ofthesituationincertaincountries,e.g.theUK,whereitaccountsfor80oftotalciga- rettesmuggling
[79] .Thissmugglingbeneitsfromtransittradebecausetaxisnotpaidin
thetransitcountryontheassumptionthatthegoodsarebeingtransportedonwards.Within theEU,BelgiumportofAntwerpisthemostimportantreceivingcentreforcigarettes
from the USA and Brazil where Philip Morris and BAT have built cigarette factories Fig.
13.8
[80] .Excludingthoseintendedforduty-freeshops,thesecigarettesaredestined
fortheThirdWorld.Hereintermediatetraderscanbuycigarettes:theestimatedtotalvalue of100,000milliontax-freecigarettesintransitisUS14,000million.Itisthesetransit
cigarettes that end up being sold illegally in Europe. Generally, the cigarettes are irst transferredfromAntwerptoSwitzerland,atwhichpointtheyareoutsideEUlaw.From
there,theyaremovedtotheCzechRepublic,HungaryoroneoftheformerSovietRepublics [81–83]
. Overthe5-yearperiodfrom1990to1995,cigarettesmugglingincreasedby73
[84] ,
asituationthatwascontributedtobythebreak-upoftheformerSovietUnion.According toreasonablyreliableestimates,303,000millioncigarettesweresmuggledinthiswayin
1997 [85,86]
.BATestimatesthatof5.4trillioncigarettessoldworldwide,6324,000 millionaredutynotpaidDNPsales
[87] .Inaddition,indevelopingcountriesinparticu-
lar,counterfeitcigarettesarebeingmanufacturedandsold,e.g.morethan50,000million inChinaeachyear
[88] .
Ithasnowbeenestablishedthatthemultinationaltobaccocompaniesselltheirciga- rettestodealers,andthere“theirresponsibilityends.”Thedealersfortheirpartallegedly
knownothingaboutthecountryofdestinationofthecigarettessoldinthisway.Sincea gap exists between import and export, the tobacco companies and the dealers really
shouldknowsomethingofthewhereaboutsofthegoods.Switzerlandmaybethoughtof asahubofthetrade:PhilipMorrisandRJReynoldshavetheirEuropeanheadquarters
there.AndintheUSA,forexample,anexecutiveofBrownandWilliamsonwasrespon- siblefortrafickingincontrabandcigarettes:thecigarettesweretransportedfromaware-
houseinAlabamatoaprivatewarehouseinLouisiana,weremarkedforoff-shorevessels andthus,weretax-freeandthensoldtoaVietnameseorganisationthatsmuggledthem
intoCanada [89]
. The scale of cigarette smuggling constitutes an enormous threat to general public
healthbecause1cigaretteconsumptionisincreasedand2governmentsaredeprived ofthousandsofmillionsofUSorintaxrevenue.Theonlypossiblecounter-strategy
dependsoninternationallyagreedsystemsforregulationandtracking,andthetobacco companiesshouldberequiredtooperatethroughtheprescribedtradechannels.Thepen-
altiesfortobaccosmugglingshouldbedramaticallyincreasedbylawandtobaccoprod- uctsshouldcarryavisiblesymboltoindicatethattaxhasbeenpaid:“Aneffectiveresponse
tosmugglingwouldbetokeeptaxeshighandcrackdownonsmuggling.Prominenttax stamps,serialnumbers,specialpackagemarkings,healthwarninglabelsinlocallan-
guagesandbettertrackingsystemsareeffectiveagainstsmuggling” [90]
.Intermediate tradersoftendealersshouldhavenoroletoplay,andthereshouldbeatotalbanon
transittradeintobaccoproducts.Inthisregard,theWorldHealthOrganizationmustbe evenmoreproactivethanitspreviousendeavourstobreaktheresistanceshownbynumer-
ousgovernmentsandbythetobaccocompaniesthemselvesInternationalFrameworkfor TobaccoControl
[91] .
13.7 Effect of Advertising Bans
Althoughtheverythoughtofadvertisingbansonitsproductsisanathematothetobacco industry,absolutebansshouldbeimposedonitsadvertising,promotionalandsponsorship
activitiesintermsof: Directandindirectadvertisingthelattercovers,forexample,Camelfootwear,Marlboro
•
leisureclothing,PeterStuyvesanttravel,etc.. Advertisinginallmediaradio,TV,press,posters,cinemaandInternetadverts,etc..
•
Financialsponsorshipfornationalandinternationalsportingandculturalevents,etc.
