, and those that don’t smoke every day. Over a third of smokers indicated that they thought menthol cigarettes were less harmful than non-menthol.²³³

Kenya

ITC survey data from Kenya also suggests a high prevalence of menthol smokers.²³³²³⁴ In 2018, 21% of smokers with a regular cigarette brand smoked menthol or sweet menthol (although Euromonitor estimates that only 7% of cigarette sales are menthol).²²⁴  More women smoke menthol than men in Kenya, and two thirds of smokers believed that menthol is less harmful than other cigarettes.²³³²³⁴

Ethiopia

In 2015, Ethiopia enacted a total flavour ban on all forms of tobacco.

• For details see Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco

This was a pre-emptive ban as flavour sales were low. However there has been a lack of enforcement at the retail level.²¹⁷ Flavoured products are not made in Ethiopia and more collaboration with customs is needed to prevent illicit importation.²¹⁷ There is also a lack of awareness that the ban includes waterpipe products.²²³

Since 2017, two years after the ban was enacted, JTI has owned 70%  the state owned tobacco company, NTE.²³⁵

Latin America

Menthol cigarettes are popular in Latin America, and increasingly so in some countries.²²⁴ Guatemala and Peru have high market share and high market share growth. There is high market share in Columbia and the Dominican Republic, and high market share growth in Argentina, Bolivia and Costa Rica.²²⁴

Use of flavour capsule cigarettes is particularly high in Chile and Mexico.²³⁶  According to BAT’s annual report in 2014,  sales of  flavour capsule cigarettes had increased in the region despite price rises, while overall cigarette sales were down.²³⁷

A study of over 1,000 retailers located close to schools in Latin American cities (Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile and Peru) found that the majority (85%) sold flavoured cigarettes, and most (71%) sold capsule versions.²¹⁹ (Similar findings were reported in Uruguay, a high income country, immediately before the implementation of plain pack regulations in 2020.)²³⁸

These products were frequently displayed near the point of sale, or confectionary. Some stores also had advertisements and price promotions.²¹⁹ Unconventional flavour descriptors such as “fusion blast” and “ruby ice” were very common.²³⁹

Brazil

Survey data from 2016-2017 among adult smokers in Brazil found that over 50% supported a ban on menthol and over 60% supported a ban on all additives.²⁴⁰ Support did not vary across sociodemographic groups. When menthol smokers were asked what they would do if menthol cigarettes were banned, a third reported they would quit, around 20% would reduce the amount they smoked and a similar number would switch to non-menthol cigarettes. Slightly fewer said they would still find a way to get menthol cigarettes.²⁴⁰

ITC survey data from the same period suggested that 8% of smokers with a regular cigarette brand smoked menthol.²⁴¹ 13% believed that menthol cigarettes were less harmful than non-menthol cigarettes, and over a third reported that they were smoother on the throat and chest.  Nearly two thirds  of surveyed smokers supported a complete ban on all cigarette additives, including flavourings.²⁴¹

An online sample of women aged 16- 26 (smokers and non-smokers) preferred packs with flavour descriptors.²⁴²

• The tobacco industry has used a range to tactics to undermine and delay Brazil’s menthol ban. For details see Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco

Chile

In 2013, Chile sought to implement a law banning substances that cause higher levels of addiction, harm or risk, leading to tobacco industry resistance and interference.²²³

• For details see Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco

Mexico

Studies of retailers in Mexican cities, found that the majority sold menthol and flavoured products, and more than half of stores situated near schools sold flavour capsule cigarettes.²⁴³²⁴⁴ Many flavoured cigarettes have descriptors which suggest there is a flavour, but the type of flavour is unclear: chemical analysis of dual flavoured cigarettes suggested flavours were menthol and another flavour, for example fruit.²⁴⁵

A study in Mexico City found that colour and flavour descriptors on cigarette packs made the products more appealing, and some smokers believed they would taste better.²⁴⁶

Guatemala

A study of convenience store retailers in Guatemala found that all sold flavoured tobacco products.²⁴⁷

The majority (88%) of indoor tobacco advertisements in Guatemala were found to be for capsule cigarettes.²⁴⁷

South East Asia & Western Pacific

There is high market share of menthol/flavour in India, Malaysia, Philippines and Thailand, and high market share growth in Vietnam.²²⁴  A 2010 study noted that governments in the region had no legislation banning exotic flavours of cigarettes and cigarettes with new flavours had appeared in Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines.²⁴⁸

Philippines

Menthol has been advertised to appeal to young women in the Philippines since the 1970s with menthol brands common for many decades.²⁴⁹ PMI, JTI, BAT and Korea Tobacco & Ginseng (KT&G) all sell flavoured capsule cigarettes in the Philippines.²⁵⁰

Menthol packs studied in the Philippines were harder than non-menthol (for capsule protection) giving a quality feel. Flavoured capsule brands had a greater technological appeal,²⁵⁰ and packs were rated as more attractive by young adults.²⁵¹

Blue and white packs were perceived to be less harmful than other colours, as were the descriptors ‘light’ and ‘cool’, whereas the term ‘strong’ was perceived as more harmful.²⁵¹  Researchers called for greater action and support for banning flavour additives.

