Plain tobacco packaging protection, and have since been publicly refuted by customs officials, and the report itself indicated that it had relied extensively on unaudited figures supplied by the tobacco industry itself. In June 2011, Imperial Tobacco Australia launched a secondary media campaign, deriding plain packaging legislation as part of a Nanny state. In June 2011, Philip Morris International announced it was using the provisions in a Hong Kong/Australia treaty to demand compensation for Australia's plain packaging anti-smoking legislation. As a US-based company, Philip Morris could not sue under the US-Australia Free Trade Agreement. The company rearranged its assets to become a Hong
Plain tobacco packaging to drive down demand of tobacco products. A 2013 review found that plain packaging increased the importance of health warnings to consumers. Plain packaging in a darker colour was associated with more harmful effects. Furthermore, plain packaging reduced confusion about health warnings. Plain packaging with large, graphic, warnings, was considered to impact on smoking cessation. There is little evidence yet as to what effect plain packaging will have on smoking in lower-income countries. Advertisement companies and consultants for the tobacco industry expressed concerns that plain cigarette packaging may establish a precedent for application in other industries. In 2012, correspondence between