Search

Background: Monitoring tobacco control policy implementation is one of the keys for tobacco consumption reduction in Latin America (LA). This study reports on the adaptation of the Tobacco Control Scale (TCS) for use in LA countries and the level of tobacco control policy implementation in this region according to the scale., Methods: Ecological cross-sectional survey. The questionnaire to measure tobacco control policies was a translated (into Spanish and Portuguese) and adapted version of the last TCS as used in Europe. The resulting TCS-LA maintains the same structure as the original TCS, with eight policy domains and 100 points (pts) as maximum score; however, four policy domains were adapted because the exact same rationale could not be applied. At least two non-governmental tobacco control experts were contacted per country to answer the TCS-LA., Results: Informants from 17 out of 18 countries completed the questionnaire. Using the TCS-LA, Panama (70 pts), Uruguay (68 pts) and Ecuador (61 pts) exhibited the strongest tobacco control policies, while Guatemala (32 pts), Bolivia (30 pts) and Dominican Republic (29 pts) have implemented a lower number of tobacco control policies. Eight countries reached 50% of the TCS-LA total possible score, indicating a relatively good implementation level of tobacco control policies., Conclusions: Panama, Uruguay and Ecuador are the tobacco control policy leaders in LA; however, tobacco control in the region has room for improvement since nine countries have a total score under 50 pts. The TCS is a feasible and adaptable tool to monitor tobacco control in other WHO regions beyond Europe., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Tobacco use is still highly prevalent in Europe, despite the tobacco control efforts made by the governments. The development of tobacco control policies varies substantially across countries. The Tobacco Control Scale (TCS) was introduced to quantify the implementation of tobacco control policies across European countries OBJECTIVE: To assess the midterm association of tobacco control policies on smoking prevalence and quit ratios among 27 European Union (EU) Member States (EU27)., Methods: Ecological study. We used the TCS in EU27 in 2007 and the prevalence of tobacco and quit ratios data from the Eurobarometer survey (2006 (n=27 585) and 2014 (n=26 793)). We analysed the relationship between the TCS scores and smoking prevalence and quit ratios and their relative changes (between 2006 and 2014) by means of scatter plots and multiple linear regression models., Results: In EU27, countries with higher scores in the TCS, which indicates higher tobacco control efforts, have lower prevalence of smokers, higher quit ratios and higher relative decreases in their prevalence rates of smokers over the last decade. The correlation between TCS scores and smoking prevalence (r sp =-0.444; P=0.02) and between the relative changes in smoking prevalence (r sp =-0.415; P=0.03) was negative. A positive correlation was observed between TCS scores and quit ratios (r sp =0.373; P=0.06). The percentage of smoking prevalence explained by all TCS components was 28.9%., Conclusion: EU27 should continue implementing comprehensive tobacco control policies as they are key for reducing the prevalence of smoking and an increase tobacco cessation rates in their population., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2019. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

To address the illicit cigarette trade, the European Union (EU) has signed agreements with the four major Transnational Tobacco Companies (TTCs) that involve establishing extensive systems of cooperation. All agreements foresee two types of payments: annual payments (totalling US$ 1.9 billion over 20 years) and supplementary seizure payments, equivalent to 100% of the evaded taxes in the event of seizures of their products. While limited by the fundamental lack of transparency in this area, our analysis suggests that these agreements have served largely to secure the TTCs' interests and are threatening progress in tobacco control. The seizure payments are paltry and a wholly inadequate deterrent to TTC involvement in illicit trade. Despite the agreements, growing evidence indicates the TTCs remain involved in the illicit trade or are at best failing to secure their supply chains as required by the agreements. The intention of the seizure-based payments to deter the tobacco industry from further involvement in the illicit cigarette trade has failed because the agreements contain too many loopholes that provide TTCs with both the incentive and opportunity to classify seized cigarettes as counterfeit. In addition, the shifting nature of cigarette smuggling from larger to smaller consignments often results in seizures that are too small to qualify for the payments. Consequently, the seizure payments represent a tiny fraction of the revenue lost from cigarette smuggling, between 2004 and 2012, 0.08% of the estimated losses due to illicit cigarette trade in the EU. Our evidence suggests the EU should end these agreements., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/)

