Tobacco firms lose DOJ appeal
Upholding of 2006 ruling is a setback for the industry but there were some positives in Friday's developments...
In the original trial, prosecutors accused tobacco firms of collaborating to restrict the debate on the dangers of smoking in order to deceive the public. Friday's ruling could lead to a ban on labels such as "light," "low tar," and "mild," which imply that some products are less harmful than others. It could also allow the Department of Justice to prosecute companies that continue the unlawful practices highlighted in the case, and this could lead to financial penalties being imposed in the future.
Although the defeat in the Court of Appeals is a blow to the tobacco industry, there were some favourable elements in the ruling. The original decisions that the government could neither force the tobacco companies to repay $280 billion in profit generated from the malpractice, nor force them to fund a $10 billion smoking cessation programme, were both upheld. This piece of the ruling is important, in our view, because it reaffirms the previous decisions of several courts to avoid imposing a financial penalty so severe that the future of tobacco manufacturers as going concerns would be jeopardised. Although the original ruling ordered tobacco firms to issue statements on their Web site to inform readers of the damaging nature of their products, this requirement is unlikely to be imposed while the case is still under appeal. Altria and Reynolds American will now appeal to the US Supreme Court, and we expect the remaining defendants--Lorillard and British American Tobacco--to follow suit.
Although this ruling itself imposes no financial penalties on tobacco manufacturers, we are concerned that it could open the door to future prosecutions by the Department of Justice. However, we think we have suitably accounted for the risk of litigation in our valuation of the tobacco manufacturers, and until the magnitude of potential penalties becomes apparent, we do not intend to adjust our fair value estimates as a result of this ruling.