Justices decline to hear challenge to tobacco law

By Lawrence Hurley

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear a tobacco industry challenge to a federal law that expanded restrictions on the advertising and marketing of cigarettes.

The provisions of the 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act under attack included one requiring the display of a large health warning on packaging and another banning the sponsorship of public events.

The law also requires that before a tobacco product can be marketed, the manufacturer must prove to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration that it is less dangerous than other tobacco products. This provision is aimed at descriptive marketing terms such as “light” and “mild.”

Those challenging the provisions of the law included companies owned in part or in full by Reynolds American Inc, British American Tobacco Plc, Imperial Tobacco Group Plc and Lorillard Inc.

The companies claimed the law violates the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech, imposing “myriad restrictions on truthful, non-misleading speech to adult tobacco consumers.”

In response, the Obama administration noted in court papers that the law was specifically drafted to battle a recognized public health problem. Congress was particularly interested in restricting the marketing of cigarettes to young people, government lawyers wrote.

The Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the law in full, saying the warnings “are reasonably related to the government’s interest in preventing consumer deception.”

The case is distinct from a separate industry challenge to regulations the FDA issued to implement the graphic warning requirement. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit tossed out the regulation. The FDA is currently drafting a new one.

The case is American Snuff Company v. United States, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 12-521.

(Reporting by Lawrence Hurley; Editing by Howard Goller, Gerald E. McCormick and John Wallace)

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/fact-sheets/2012/may/tpp-tobacco-proposal 

담배 규제 예외조항(Tobacco Control Exception)에 대한 미국 무역대표부(USTR)의 입장

TPP 담배관련 건의안(TPP tobacco proposal)

배경

우리(미 무역대표부)가 협상을 시작하고 보건의료 정책 지지자들, 농부, 산업이해당사자 등에게 많은 비판을 받으면서, 오바마 행정부는 TPP 관련자들에게 조언을 구했다. 더불어 오바마 행정부는 미국 내에서 그리고 전세계적으로 지난 수년간 담배를 규제하기 위한 노력들이 점차 증가하고 있음을 알고 있다. 가족흡연예방 및 담배규제 법안(The ​Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act)은 2009년 의회에서 통과되어, 미국 식약청(FDA)이 공중보건을 사유로 담배상품을 규제할 수 있는 중요한 권한을 갖게 되었다. 이를 통해 미국 내에서 담배상품을 광고하고 판매되는 방식에 중대한 변화가 일어나게 될 것이다. 이에 우리는 TPP협상을 위한 시안(draft proposal)을 진전시키면서, 담배 규제법안(Tobacco Control Act)의 입안과 함의를 신중하게 검토하였다.

TPP 담배관련 건의안(TPP tobacco proposal)

우리는 최근 우리 건의안 시안에 대해 이해당사자들과 의회와 의논하고 있다. 아래는 최근 시안내용을 자세히 요약한 것으로, 내용에 대해 의미있는 참여(engagement)를 촉진하기 위해 준비한 것이다. 건의안 시안은 세 가지 내용으로 구성된다:

●건의안은 건강과 규제 관점에서 담배상품의 독특한 지위를 명백히 알고 있어야 한다.

●과거에 그랬듯, 건의안은 담배상품(다른 상품과 마찬가지로)이 관세의 단계적 폐지 대상이 되도록 하며, 따라서 미국 담배상품을 경쟁적 열위에 놓지 않도록 하며, 미래 미국 관세협상에서 담배나 다른 상품을 제외하는 선례를 피하고자 한다. 미국은 양자협상을 진행하고 있는 4개 국가-브루나이, 말레이시아, 뉴질랜드, 베트남-들과 관세 철폐와 관세율 쿼터제에 대한 토론에 관여하게 된다. 호주, 칠레, 페루, 싱가폴과 담배및 담배상품 무역에 대한 관세와 관세율쿼터제는 이미 폐지되었거나 이들 국가들과 진행된 기존 양자간 FTA조항에 따라 단계적으로 폐지되고 있다.

●건의안은 ‘일반 예외조항’ 장에, TPP 정부 의료당국이 공중보건을 보호하기 위해 특정 담배상품/분류에 대해 출처가 중립적이며, 과학적 근거에 기반해 제한조치를 부과하는 규제 적용을 허용한다는 표현이 들어가야 한다. 이런 표현은 담배 조치에 대한 중대한 무역규율(내국민대우, 수용보상, 투명성)을 유지하면서도 FDA의 담배규제에 대해 안전한 피난처를 만들어주게 되며, TPP의 이 조항이, FDA가 담배규제법안을 효율적으로 시행하는데 필수적인 점진적 규제활동 같은 일을 못하게 어느 정도 활용되지는 않을 거란 확실함을 더 부여하게 될 것이다. 

원문

TPP Tobacco Proposal

BACKGROUND

The Obama Administration sought input from stakeholders on TPP when we launched the negotiations and received many comments from health advocates, farmers, industry stakeholders, and others. The Administration also considered the increasing effort both in the United States and around the world over the past several years to regulate tobacco products. The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, passed by Congress in 2009, gave the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) significant new authorities to regulate tobacco products for public health reasons. This will lead to important changes in the way tobacco products are marketed and sold in the United States. We have reviewed this input and the implications of the Tobacco Control Act carefully as we have developed a draft proposal for the TPP negotiations.

TPP TOBACCO PROPOSAL

We are currently consulting with stakeholders and Congress on our draft proposal. Below is a detailed summary of the current draft proposal, which we have prepared in order to facilitate meaningful engagement on its contents. The draft proposal has three elements:

• It would explicitly recognize the unique status of tobacco products from a health and regulatory perspective.

• As in the past, the proposal would make tobacco products (like other products) subject to tariff phase-outs, thus avoiding putting U.S. tobacco products at a competitive disadvantage and avoiding a precedent for excluding tobacco or other products from future U.S. tariff negotiations. The United States will engage in discussions regarding the elimination of tariffs and tariff rate quotas with the four countries with which the United States is negotiating bilaterally—Brunei, Malaysia, New Zealand and Vietnam. Tariffs and tariff rate quotas on tobacco and tobacco product trade with Australia, Chile, Peru and Singapore have already been eliminated or are being phased out under the provisions of our existing bilateral FTAs with those countries.

• The proposal would include language in the “general exceptions” chapter that allows health authorities in TPP governments to adopt regulations that impose origin-neutral, science-based restrictions on specific tobacco products/classes in order to safeguard public health. This language will create a safe harbor for FDA tobacco regulation, providing greater certainty that the provisions in the TPP will not be used in a manner that would prevent FDA from taking the sorts of incremental regulatory actions that are necessary to effectively implement the Tobacco Control Act, while retaining important trade disciplines (national treatment, compensation for expropriations, and transparency) on tobacco measures.’