Tobacco Industry response
tji-coverto plain packaging and other packaging reforms

Tobacco companies have strongly opposed proposals for plain packaging, and have adopted a strategy of focusing their concerns on intellectual property issues.

(The response of the trade journal "Tobacco Journal International" in April 2008 (shown above) is a colourful illustration of the industry's response.


See also Tobacco Control Supersite for more industry response as well as ASH Australia's site.

Industry web-sites against plain packaging.

Industry web-sites against plain packaging

Industry commissioned research:

Japan Tobacco

Analysis of Consumer Research Evidence on the Impact of Plain Packaging for Tobacco Products Prepared by:
Professor Timothy M. Devinney
November 2010

Philip Morris International

The role of packaging imagery on consumer
preferences for experience goods
A consumer behavioural experiment

London Economics

A critical review of the literature on generic packaging for cigarettes
De Jorge Padilla and Dr. Nadine Watson

Update - 2010

The impact of plain packaging of cigarettes in UK: a simulation exercise
Jorge Padilla, November 2010

The Impact of plain packaging of cigarettes in Australia: a simulation exercise
Jorge Padilla, February 2010

Lalive: Why Plain Packaging is in violation of WTO Members' International Obligations under TRIPS and the Paris Convention
July 2009

Australian companies: British American Tobacco Australia Ltd, Philip Morris Limited, Imperial Tobacco Australia Limited. AT, Philip Morris International

Illicit trade of tobacco in Australia: February 2011
February 2011

British American Tobacco

Tobacco packaging regulation. An international assessment sof the intended and unintended impacts
Deloitte. 2011

Australia's illegal tobacco market: Counting the cost of Australia's black market
Price Waterhouse Coopers, 2010

Review of industry arguments against plain packaging

phoneyclaimsPhysicians for a Smoke-Free Canada
Packaging phoney intellectual property claims. How multinational tobacco companies colluded to use trade and intellectual property arguments they knew were phoney to oppose plain packaging and larger health warnings.
Length: 48 pages
Related Website:


Response to Australian Senator Fielding's proposed law

The Australian Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee has posted submissions from all parties.  Link to their web-site by clicking here


ukproposalResponse to Plain Packaging Proposal in the United Kingdom


United Kingdom Department of Health. Consultation on the future of tobacco control

Submissions to the consultation from health community can be found on web-site of ASH UK

Industry submissions


Industry response/submissions

australiaResponse to Plain Packaging Proposal in Australia - 2008 - 2011

The proposal:
Australian Preventive Health Taskforce:
Tobacco Control in Australia. Making Smoking History.
Length: 79 Pages
Related web-site:

The 2008 response:

Industry Responses:

The 2011 response to the exposure draft and consultation paper on non-cigarette tobacco

Industry and industry-friendly responses

International health support

Response to Plain Packaging Proposal in Canada - 1994

The proposal

Standing Committee on Health Terms of Reference:
  • 1. To receive evidence and otherwise examine: a) the effectiveness of plain packaging of tobacco products In reducing both tobacco consumption and smuggling : b) the legal considerations related to plain packaging .
  • 2. To report on the findings of the enquiry and to make recommendations to the federal government.

The response:  

Response to Plain Packaging Proposal in New Zealand - 1993/94

The proposal

The response