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 trade of drastically cheaper cigarettes had significantly increased, but an article in The British Medical Journal refutes this. After one year of plain cigarette packaging rule implementation, a special supplement to the British Medical Journal described that before plain packaging implementation 20% smokers want to quit, but after implementation 27% smokers want to quit. The study found that plain packaging reduces brand appeal and brand image of tobacco products. If true, this would foretell fewer new smokers taking up the habit. An analysis of Philip Morris claims that "the data is clear that overall tobacco consumption and smoking prevalence has