•
A worldwide ban on advertising which should be intensified progressively, taking
•
accountofnationalfeaturesinparticularcountries [86]
. WithinandoutsideEurope,fourcountrieshavenowintroducedgeneraladvertisingbans
ontobaccoproducts:Norway,Finland,NewZealandandFrance. Theseadvertisingbansaremoreextensivethanthe1974banimposedinGermanyon
tobaccoadvertisingonTVandradio.AstrictbanonadvertisinghasalsoexistedinPoland since1998.TheadvertisingbanintroducedinCanadahassubsequentlybeenliftedbythe
SupremeCourt,whiletheexistingbanonadvertisinginItalycannotbeassessedbecause oflackofdata
[92] .ThecontrolprogrammesdevelopedinvariousUSstates
[58] ,includ-
ingrestrictionsonoutdooradvertising [93,94]
,pointinthesamedirectionwithregardto adeclineinsmokingbehaviouramongchildren.
Communitybansonadvertisinghavealsobeenimplementedinvariouscountries,with restrictionsimposedonself-serviceoutletstoreducein-storeadvertising.Reducingcon-
sumertobaccoaccessibilityalsohastheeffectofreducingshoplifting [95]
. Bansontobaccoadvertisinginvariouscountrieshavesupportedorencouragedseveral
otherinitiatives:forexample,restrictionsonsalestominors,healtheducationandhealth campaigns,tobacco-usepreventionprogrammesforchildrenandadolescents,creationof
smoke-freezones,settingoflegallimitsfortoxicsubstancesintobaccoandpro-ratauseof tobaccotaxationrevenueforresearchandhealtheducationseeTables
13.2 and
13.3 .
Table 13.2
Relationshipsbetweenadvertisingbansindifferentcountriesandthedeclineintobacco consumption,comparedwithGermanyDwherethereisnoadvertisingban
Country Introductionof
advertisingban Referenceyear
forevaluation Reduction
inconsumption by1996
Reduction inconsumption
inGermany by1996
Norway 1.7.1975
19741975 −26
−13 Finland
1.3.1978 1977
−37 −11
NewZealand 17.12.1990
1990;forD: 19891991
−21 −14–13
France 1.1.1993
1992 −14
−4 Reductioninper-capitaconsumptionoftobaccoproductsingcigarettes,inecuttobacco,pipe
tobacco;inFrance,cigarettesonly [92]
Within15yearsfollowingthegeneralbanontobaccoadvertisingthathasexistedin Norwaysince1975,therewasadeclineinthenumberofadolescentsmokersof5–10,
dependingonagegroupandsex,withtotalsmokingprevalencereductionsof10among 16–24-year-oldmenand20amongwomenofthesameage
[96,97] .Smokingpreva-
lencealsofellamongolderpeoplewithin15years,withiguresof35formenand32 forwomenbeingreportedin1995
[98] .Overall,per-capitatobaccoconsumptionfellfrom
2,100to1,553gduringtheperiodfrom1975to1996Fig. 13.9
[99]
. InFinland,thebanwasimplementedintwophasesin1977and1994:inthesecond
considerablymorestringentphase,cigaretteadvertisementswerealsoprohibitedinfor- eignmagazines,whichareextremelypopularinFinland.Thegreatestdeclineinsmoking
prevalence was recorded among men [100]
. During the period 1978–1996, per-capita tobaccoconsumptionfellfrom2,134to1,350gFig.
13.9
[99,101] .
TheadvertisingbanintroducedinNewZealandin1990resultedinareductioninper- capitatobaccoconsumptionfrom1,957to1,553g1990vs.1996.Overthesameperiod,
thenumberofadolescentsmokersfellby1.9 [99]
. InFrance,abanontobaccoadvertisinghasbeeninplacesince1993.Within4years,
per-capitatobaccoconsumptionfellfrom2,970to1,834g;despitethisfall,noreduction insmokinghasbeenreportedamong12–18-yearoldsTable
13.3
[99] .
Country Introductionof
advertisingban Referenceyear
forevaluation Reductioninconsumptionamong
adolescentsby1996;inGermany by1993
Norway 1.7.1975
1975 −15.8boys;−15.4girls
Finland 1.3.1978
19781979 −12boys;−14girls
NewZealand 17.12.1990
1990 −2.1
France 1.1.1993
1992 Germany
– 1993
−5.4
Table 13.3
ReductioninpercentageofadolescentswhosmokedailyinivecountriesinGermany, thereferenceindexshownisthepercentageofadolescentswhosmokeregularly
[35]
Fig. 13.9
Meanper-capita consumptionoftobaccoin
eightdifferentcountries Canada,USA,Norway,
Finland,Sweden,Austria, France,Germany[D]during
theperiod1964–1990 adaptedfrom
[114]