Malaysia

In Malaysia, menthol cigarette marketing has been aimed at young people and women.  In the 1980s Brown and Williamson’s Newport menthol cigarettes were marketed in Malaysia with youthful American images and were sold at a cheap price point.²⁵² An internal document from 1993 reveals how the company was developing sweet and fruit flavours for the Malaysian market. ²⁵²²⁵³ A 2003 study noted that the menthol variant of Cartier Vendome (a BAT brand at the time) was described as ‘pearl tipped’ so likely to appeal to women.²⁵⁴

In 2013, vanilla, mint and fruit flavoured cigarettes were on sale, and strawberry cigarette packs with pink packaging were documented.²⁵⁵

China

In China ‘flavour capsule’ was found to be one of the most common cigarette terms used in online tobacco marketing.  One website explicitly linked flavour capsules with female smokers.²⁵⁶

Indonesia

In Indonesia the dominant cigarettes are kreteks which are flavoured with cloves.  Industry attempts to introduce their own cloved flavoured products had failed at least to 2004.²⁵⁷  In 2009 PMI and BAT acquired two domestic manufacturers which allowed them access to the kretek market.²⁵⁸ In 2009 PMI launched the first super slims kretek for women and Marlboro black menthol for young men.  By 2012 BAT had launched several kretek brands. Both companies were aware that kreteks  are particularly carcinogenic due to the presence of toxic chemical compounds: Anethole, Coumarin and Eugenol.²⁵⁸

In Indonesia the flip lid of the cigarette packet was used by Esse (owned by Korean Tobacco & Ginseng, KT&G) to promote the brand with phrases evoking flavour, like “sweet surprise” and “its honey”.  Research found seven cigarette brands with capsules.  Flavours included mint, menthol, berry and honey.²⁵⁹

Eastern Mediterranean

There is high market share growth in in Pakistan and Egypt .²²⁴

• See also Waterpipe for information on the role of flavours in promoting these products.

Eastern Europe

Data shows that in Russia menthol/flavour has both a high market share and high market share growth.²²⁴

Other LMICs in the region with high market share growth are Ukraine, Bosnia Herzegovina, Belarus, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan.²²⁴

Relevant Links

WHO Advisory note: banning menthol in tobacco products (2016)

WHO Case studies for regulatory approaches to tobacco products: menthol in tobacco products (2018)

WHO FCTC decision on banning waterpipe flavour (2016)

A global map of menthol bans is available on Tobacco Atlas: Product Sales

TobaccoTactics Resources

• Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco
• Menthol Cigarettes: Industry Interference in the EU and UK

TCRG Research

A growing menace: menthol and flavoured tobacco products in LMIC, M. Zatonski, K. Silver, S. Plummer, R. Hiscock, Tobacco Induced Diseases, 2022;20(April):39, doi:10.18332/tid/146366
STOP research summary (May 2022)

Marketing of flavour capsule cigarettes: a systematic review, C. Kyriakos, M. Zatonski, F. Filippidis, Tobacco Control, Published Online First: 18 January 2022, doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2021-057082[/ref]

Flavour capsule cigarette use and perceptions: a systematic review, C.N. Kyriakos, M.Z. Zatoński, F.T. Filippidis, Tobacco Control, Published Online First: 04 October 2021, doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2021-056837

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 Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco in LMICs appeared first on TobaccoTactics.

• The EU menthol ban came into force in May 2020. Tobacco companies exploited weaknesses in the ban: the focus on characterising flavours rather than flavour ingredients; product exemptions; and a long phase-in period.
• Prior to the ban menthol use was highest in England and Poland. Menthol had an estimated 20% of the UK cigarette market, in which Imperial Brands and JTI dominate.
• Unlike other EU countries, menthol’s share of the market grew in Poland and the UK after the ban was announced in 2016.
• Tobacco companies, led by JTI and Imperial, were able to exploit the challenges of determining ‘characterising’ flavour, and the omission of cigarillos and accessories from the ban. There are early indications that this has prolonged menthol use post-ban.
• Menthol ban websites promoted newer products, mainly heated tobacco and e-cigarettes.
• In its submissions to the EU, the tobacco industry is minimising the harm caused by flavoured additives by focusing on toxicity rather than addiction.

Regulation of flavours that make smoking more palatable is recommended by the WHO Framework Convention of Tobacco Control (FCTC).²²³²⁶⁰ This page details regulation and interference in the EU in the pre and post the 2020 menthol ban.

For information on the global menthol market, and regulation and interference in other countries see Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco.

Background

Regulation and Interference on Flavour in the EU and UK

An EU-wide ban on the sale of flavoured cigarettes was introduced in May 2016, including menthol, under the 2014 revised European Tobacco Products Directive (TPD), with a May 2016 deadline for EU countries to transpose the TPD into national law.²⁶¹ While retailers were allowed a year to sell existing stocks of other flavours, the phase-out period for menthol was extended for a further three years, and came into force across the EU in May 2020.²⁶²

Weaknesses of the EU menthol ban which could be exploited by industry included:^263264265

• not banning menthol as an ingredient
• exemption for most products (as the ban was only applicable to cigarettes – factory made and roll your own) and accessories
• and a four year phase-in period.