Objective: Little evidence, other than that commissioned by the tobacco industry, exists on the size of the illicit tobacco trade. This study addresses this gap by examining the level and nature of illicit cigarettes and hand-rolled tobacco in 18 European countries., Design: Face-to-face cross-sectional survey on smoking., Setting: 18 European countries., Participants: For each country, around 1000 subjects representative of the population aged 15 and over were enrolled. Current cigarette smokers were asked to show their latest purchased pack of cigarettes or hand-rolled tobacco., Main Outcome Measure: A comprehensive measure called an Identification of an Illicit Pack (IIP) was used to study the extent of illicit trade, defining a pack as illicit if it had at least one of the following tax evasion indicators: (1) it was bought from illicit sources, as reported by smokers, (2) it had an inappropriate tax stamp, (3) it had an inappropriate health warning or (4) its price was substantially below the known price in their market., Results: Overall, the proportion of illicit packs was 6.5%. The highest prevalence of IIP was observed in Latvia (37.8%). Illicit packs were more frequent among less educated smokers and among those living in a country which shared a land or sea border with Ukraine, Russia, Moldova or Belarus. No significant association was found with price of cigarettes., Conclusions: This study indicates that IIP is less than 7% in Europe and suggests that the supply of illicit tobacco, rather than its price, is a key factor contributing to tax evasion., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Background: Following a legal agreement with the European Union (EU), Philip Morris International (PMI) commissions a yearly report ('Project Star', PS) on the European illicit cigarette trade from KPMG, the global accountancy firm., Methods: Review of PS 2010 report. Comparison with data from independent sources including a 2010 pan-European survey (N=18,056)., Findings: Within PS, data covering all 27 EU countries are entered into a model. While the model itself seems appropriate, concerns are identified with the methodologies underlying the data inputs and thus their quality: there is little transparency over methodologies; interview data underestimate legal non-domestic product partly by failing to account for legal cross-border sales; illicit cigarette estimates rely on tobacco industry empty pack surveys which may overestimate illicit; and there is an over-reliance on data supplied by PMI with inadequate external validation. Thus, PMI sales data are validated using PMI smoking prevalence estimates, yet PMI is unable to provide sales (shipment) data for the Greek islands and its prevalence estimates differ grossly from independent data. Consequently, comparisons with independent data suggest PS will tend to overestimate illicit cigarette levels particularly where cross-border shopping is frequent (Austria, Finland, France) and in Western compared with Eastern European countries. The model also provides data on the nature of the illicit cigarette market independent of seizure data suggesting that almost a quarter of the illicit cigarette market in 2010 comprised PMI's own brands compared with just 5% counterfeited PMI brands; a finding hidden in PMI's public representation of the data., Conclusions: PS overestimates illicit cigarette levels in some European countries and suggests PMI's supply chain control is inadequate. Its publication serves the interests of PMI over those of the EU and its member states. PS requires greater transparency, external scrutiny and use of independent data., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Background: Legal tobacco tax avoidance strategies such as cross-border cigarette purchasing may attenuate the impact of tax increases on tobacco consumption. Little is known about socioeconomic and country variations in cross-border purchasing., Objective: To describe socioeconomic and country variations in cross-border cigarette purchasing in six European countries., Methods: Cross-sectional data from adult smokers (n=7873) from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Surveys in France (2006/2007), Germany (2007), Ireland (2006), The Netherlands (2008), Scotland (2006) and the rest of the UK (2007/2008) were used. Respondents were asked whether they had bought cigarettes outside their country in the last 6 months and how often., Findings: In French and German provinces/states bordering countries with lower cigarette prices, 24% and 13% of smokers, respectively, reported purchasing cigarettes frequently outside their country. In non-border regions of France and Germany, and in Ireland, Scotland, the rest of the UK and The Netherlands, frequent purchasing of cigarettes outside the country was reported by 2-7% of smokers. Smokers with higher levels of education or income, younger smokers, daily smokers, heavier smokers and smokers not planning to quit smoking were more likely to purchase cigarettes outside their country., Conclusions: Cross-border cigarette purchasing is more common in European regions bordering countries with lower cigarette prices and is more often reported by smokers with higher education and income. Increasing taxes in countries with lower cigarette prices, and reducing the number of cigarettes that can be legally imported across borders could help to avoid cross-border purchasing.