Tobacco industry manipulation of data on and press coverage of the illicit tobacco trade in the UK

Abstract

BackgroundIn the UK, transnational tobacco companies (TTCs) have been arguing that levels of illicit trade are high and increasing and will rise further if standardised packaging is implemented. This paper examines trends in and accuracy of media reporting of, and industry data on, illicit tobacco in the UK.MethodsQuantification of the volume, nature and quality of press articles citing industry data on illicit tobacco in UK newspapers from March 2008 to March 2013. Examination of published TTC data on illicit, including a comparison with independent data and of TTC reporting of Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs data on illicit.ResultsMedia stories citing industry data on illicit tobacco began in June 2011, 2 months after the Tobacco Control Plan for England, which heralded standardised packaging, was published. The majority of data cited are based on industry Empty Pack Surveys for which no methodology is available. For almost all parts of the country where repeat data were cited in press stories, they indicated an increase, often substantial, in non-domestic/illicit cigarettes that is not supported by independent data. Similarly, national data from two published industry sources show a sudden large increase in non-domestic product between 2011 and 2012. Yet the methodology of one report changes over this period and the other provides no published methodology. In contrast, independent data show steady declines in non-domestic and illicit cigarette penetration from 2006 to 2012 and either a continued decline or small increase to 2013.ConclusionsIndustry claims that use of Non-UK Duty Paid/illicit cigarettes in the UK is sharply increasing are inconsistent with historical trends and recent independent data. TTCs are exaggerating the threat of illicit tobacco by commissioning surveys whose methodology and validity remain uncertain, planting misleading stories and misquoting government data. Industry data on levels of illicit should be treated with extreme caution.

Standardized packaging and illicit tobacco use: A systematic review

“…Searches generated ten relevant empirical studies 21,30,[32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39] : three were qualitative studies (two reporting focus group research with young adult smokers in Scotland 30,32 , and in-depth interviews with retailers in New Zealand 39 ); three were content analyses (of online commentary on tobacco packaging in Australia 33 , UK press coverage of the illicit tobacco trade 34 and the four TTC submissions to the consultation in the UK 35 ); two were cross sectional surveys (of illicit tobacco use following introduction of standardized packaging in Australia) 36,37 ; and two were before and after studies (one of availability of illicit tobacco in small retail outlets 38 and one empty-pack survey before and after the introduction of standardized packaging in Australia) 21 . See Table 2 for a summary of included studies.…”

“…There were few studies examining tobacco standardized packaging and illicit trade and those that were available were generally not of high quality. We identified ten relevant empirical studies which examined standardized packaging and illicit tobacco 21,30,[32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39] . Five studies reported smokers did not intend to 30,32 or actually 21,36,37 purchase more illicit tobacco following standardized packaging although one 33 suggested a small number of responders to online news felt smokers In 179 (59%) of the shops the secret shopper then asked the retailer about the availability of unbranded, i.e.…”

“…supported by the independent data to which they were compared (HM Revenue & Customs figures and survey data from Pricing Policies and Control of Tobacco in Europe) 34 . In addition, Evans-Reeves and colleagues 35 carried out a content analysis of the four TTCs submission to the consultation on standardized packaging for relevance and quality of evidence that TTCs cited to support their arguments that "it will harm business and increase illicit trade".…”

“…Rowell et al 34 were the first to analyse tobacco industry manipulation of data on the illicit cigarette trade, in the UK press, in response to the proposal for standardized packaging. Analysis of newspaper articles covered a 5-year period, although no other forms of media were considered.…”

An analysis of purchase price of legal and illicit cigarettes in urban retail environments in 14 low‐ and middle‐income countries

“…The tobacco industry argues against many tobacco control measures, including tobacco tax increases and standardized packaging, on the basis that such initiatives increase illicit trade of tobacco products 7, 8.…”