Menthol market share in Europe

Prior to the 2020 ban, Euromonitor analysis estimated the whole European menthol market to be worth around EU€9.7 billion (US$11 billion, nearly UK£8.5 billion).²⁶⁶  The relative shares of menthol flavoured cigarettes versus those with capsules (menthol and other flavours) varied; while the market share for capsules exceeded the share for menthol flavoured tobacco in half of EU countries, in others the capsule share was very low or non-existent.²⁶⁷ Menthol and capsule market share has tended to be higher for European countries outside the EU.²⁶⁷

The International Tobacco Control (ITC) survey in 2016 (n=10,000 adult smokers, in 8 European countries) found that the countries with the highest menthol use were England (over 12% of smokers) and Poland (10%); the lowest levels were observed in Germany and Spain (Figure 1).²⁶⁸

Figure 1: Prevalence of flavour of cigarettes smoked (usual brand of choice) in 2016 (%).(Source: EUREST-PLUS ITC Europe Surveys)²⁶⁸

The ITC figures are supported by 2018 Euromonitor data, which show that the combined market share of menthol and capsules was generally higher in northern European countries, with the highest in Poland, at over 25%, followed by the UK, at over 20% .²⁶⁹

The UK market

The UK was part of the EU until 31 January 2020.  The 2016 TPD, which included the menthol and flavours ban, was transposed into UK law and remains in place in the UK.  Any future amendments to UK legislation will be made by the UK government.

The UK cigarette market, is dominated by two tobacco companies, Imperial Tobacco (Imperial Brands) and Japan Tobacco International (JTI).²⁷⁰ According to Euromonitor, in 2019, Imperial had a 44% share of the total cigarette market and JTI 37%, by retail volume. Although it is also based in the UK, British American Tobacco (BAT)’s share was much smaller, at just over 9%. Philip Morris International (PMI) had under 8%, mainly due to its Marlboro brand.²⁷¹

Prior to the ban, menthol cigarettes formed an estimated 21% of the UK market.²⁶⁷ 2018 figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) indicate that there were 7.2 million smokers in the UK; based on the 2016 ITC survey data (detailed above) that would equate to nearly 900,000 smokers who usually smoke menthol cigarettes. According to market research survey based data, the figure was much higher in 2019, nearly 1.6 million in Great Britain,²⁷²

Six billion menthol cigarettes were sold in the UK in 2018.²⁷³ According to the ITC survey, 17.5% of UK smokers said that they intended to quit after the ban (an average of 16% of smokers in the EU said the same).²⁶⁸ As this could reduce annual sales by around 1 billion sticks (3% of the total UK cigarette market), tobacco companies had a clear interest in circumventing the ban and maintaining market share, particularly Imperial and Japan Tobacco International (JTI) (having over 80% of the total cigarette market between them).

See below for a description of the range of tactics used by tobacco companies to exploit loopholes in the legislation and circumvent the EU menthol ban.

• For information on the global market for menthol cigarettes see Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco.

Tobacco Companies Activities to Circumvent and Undermine the Menthol Ban

Lobbying and delay: four year phase-out for menthol

After protests against the TPD from the tobacco industry, and an (ultimately unsuccessful) legal challenge by Poland at the European Court of Justice, supported by Romania, implementation of the ban on menthol cigarettes was postponed to 2020.²⁷⁴²⁷⁵ This was agreed as a four-year transitional “phase-out” period for all flavoured products with more than a 3% market share in the EU, such as menthol.²⁷⁶ (There was a similar ‘sell-through period’, a period when soon to be non-compliant stock can be sold off, when plain, or standardised, packaging was introduced into the UK in 2016, although only for one year).²⁷⁷  Romania asked for the ban to be repealed shortly after the TPD was agreed, using evidence from PMI as justification.  JTI officials in Romania were making the same arguments at the time.²⁷⁸

The relevant wording of the EU TPD menthol ban is as follows:

“Member States shall prohibit the placing on the market of… cigarettes and roll your own tobacco… products with a characterising flavour… including… menthol [or those] containing flavourings in any of their components such as filters, papers, packages, capsules or any technical features allowing modification of the smell or taste of the tobacco products concerned…  However, products with characterising flavour with a higher sales volume should be phased out over an extended time period to allow consumers adequate time to switch to other products… In the case of tobacco products with a characterising flavour whose Union-wide sales volumes represent 3 % or more in a particular product category, the provisions of this Article shall apply from 20 May 2020… The Member States and the Commission may charge proportionate fees to manufacturers and importers of tobacco products for assessing [compliance].” ²⁶¹

Some member states, such as Germany and Finland, have gone beyond these requirements and prohibit menthol as an additive.²⁶⁵ Hungary has also announced it has plans to ban cigarettes that contain any amount of menthol.²⁷⁹

In early May 2020, tobacco companies were reported to be lobbying for further postponement of the ban in the EU.²⁸⁰²⁸¹ Tobacco industry front group Forest EU were also reported to be lobbying against the ban.²⁸¹ In January 2019 it had described the ban as “unwarranted attack on consumer choice that will do little to deter children from smoking”.²⁸² These attempts were not successful. Romania delayed implementing the ban for six weeks in 2020, without informing the EU.²⁷⁸

Promotion of menthol products through the derogation period

Menthol/capsule cigarettes’ market share began to decline after the EU TPD legislation was announced in EU countries, whereas there was some growth in in countries in the WHO Europe Region which were not EU members. Two exceptions were the UK and Poland, two markets with high proportions of menthol sales.  In these countries there was marked growth in the market share of menthol/capsule cigarettes despite the incoming ban (figure 2).

