Britain, France and Hungary have since announced plans to follow Australia's lead
As Australia is the only country to have implemented the laws, real-world evidence on plain packaging is limited
These include the chemicals used in tobacco leaf preparation, metals to help manufacture and ship the cigarette-making machines, and energy from coal or gas to manufacture and distribute products
Australia argued that its objective was to reduc[e] smoking rates in Australia by reducing the appeal of tobacco products, increasing the effectiveness of graphic health warnings, and reducing the ability of packages to mislead consumers about the harms of smoking.[7] The complainants attempted to define Australias objective narrowly as reducing smoking prevalence.[8] The panel found the objective to be related to the protection of human health, in particular to improve public health by reducing the use of, and exposure to, tobacco products.[9] The panel also found that Australias objective was legitimate.[10] Viewing Australias public health objective broadly was a pivotal decision that effected the panels other findings
The first statutory tobacco duty regime in modern times dates to the Finance Act 1976, which imposed excise duties on cigarettes, cigars, hand-rolling tobacco and other tobacco products
