Advisory opinion letter to Mr. Gastman

/s/ Donald L. Johnson

AVVISUNY UFLNIVINDS 1U59 Proposed advertising plan to disseminate cigarette advertisements headlining, without qualification, tar values higher than latest published FTC number disapproved. [File No. 773

7016, Lorillard, September 26, 1978 |
Advisory Opinion Letter
September 26, 1978
Dear Mr. Gastman:

This is in response to your request for an advisory opinion as to whether Lorillard may disseminate cigarette advertisements headlining, without qualification, a tar value higher than the latest published FTC number.

The Commission understands that your request was transmitted orally to a Commission staff attorney. Although requests for advice | should be submitted in writing to the Secretary of the Commission, §1.2 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, the Commission has determined to render an advisory opinion because it has sufficient information regarding the proposed course of action. Under the agreement submitted to the Commission by Lorillard and seven other cigarette companies, dated December 17, 1970, cigarette advertisements must include tar and nicotine data from Commission test results most recently published in the Federal Register, subject to certain specified exceptions necessary to meet deadlines for submission of advertising copy. Lorillard’s proposed advertisements would deviate from this industry agreement, by permitting cigarette advertisements to feature a.tar number greater than the latest FTC tar number for an indeterminate length of time. The Commission cannot give its approval to Lorillard’s proposed advertising plan. In the Commission’s view, it would be deceptive to advertise a tar figure which is higher than the latest applicable FTC tar figure. If the headlined tar level differs from the tar figure disclosed: in accordance with the cigarette industry’s voluntary disclosure agreement, consumer confusion might be generated. At the same time, the Commission could not condone the practice of utilizing a higher headlined tar figure in the voluntary disclosure and labelling the figures “By FTC Method,” since the figures would not actually be the result of the FTC method.

fi 92 F.T.C.

Therefore, in the Commission’s opinion, tar values which are set forth in cigarette advertisements must be consistent with the latest applicable FTC tar number.

By direction of the Commission.

ADVISORY OPINIONS 1037