Figure 2: Tobacco companies increased their sales of menthol in the run up to flavour bans in the UK and Poland (source: TCRG, June 2021)

During this period the tobacco industry promoted new menthol products to UK retailers through the retail trade press. It appears that the tobacco industry was prolonging sales in the ‘phase out’ period in these countries rather than using the period for a phase out of flavours, thus calling into question the necessity of a long derogation (delay to implementation).^283284285

Tobacco company buy-back schemes to maximise pre-ban sales

Despite being given four extra years by the EUTPD to get ready for the menthol ban, UK retailer group the Association of Convenience Stores stated, in advice to its members, that there was “no sell-through period”.²⁸⁶²⁸⁴ Tobacco companies stated that they had, or were planning, ‘buy-back’ schemes, to encourage retailers to sell menthol cigarettes right up to the ban.²⁸⁴  However, tobacco companies were slow to inform UK retailers of their plans.

PMI’s UK affiliate Philip Morris Ltd (PML) supplied details of its scheme via a dedicated website, where it promoted PMI’s heated tobacco product (HTP) IQOS as an alternative product, and which required retailer registration (see below).²⁸⁷²⁸⁸ Further details were provided as late as the end of April 2020.^284288289 BAT said in November 2019 that it would swap small amounts of menthol stock after the ban came into force. However, when approached by trade publication Better Retailing in April, less than a month before the ban, BAT refused to give further details.²⁸⁹

Imperial Tobacco also gave no indication whether or how it would take back excess menthol products, other than that it would “be dealt with on an individual basis”.²⁸⁹ It was reported that some retailers had advised others to remove from their product lists those products supplied by companies which would not disclose their plans. Otherwise, they risked being left holding stock which they would not be able to legally sell after 20 May.²⁸⁹

In August 2021, fourteen months after the ban, some retailers were still waiting for the buyback and complaining of a lack of response from attempts to contact tobacco companies. ²⁹⁰²⁹¹

Tobacco companies issued warnings of the risks of the ban leading to illicit trade. JTI, which said it would be buying back excess menthol stock, warned retailers that there was a risk of illicit trade in menthol cigarettes, claiming that “counterfeit menthol products [had been] seized in the UK already”.²⁸⁹²⁹² However, Better Retailing stated that this was contrary to information from other tobacco companies earlier in the year.²⁹² JTI’s anti illicit trade operations manager said that retailers should warn their customers not to buy fake products, using common tobacco industry arguments around product quality and safety.²⁹²

For more information see Illicit Tobacco Trade.

Product innovation & promotion of newer products

While the ban applied to cigarettes and roll your own tobacco, other tobacco products were exempt. Menthol accessories were only included in the ban if they were sold within the packaging of cigarettes or roll your own tobacco.²⁸³²⁸⁶

Tobacco companies used product innovation as a way to circumvent the menthol ban and maintain a market for their menthol products, claiming that they were doing so to meet the needs of consumers.^266293294

Tobacco companies used several tactics, including launching product alternatives, in order to circumvent the ban:

• new menthol accessories
• new brands of cigarettes containing some menthol, exploiting the term ‘characterising flavour’
• new cigarette-like cigarillos, other tobacco products (pipe or shisha tobacco)
• menthol and flavour launches for newer products (heated tobacco products, e-cigarettes and nicotine pouches) promoted through ‘menthol ban’ websites

CNTC identified Germany, France, Belgium, Spain and the UK as offering the largest variety of these alternatives in the EU.²⁶⁹ Methods varied by company: Imperial and JTI developed new products; PMI used it as an opportunity to promote its own alternatives. All created ‘menthol ban’ websites or web pages (see below).

