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
Institute of Public Affairs diversity". In 2006, the IPA predicted that banning smoking in public places would increase the risk of passive smoking as smokers moved to private areas indoors, that illegal garage bars may be set up and that without cigarette smoke nightclubs would have to "deodorise sweat and flatulence" with scented smoke. In 2010, the IPA argued against the Gillard Government's plans to introduce plain tobacco packaging, criticising it on the grounds that plain packaging may not affect the consumption of those products and that plain packaging may infringe intellectual property rights in tobacco trademarks and logos. If so, it would represent