From the Associate Editor: Most of us could definitely agree...

by

Most of us could definitely agree that rules — in theory — are in place to provide structure, organization, and general safety for the greater good, limiting the chaos that could occur if everyone behaved however they so pleased without any regard for the rights of others or the consequences of their actions. There are rules in every part of our lives ranging from informal rules such as table manners and accepted social etiquette to formal rules in the form of laws and regulations.

In practice, how much we adhere to these rules varies depending on circumstances, necessity, how formal the rule is, or even our own personal character. Some will follow the rules to a T, some will follow Gen. Douglas MacArthur’s famous words, “Rules are mostly meant to be broken…” and ‘loosely’ follow rules as convenient. While in most circumstances, particularly when it comes to government decreed laws and regulations, strict compliance would be expected with consequences for those who do not, sometimes laws and regulations leave us wondering at the logic, or lack thereof, behind them. They also make us question if such laws and regulations are meant to be beneficial to the majority of the public or if they will benefit just a small group at the expense of others. The tobacco industry certainly falls prey to laws and regulations like this time and time again.

There are plenty of examples of this. Industry veteran Dr. Iqbal Lambat describes what he calls “the perfect storm” where government regulations encroach on both consumers and manufacturers’ rights and contribute to contraband and counterfeits, all while trying to strike a balance between gaining revenue from tobacco taxes and tobacco control. In China, the world’s largest consumer of tobacco, smokers find it more and more difficult to find a place where they can smoke as stricter anti-smoking laws are implemented and punishments for violators range from fines to being put on a “trust-breaker” list and having restricted access to train tickets. Even in Shenzhen, where there is a large vape manufacturing industry, vaping in public is now a no-no. And, indoor public smoking rooms are being demolished.

Plain packaging laws along with graphic warnings came into effect in a growing number of countries after Australia initiated them in 2012, but the question remains: is plain packaging really effective in stopping people from buying cigarettes or is it simply a random way of slapping another law on tobacco that restricts tobacco companies from using some of the same marketing methods as any other legal product?

This is not to say tobacco and vape products should not be regulated. They absolutely should, at the very least to ensure quality standards, industry best practices, and safe products for consumers. China’s recently-released draft measures for e-cigarettes, for example, should help achieve this and provide clarity and direction for the industry moving forward, something the industry tried to achieve for years. The Philippines’ vape bill is another example of a government trying to strike a balance between regulating vapes to maximize the benefits (such as providing a safer alternative to smokers and additional tax revenue) without over-regulating or stigmatizing them. 

So, what awaits the industry in the future? The way things play out so far makes it more likely that tobacco will keep getting overregulated to the point where the industry may very well sink under the weight of cumbersome, myopic legislation, depriving the very governments and politicians who caused this demise of tens of billions of dollars in tariffs and taxes that they count on every year in order to implement dozens of other programs. As is often the case, this road to hell may once again be paved with good intentions.