New menthol accessories

Tobacco accessories sold separately are not covered by the current TPD regulations, although they can still impart a menthol flavour. The tobacco industry has launched various new accessories since the TPD implementation in 2016, many relating to filters.²⁸³²⁹⁵ Imperial launched menthol roll your own (RYO) filter tips in mid-2017.²⁹⁶ In January 2019, it launched a filter tip with a capsule, called “Polar Blast”.²⁹⁷

It originally appeared that new filter tips might be an attempt to encourage menthol cigarette smokers to switch to RYO rather than quit. However, IMB introduced a product which enabled it to circumvent the EU ban on pre-inserted flavour capsules in factory made cigarettes. In January 2019, Imperial launched the L&B Blue Bright Air Filter with a recess in the filter and a firm filter structure.²⁹⁸ Although the launch announcement did not mention it, this filter structure allows a menthol filter tip – designed for RYO – to be inserted.²⁹⁹

Independent company Republic Technologies, which specialises in RYO accessories, also introduced a new menthol filter tip under its Swan brand.³⁰⁰ (Republic Technologies bought Swedish Match UK in 2008, but does not sell tobacco).³⁰¹ These have been advertised with Imperial’s L&B Blue Bright Air Filter cigarettes.²⁹⁹

Packets of flavour capsules are now being advertised to buy separately to be poked into the cigarette filter before combustion in websites targeted at Poland.³⁰²

Figure 3: Imperial’s Rizla menthol “infusion” cards (source: conveniencestore.co.uk)³⁰³

Strips of cardboard, known as flavour cards, add flavour to cigarettes when they are added to a pack.  A Finnish firm ‘Frizc’ sells menthol, lime, liquorice and raspberry flavoured cards in Estonia.³⁰⁴  The company website states that the packs (which appeared on the market in May 2020) can be used to flavour tea, coffee and oatflakes but do not mention tobacco. However, they are sized exactly for a cigarette pack and retailers can recommend them to smokers.³⁰⁴

In January 2020, the launch of Imperial’s “Flavour Infusion cards” in two flavours: “menthol chill” and “fresh mint” was announced (Figure 3).³⁰⁵ These cards impart a menthol flavour into factory made cigarettes or RYO tobacco if inserted into product packs.³⁰⁶  Imperial stated it was selling 900,000 packs of flavour cards a week by mid-2021.³⁰⁷

The point of sale display ban exempts tobacco accessories (including branding) in England and Wales but in Scotland accessories must be hidden like other tobacco products.³⁰⁸ Imperial have made use of the exemption in England and Wales to recommend that flavour infusion cards are promoted in point of sale displays.³⁰⁶³⁰⁹ Imperial reported selling 900,000 a week in July 2021.³¹⁰ Swan, an accessories manufacturer had also launched flavour cards by mid-2021.³¹⁰ In July 2021, the UK tobacco accessories market was reported to be worth UK£314 million.³¹⁰

Menthol and other flavour sprays, stones and drops have been developed for soaking filters or cards, and are on sale in the EU,²⁶⁹³¹¹ and the UK ³¹²³¹³

Exploiting the term ‘characterising flavours’

The TPD regulations state that:²⁶¹

“characterising flavour” means a smell or taste other than one of tobacco which—
(a) is clearly noticeable before or during consumption of the product; and
(b) results from an additive or a combination of additives, including, but not limited to, fruit, spice, herbs, alcohol, candy, menthol or vanilla”

In November 2020, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, working with the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) reported uncertainty and confusion in multiple European countries as to the level of menthol flavouring present in cigarettes that could be considered to be characterising.²⁷⁹³¹⁴ They presented evidence that the term ‘characterising’ was used after lobbying from the tobacco industry.²⁷⁹ Public health NGO Comité National Contre le Tabagisme (CNTC) accuses tobacco companies of exploiting the ambiguity around the definition of the term ‘characterising’.²⁶⁹

Determining whether a product has a characterising flavour is difficult. The EU took nearly five years to put a methodology in place; a combination of sensory panels and chemical analyses.²⁶⁵³¹⁴ Slow development of testing, and a lack of firm action, has left a regulatory vacuum for the tobacco industry to exploit. JTI launched products which, when challenged, it claimed did not have a characterising flavour.³¹⁴ The company later changed direction, saying it was able to sell these products because there was no way at the time to test for a characterising flavour.³¹⁴ Other tobacco companies and health campaigners have claimed that these new products do have flavours that would be characterising.³¹⁵ The Direction Générale de la Santé (DGS, the French ministry of health) was reported to be investigating over 300 products suspected of containing prohibited flavours.²⁶⁹ Sweden referred 21 JTI cigarette varieties to the European Commission to test for characterising flavour in June 2020.  In late 2021, the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities (the successor to Public Health England) was reported to be testing products from several manufacturers.³¹⁴

UK

In the UK products began to be released at an early stage. In late March 2020, JTI promoted new ‘dual’ cigarette products with new blends, filters and two sections of 10 cigarettes, to appeal to menthol smokers looking for new products.³¹⁶³¹⁷ However it was unclear what these new ‘blends’ entailed.

