For
Immediate Release
December 22, 2006 |
Media
Contact:
Kevin Enright
410-576-6357
|
CURRAN ANNOUNCES MARYLAND TO RECEIVE $1.2 MILLION
FROM $55.4 MILLION IN TOBACCO SETTLEMENT
Maryland Attorney General J. Joseph Curran announced today that
Maryland received $1.2 million under a $55.4 million settlement
reached with House of Prince A/S and Scandinavian Tobacco, S.I.A.
to resolve a dispute over enforcement of the 1998 Master Settlement
Agreement (MSA).
“The MSA is primarily a public health agreement; and when
Maryland is owed money under this agreement, we will aggressively
pursue these types of disputes,” said Attorney General Curran. “As
advocates for the public interest, we believe it is important enforce
all provisions of the MSA to help reduce tobacco use and protect
consumers from its deadly consequences.”
The MSA requires tobacco manufacturers that signed the agreement
to make annual payments to the states, in part to compensate the
states for billions of dollars in health care costs associated
with treating tobacco-related diseases under state Medicaid programs.
House of Prince is a Participating Manufacturer under the MSA,
and Scandinavian Tobacco is an affiliated entity.
The settlement resolved a three -year court dispute
over whether cigarettes manufactured by Scandinavian Tobacco
and sold in the
United States from 1999-2003 were subject to the MSA’s payment
requirements and other obligations. No cigarettes manufactured
by Scandinavian Tobacco have been sold in the United States since
2003.
The State of California filed a lawsuit in February
2003 to force House of Prince to make MSA payments for Scandinavian
Tobacco’s
cigarettes. Assisted by other states, California won preliminary
legal skirmishes. House of Prince subsequently entered settlement
discussions that produced a national agreement with all jurisdictions
that signed the MSA – 46 states, four territories, Puerto
Rico and Washington D.C.
Aside from its payment provisions, the MSA created a broad array
of restrictions on the advertising, marketing and promotion of
cigarettes. For example, it prohibits the targeting of youth in
cigarette advertising. It also restricts outdoor advertising of
cigarettes, the advertising of cigarettes in public transit facilities,
and the use of cigarette brand names on merchandise, among other
limitations.
|