Reason Foundation

Background

The Reason Foundation is an American think tank which describes its mission as “advancing a free society by developing, applying, and promoting libertarian principles, including individual liberty, free markets, and the rule of law”. It’s states that it aims to “change the way people think about issues, and promote policies that allow and encourage individuals and voluntary institutions to flourish”. It also identifies itself as an institution that engages in policy research.¹

Relationship with the Tobacco Industry

Tobacco industry funding

The Reason Foundation has accepted funding from Altria since 2011.²³⁴

It reported receiving contributions worth close to US$14 million in its 2021 financial statements, however, no funders were named.⁵

Historical industry funding

• The 1981/1982 Annual Report of the Reason Foundation listed Brown & Williamson Tobacco, a subsidiary of British American Tobacco, as a “Contributor”.⁶
• Philip Morris USA’s 1993 contribution report disclosed contributing $10,000 to the Reason Foundation in 1993, and $40,000 in the previous year as “General Support”.⁷
• Philip Morris USA also reported contributions of $20,000 in 2000, with a similar sum proposed for the following year.⁸

Communicating Pro-Tobacco Messages

The think tank has a number of different communication channels, namely, Reason magazine, a blog and a TV channel. Each of these channels has promoted anti-regulation messages in relation to tobacco tax measures, plain packaging, regulations to control e-cigarette use and menthol bans.⁹

There has also been repeated criticism of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) and its approach to harm reduction.¹⁰¹¹¹²

Interference at COP

The FCTC Conference of the Parties (COP) is the governing body which keeps the implementation of the FCTC under review.¹³

COP7

In September 2016, a few weeks before COP7, Julian Morris, the Reason Foundation’s Vice President of Research, authored a policy brief in which he argued that the World Health Organization’s (WHO) opposition to tobacco harm reduction was a threat to public health. He accused the FCTC of being a threat to good governance and transparency, because the two preceding COPs in 2012 and 2014 did not allow the participation of the “affected”, namely, tobacco users, vendors, and farmers. According to Morris, the WHO ought to be in favour of e-cigarettes and harm reduction.¹⁴

COP9

In February 2021, the UK All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Vaping, set up an inquiry into COP 9 “to collect evidence and issue a report on the FCTC’s Conference of Parties 9”.¹⁵ Guy Bentley, director of Consumer Freedom at the Reason Foundation,¹⁶ made a submission to the inquiry which supported the use of “reduced-risk nicotine products” and criticised the FCTC for a lack of focus on harm reduction strategies.¹⁷

It also argued that “As a consequence of sidelining harm reduction strategies and limiting input for evidence and guidance, the FCTC has failed to achieve its aim of reducing tobacco use”, and that there was a lack of diversity in voices heard around harm reduction.¹⁷

• See the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Vaping page for more information on the inquiry and associated consultation report.

Tobacco Tax

The Reason Foundation has regularly argued against tobacco tax increases in the United States (US), using common industry arguments.

In 2021, it spoke out against proposed federal tobacco and nicotine product tax increases, stating that “high taxes don’t push most smokers to quit” and that the changes would unfairly impact low and middle-income Americans. It also argued that tax increases could fuel tobacco smuggling, threaten community safety, and lead to job losses among retailers.¹⁸¹⁹

Prior to this, the Reason Foundation strongly opposed proposed tobacco tax increases in three states in the US in 2016, arguing that the government was making money at the expense of smokers.²⁰²¹²² It engaged in a similar campaign in 2014, claiming that in Canada, increased tobacco tax led to an increase in the illicit tobacco trade.²³

Newer nicotine and tobacco products

The Reason Foundation has argued that increased regulations around the sale and use of e-cigarettes would harm public health.²⁴²⁵²⁶ It has also opposed tax increases on e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products (HTPs), arguing that they would be highly regressive and have a devastating impact on public health.²⁷

The Reason Foundation has published articles supporting the use of HTPs, including PMI’s IQOS.²⁸²⁹ It has also stated “This harm-reduction approach offers a win-win whereby businesses and jobs are created and thrive by making it as enjoyable as possible for people to quit smoking”.³⁰

Menthol and flavoured tobacco products

The Reason Foundation has regularly opposed banning the use of menthol as a characterizing flavour in cigarettes in the US, again using common industry arguments.

In July 2022, it submitted a public comment to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) arguing that the proposed US-wide ban³¹ “will not present significant public health benefits” and “prohibition will result in a host of unintended consequences, including increased tobacco smuggling, burdens on law enforcement, and more frequent interactions between law enforcement and minority communities”.⁹

It has also published several articles opposing the ban, regularly using the arguments that it would create an illicit market that would disproportionally effect black people,³²³³ and that the federal government was denying their “moral agency”.³⁴

In February 2023, Reason Foundation policy analyst, Jacob James Rich, published a non peer-reviewed analysis of cigarette sales in Massachusetts, following the state’s ban on the sale of flavoured tobacco products, including menthol cigarettes, in 2020.³⁵³⁶ This paper stated that as a result of the law, an increase in cigarettes sales was seen in the states boarding Massachusetts, outweighing the sales decline of menthol cigarettes in Massachusetts. However, research has shown that most neighbouring states did not see increases in overall tobacco sales;³⁷ any increases that were seen, were not statistically significant;³⁸ and the decline in cigarette sales in Massachusetts greatly outweighed any increase in bordering states.³⁹⁴⁰

An associated commentary article published by the Reason Foundation also stated that the ban “primarily sent buyers to other states and illicit markets, so other cities and states should consider the real-world impacts of implementing similar prohibitions”. However, evidence of an increase in illicit trade is not provided.⁴¹ Academic research shows that menthol bans are effective public health measures, and there is little evidence that they increase illicit trade.

The Reason Foundation has spoken out against other US state flavoured tobacco product bans, including those proposed in Denver,⁴² Colorado⁴³ and New York.⁴⁴

• For more information see Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco and Flavoured and Menthol Tobacco in the US

Plain Packaging

The Reason Foundation has spoken out against plain packaging, claiming that the policy would not stop smokers from smoking.⁴⁵

Staff with tobacco industry links

The Reason Foundation provides a list of its staff on its website.⁴⁶ The following staff member has a history of tobacco industry engagement:

• Jacob Sullum, Senior Editor of Reason Magazine, has been a member of the Foundation since the late 1980s. He published many books, articles and reports favourable to the tobacco industry and was featured in a tobacco industry-led campaign against second hand smoking regulations.^474849505152

• Guy Bentley, Director of Consumer Freedom, and Editor of the Reason Foundation’s Harm Reduction Newsletter, previously contributed to a report on “sin taxes” by the Adam Smith Institute (ASI).¹⁶ ASI has a history of accepting funding from the tobacco industry.

TobaccoTactics Resources

• Plain Packaging in the UK: Tobacco Industry Built Alliances
• Third Party Techniques
• Atlas Network

Relevant Link

• Reason Foundation website