JTI also developed a range of “Green” and “Blue” product variations under the same brand names as their menthol cigarettes.³¹⁸ The Sun newspaper reported that these products tasted and smelled like menthol, without containing the substance.³¹⁸ Scottish Local Retailer published a dedicated  publication for UK retailers in conjunction in conjunction with JTI, called “Making A Mint”, which detailed alternative products including cigarettes made with “distinctive blends” of tobacco but did not mention helping smokers quit; it did recommend selling cigarettes at low prices.(Figure 4 )³¹⁹ These new cigarettes were promoted under the logo “menthol reimagined”, alongside  JTI’s newer nicotine and tobacco products (so called “Next Generation Products”).³¹⁹ (Imperial Tobacco promoted its e-cigarette blu in this publication.³¹⁹ See below for more on tobacco companies promoting newer products as menthol alternatives). JTI also ran an online training course for retailers, which featured their new cigarettes as direct replacements for existing menthol brands.³¹⁸

Figure 4: Page from retail publication showing JTI’s alternative cigarettes post-ban.(Source: Scottish Local Retailer/Japan Tobacco International, Making a Mint 2020, PDF supplied by Action on Smoking and Health)

A week before the May ban, Imperial Tobacco announced the launch of new “smooth” variants of their non-menthol brands, called “Bright” and “Green Filter”. The company said this was to “help retailers cater for their menthol and crushball customers when the ban comes into effect, by offering them new innovations from their brands of choice”.³²⁰ Imperial also said its research showed that 82% of menthol and crushball smokers would continue to smoke their usual cigarette brand despite reduced levels of menthol, and 70% percent were “expected to switch to a smooth or full flavour variant”.³²⁰

Better Retailing reported that, according to information from UK wholesalers, tobacco companies had between them created 29 new product lines to replace menthol products due to be banned, which was confusing for customers.³²¹ While colour and branding can be used to promote products to retailers, cigarettes can only be sold in plain packs, and so the only noticeable difference for the customer with these new products would be a slight change of brand variant name.

Ireland

The Irish Times reported that JTI were selling a “green” version of their Silk Cut cigarette brand. JTI argued that this product complied with the ban, even though the company admitted that it used menthol flavouring in its manufacture.³²² According to the newspaper, JTI stated that they: “conduct robust internal testing processes to determine that the use of flavourings in our products does not produce a clearly noticeable smell or taste other than one of tobacco.”³²² BAT accused JTI of using the same tactic in France, with new versions of its Camel and Winston brands, to which JTI issued a similar denial.³²³

The Irish Times also reported that PML was advertising a new cigarette in the retail press. Called “Marlboro Bright“, it was described by PMI as a “the Marlboro menthol blend – without methylation”.³²²³²⁴ PMI later said that this advertisement was a “mistake” and it should have used the phrase “without menthol” rather than “methylation”.³²⁴ The company insisted that it had “delisted all menthol cigarettes in the UK and Ireland – all of our cigarettes remaining on the market, including our latest variant Marlboro Bright, do not have any menthol in them and are in full compliance with the law”.³²⁵

BAT also developed new variations under its Pall Mall, Vogue and Rothmans brands which included new blends and changes to filters “providing meaningful differentiation for adult smokers who previously preferred menthol.”^326327328 A representative of BAT (P.J.Carroll) in Ireland said that it was “not launching any cigarette brands or accessories with menthol-type properties”.³²²

These attempts to adapt products were criticised by the Irish government with a spokesperson stating that the Health Minister believed the issue “should be dealt with at EU level”.³²²

Similar tactics from BAT, PMI and JTI have been noted in the following EU member states: France, Germany, Belgium, Spain, Denmark and Ireland ²⁶⁹, Austria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary,  Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden ³¹⁵

In 2020, JTI’s brands in France,²⁶⁹ and Ireland ³²⁹ had high sales, suggesting this has been a successful strategy for the tobacco industry.

New ‘cig-alike’ cigarillos

The only part of standardised packs legislation applicable to cigars and cigarillos was a larger health warning; legislation on branding, minimum pack size, and flavourings does not apply. Tobacco companies developed new product variations and promoted these products in the retail press.²⁸³ From 2020, JTI and/or Landwyck cigarette-like cigarillos were launched in France, Germany, Belgium, Spain, Denmark, Ireland, Romania, Netherlands, Poland and the UK.²⁶⁹

Figure 5: JTI’s Sterling Dual menthol cigarillo (Source: talkingretail.com)³³⁰

Japan Tobacco International 

Stirling Dual Capsules are cigarette-like cigarillos with mentholated tobacco launched in the UK by JTI in early 2020 (figure 5).³³⁰ The product contains  a capsule filter which releases a peppermint flavour on crushing.³³¹ Stirling is one of JTI’s most popular cigarette brands, which already included capsule options.  The cigarillos were legally allowed to be sold in 10 packs making them  approximately half the price of the cheapest cigarette packs on the UK market. Marketing to retailers framed them as an option to circumvent the menthol ban.²⁷⁷²⁹³ Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) described this as a “cynical” move on the part of JTI, saying that its new cigarillo was essentially “a cigarette wrapped in tobacco leaf”.²⁹⁴ JTI, quoted in retail magazine The Scottish Grocer, said that it was “committed to providing retailers with as much choice as possible by launching innovative new products that respond to current trends”.³³²

These cigarillos won retail industry awards and were described as having “a strong performance” and JTI released a 20 stick version in early 2021.³³¹ In the second half of 2020, over 45% of cigar sales recorded by the Retail Data Partnership were Sterling Dual Capsule cigarillos.³¹⁴

Scandinavian Tobacco Group

The Scandinavian Tobacco Group, a cigar specialist, launched Signature Dual in February 2020.³⁰⁰³³³ This is a menthol capsule cigarillo, similar to JTI’s Sterling Dual Capsule.

Imperial Brands

In August 2020, Imperial Brands (previously Imperial Tobacco) added a 10-pack of menthol crushball cigarillos to its JPS Players range, with a price comparable to JTI’s product. Imperial’s UK market manager said that this product would: “help bridge the gap left by the ban”.³³⁴³³⁵

Impact of new cigarillo variants

According to Euromonitor data, the UK cigarillo market was in decline until the TPD came into force in 2016, but it is now growing. Euromonitor forecasts sales of cigarillos will carry on rising, whereas cigar sales will remain in long term decline.³³⁶³³⁷

Promoted newer products through menthol ban websites

Tobacco companies used harm reduction as a strategy to achieve their business objectives. In advance of the menthol ban in the UK, they promoted their newer nicotine and tobacco products (heated tobacco products, e-cigarettes and nicotine pouches).

As the UK does not allow open promotion and display of tobacco products, tobacco companies created websites and pages specifically to provide information about the ban to retailers and consumers, in addition to articles in the retail press.^287288337338 Although they are apparently set up to provide information, these websites also help companies to capitalise on the upcoming ban by promoting their newer products.³¹⁷ These include heated tobacco products (HTPs) such as PMI’s IQOS and its HEETS tobacco sticks, to which the ban did not  apply.³⁰⁰²⁸⁹

• For details, see: Promotion of Newer Products Around The UK Menthol Ban

What Next for Menthol in Europe?

Despite industry efforts to boost menthol sales, the upcoming ban appeared to be having an impact on UK smokers’ buying habits, as sales of menthol cigarettes fell in the months before it came into effect. For details see Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco – Do Bans Work.

UK: arguments for retrenchment

Since the EU 2016 TPD came into force, the UK has left the EU (known as Brexit).  Twitter activity and some media reports suggested Brexit could be an opportunity to repeal the menthol ban. ³³⁹³⁴⁰ It is not clear whether the tobacco industry intends to lobby to roll back this legislation after the transition period. However, traditionally the UK has gone beyond EU requirements regarding tobacco control, so repealing would require a change in political consensus.³⁴¹ In July 2020, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care confirmed that “As the ban is part of United Kingdom legislation, it will remain in place when the UK exits the transition period with the European Union”.³⁴²

The UK did not replicate the 2023 EU ban on flavoured heated tobacco products (see below).

Finland: going beyond the TPD

Finland aims to end the use of tobacco and other nicotine products by 2030.  Policy makers have interpreted the 2016 TPD flavour ban as also applying to e-cigarette liquids.³⁴³ There have been court cases in Finland as shops have been selling flavourings labelled for food use, but which have not been tested for possible toxicity when heated and inhaled.  These flavourings are labelled for use with e-cigarettes (vaping) in other countries.  Finnish researchers have called for the EU to reconsider regulation, product notification and prohibition of e-cigarette flavours.³⁴³

Revision of the 2014 TPD

The TPD is under revision, in both the EU and the UK, as scheduled in the legislation. Tobacco industry activity implies that current regulation should be tightened to:³⁴⁴

• remove the loopholes around characterising flavour by banning menthol as an ingredient;
• extend the ban to all tobacco products, especially cigarillos and other products that are mimicking or replacing cigarettes; and
• consider whether to broaden regulations to include heated tobacco sticks, e-liquids and other new products

As essentially a cigarette wrapped in brown leaf rather than white paper, cigarillos are likely to be very attractive to the tobacco industry; not only are they currently exempt from EU and UK standardised packs legislation, but they are also subject to lower taxes.²⁸³²⁷⁷ It has also been recommended that the ban is extended to waterpipe where flavours are a key attraction and young people, and some European populations have a particularly high level of use.³⁴⁵

Extending the ban to accessories could be more difficult given their variety, but there are already a bans on  their display at point of sale in Denmark and Scotland.³⁴⁶³⁴⁷ Some accessories such as cigarette filters, where the tobacco industry has made false health claims, could themselves be banned completely.²⁹⁵

Tobacco industry strategies during revision development

Reinskje Talhoot from the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, (Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu, RIVM) in the Netherlands stated that the tobacco industry has been focussing on the toxicity of tobacco additives like menthol. There is little evidence of toxicity and this helps draws attention away from studies that show that menthol encourages young smokers to continue smoking.²⁶⁴

From May 2020, manufacturers were required to disclose additives in tobacco products and additional information about the harmful and addictive effects of 15 priority additives including menthol.  The EU Commission asked an independent group of experts, called WP9 and led by RIVM, to assess the research reports.²⁶⁴ WP9 concluded that there was strong independent evidence that low amounts of menthol (which would be insufficient to make a characterising flavour) still facilitates smoke inhalation making smoking easier for novice (new) smokers.²⁶⁴ WP9 noted that tobacco industry reports did not come to the same conclusion because they left out some independent studies. There were also limitations in the research methods and statistical analyses.²⁶⁴ WP9 therefore concluded that the industry reports were unreliable and should not be used to guide EU member states’ policies. WP9 instead advises that menthol in cigarettes should be banned completely.²⁶⁴

EU ban on flavoured heated tobacco products

Heated tobacco products (HTPs) were exempted from the flavour ban. However, the Commission published a report in June 2022 which found that the sales of HTPs had increased by more than 10% (by volume) in 10 member countries, and were making up over 3% of total tobacco product sales.³⁴⁸

This was classified as a “substantial change of circumstances” enabling the Commission to propose a ban on flavoured HTPs, as part of Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan.^{349350 351} The Commissioner for Health and Food Safety, Stella Kyriakides, said:

“With nine out of ten lung cancers caused by tobacco, we want to make smoking as unattractive as possible to protect the health of our citizens and save lives. Stronger actions to reduce tobacco consumption, stricter enforcement and keeping pace with new developments to address the endless flow of new products entering the market – particularly important to protect younger people – is key for this. Prevention will always be better than cure.”³⁴⁹

After a period of scrutiny, a Delegated Directive was published in November 2022 and entered into force the same month, which banned HTPs with a characterising flavour in any of their components (referring to components closes a potential loophole for flavoured accessories).³⁵²³⁵³ EU member countries were required to adopt national laws by 23 July 2023, and enact the ban 3 months later, by 23 October.³⁵⁰ Germany was the first country to pass the ban into law,³⁵⁴

Extended transition period in Italy

The directive included a 3 month transitional period.³⁵² Market analysts Tobacco Intelligence reported that Italy allowed an extended transition period to sell existing stocks of flavoured products: ³⁵³

“…manufacturers can supply these to tax warehouses until 31st December 2023, tax warehouses can provide them to retailers until 1st March 2024, and retailers can sell existing stocks.”³⁵³

Tobacco industry response

Legal challenges

In January 2023, BAT was granted permission to challenge the ban in the Irish high court (as the Republic of Ireland is part of the EU).³⁵⁵³⁵⁶ BAT stated that the ban would undermine its investment in “products with a reduced-risk profile” and have implications for public health policy.³⁵⁵ In March, Philip Morris Group was given permission to join the legal challenge. Philip Morris did not market HTPs in Ireland at the time, but said it intended to do so.³⁵⁷  In October 2023, media reported that the case had been referred to the European Court of Justice, with the tobacco companies accusing the EU of regulatory ‘overreach’.^358359360

Promoted purchases in countries where flavoured HTP sticks continued to be legal

On its website PMI stated that Northern Ireland was affected by the ban, but not the rest of the UK.³⁶¹ It noted that as the ban was on sales, not use,  “[a]dult users may still be able to buy heated tobacco products with a characterising flavour abroad and use them in the EU.”³⁶²

Tobacco industry journal Tobacco Journal International also highlighted the potential for cross-border purchasing of flavoured products from neighbouring countries without a ban in place.³⁶³

Launched new nicotine sticks

In the months before the ban came into force, PMI and BAT launched flavoured sticks for using in HTP devices that do not contain tobacco. Instead, the sticks contain nicotine infused leaves (including rooibos tea) apparently developed in order to circumvent the HTP flavour ban.³⁶⁴³⁶⁵

For details see:

• Newer Nicotine and Tobacco Products: Philip Morris International
• Newer Nicotine and Tobacco Products: British American Tobacco.

TobaccoTactics Resources

• Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco
• Promotion of Newer Products Around The UK Menthol Ban
• EU Tobacco Products Directive Revision
• Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco in LMICs
• Product Innovation
• Newer Nicotine and Tobacco Products

Relevant Links

• STOP statement on the delayed US menthol ban and NGO-instigated legal action
• Menthol tobacco companies are exploiting loopholes in the  UK’s characterising flavours ban, S. Dance & K. Evans-Reeve, Tobacco Control blog, May 2021

TCRG Research

• Effects of and challenges to bans on menthol and other flavors in tobacco products, K. Przewoźniak, C. Kyriakos, R. Hiscock et al,  Tobacco Prevention & Cessation, 2021; 7 (November): 68, doi: 10.18332/tpc/143072
• Tobacco industry tactics to circumvent and undermine the menthol cigarette ban in the UK, R. Hiscock, K. Silver, M. Zatonski, A. Gilmore, Tobacco Control, 18 May 2020, doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2020-055769
• Cigarette-like cigarillo introduced to bypass taxation, standardised packaging, minimum pack sizes, and menthol ban in the UK, J. Branston J, R. Hiscock, K. Silver, D. Arnott, A. Gilmore, Tobacco Control, Online First, 26 August 2020, doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2020-055700
• A prospective longitudinal study of tobacco company adaptation to standardised packaging in the UK: identifying circumventions and closing loopholes, K. Evans-Reeves, R. Hiscock, K. Lauber K, J. Branston, A. Gilmore, BMJ Open, 2019;9:e028506, doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028506
• Standardised packaging, Minimum Excise Tax, and RYO focussed tax rise implications for UK tobacco pricing, R. Hiscock, N. Augustin, J. Branston, A. Gilmore, PloS one, February 2020, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0228069

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

References