Clear The Air News Tobacco Blog Rotating Header Image

Investments

Axa stubs out tobacco investments

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/05/23/axa-stubs-out-tobacco-investments/

Axa is giving up cigarettes, saying it “makes no sense” for the insurer to keep its €1.8bn portfolio of tobacco investments.

The French insurance group, which manages more than €1 trillion, will sell off its current tobacco shareholdings that are worth approximately €200m, while its bond portfolio worth about €1.6bn will be gradually wound down.

“This decision has a cost for us, but the case for divestment is clear: the human cost of tobacco is tragic; its economic cost is huge,” said Thomas Buberl, deputy chief executive at Axa.

“We strongly believe in the positive role insurance can play in society, and that insurers are part of the solution when it comes to health prevention to protect our clients.

Hence, it makes no sense for us to continue our investments within the tobacco industry.”

The move follow’s Axa’s decision last year to withdraw from coal assets in the face of the threats from climate change.

Ethical investing policies have prompted a number of the world’s biggest investors to blacklist industries including tobacco. Calpers, the Californian pension fund, has this year restarted a review into its 16-year ban on tobacco investments.

Norway’s sovereign wealth fund pulled out of tobacco companies in 2006, in a decision that it estimates has cost the fund $1.9bn in forgone profits.

Governments around the world are exerting pressure on tobacco firms, including in the UK, where this week plain packaging has been introduced on cigarettes in an attempt to reduce the appeal of particular brands to smokers.

However, these measures are yet to dent global earnings for the largest tobacco companies. The MSCI ACWI tobacco index, which tracks the industry across 46 countries, has delivered returns of 14.4pc over the past decade, far outperforming a 3.89pc gain in the broader MSCI share index.

A study by the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment at the University of Oxford suggested that divestment programmes risk creating “stranded assets”, such as funds that are stuck in illiquid holdings in assets such as coal after others withdraw from the industry.

They also found that share prices in fossil fuels are unlikely to suffer directly from divestment efforts, as less ethically driven investors swoop in to buy the assets being sold.

Axa’s Decision to Quit Tobacco is not as Pure as it Looks

Download (PDF, 914KB)

EELI’s Anti-EPA Suit Uses ‘Exhibit A’ from Tobacco’s RICO Loss

http://www.desmogblog.com/2016/05/19/eeli-s-anti-epa-suit-uses-exhibit-tobacco-s-rico-loss

This is a guest post by ClimateDenierRoundup cross-posted from DailyKos.

Apologies dear reader, this is a long post. It’s worth reading, though, we promise!

With few exceptions (like this weak WSJ column), the folks defending Exxon from RICO accusations focus their attention on the free speech argument and avoid the tobacco comparison. But now one of their own, Dr. James Enstrom, has provided a painfully clear connection between the beleaguered industries.

The Daily Caller carries the news that the Energy & Environment Legal Institute’s (EELI) latest attempt to waste its (probably coal) funders’ money is a lawsuit against the EPA, claiming an independent review panel for air quality regulations isn’t actually independent. Their reason is that members of the panel have received funding from the EPA for past studies.

Obviously, that’s ridiculous, since public and private funding are vastly different in terms of conflict of interest.

So what does a real conflict of interest look like? For a prime example, look no further than the plaintiffs EELI is representing: The Western States Trucking Association (WSTA) and Dr. James Enstrom.

Now, the WSTA has a legitimate stake here, as the regulation in question deals with particulate matter emissions from trucks, so the organization’s members would face a cost to upgrade their trucks to meet stricter EPA standards. Fine.

But who is Dr. James Enstrom? Oh, he’s just your run of the mill epidemiologist who took funding from tobacco giant Philip Morris and produced a study in 2003 downplaying the connection between second-hand smoke and cancer. Enstrom was such a pivotal player in the pro-smoking propaganda that when the Department of Justice wrapped up its successful RICO case against the tobacco industry, it dedicated an entire chapter to Enstrom—one of just three researchers to receive such a distinction. (H/T DeSmog)

A search of his name in the Tobacco Industry Documents database returns over 500,000 results. An LA Times article notes that Enstrom became “Exhibit A” in the fight between the tobacco industry and anti-smoking activists, a prime example of how the tobacco industry funded friendly studies for PR and lobbying purposes.

Since then, Dr. Enstrom has turned his attention to other epidemiology questions, namely the dangers from particulate matter. And who funded his work? None other than an electric utility group, which used his study to argue against stricter PM standards that would force utilities to reduce the pollution from coal plants.

So even as the fossil fuel industry fights off RICO accusations and denies the tobacco parallels, its surrogate EELI is fighting to give “Exhibit A” from the tobacco corruption case a chance to use his industry-funded science to shape the EPA’s regulations.

Though connecting the dots between tobacco corruption and fossil fuels looks like a colossal own-goal, maybe EELI isn’t as foolish as this makes them seem. After all, if the fossil fuel industry needs to defend itself from a RICO suit like the tobacco industry did, surely EELI will offer their services?

And odds are slim they’d do it pro bono…

Why I love cigarettes, even though I don’t smoke

Investing in companies that supply our bad habits has proven to be a winning theme

Have you ever thought about taking a punt on sin stocks? Perish the thought eh!

Not only are there ethical problems but also, surely, stocks like these are likely to be underperforming the market?

But what if they are doing the reverse? Take a look, for example, at tobacco shares. It is no exaggeration to say that investing in tobacco companies has been one of the most lucrative investments of recent times.

The FTSE All World Tobacco index rose 988 per cent from 2000 to last month. This compares with a rise of 131 per cent in the FTSE All World index for the same period.

This may be explained by the fact that contrary to some impressions, tobacco sales remain near their peak, mainly due to increased demand in developing countries.

If tobacco is not your thing what about another looking at Macau casino shares which peaked and crashed last year but are coming back strongly this year.

Brewery stocks are also out there on the sin list and represent quite a mystery, not least because in most developed countries beer sales have slumped while shares in breweries seem to be buoyant. So called craft beers have bucked the sales decline trend and help to explain the strength of these counters but the reality is that craft sales remain a niche within the portfolios of the big brewers.

Away from the heady world of gambling and booze but firmly among things that are bad for you would be fast food stocks. There are many listed companies in this sector and the share price picture is more mixed; however at the beginning of this year a survey of US brokers recommendations on US fast food stocks found that out of 46 companies in this sector 21 were rated as buys, while just two had a sell sticker.

Deeply unfashionable McDonalds is gaining shareholder interest again and while companies of this kind are talking a lot about their healthy options what really interests investors is their discounted offerings on many products that come under the category of well known, and um, well loved diet busters. It’s these good old greasy combos at low prices, not the so-called healthy options, which are adding impressively to the bottom line.

Stop reading right here if you have a moral objection to any of these sin stocks. Indeed a large number of institutional investors, not forgetting many individuals, have decided to avoid these counters like the plague. They have sound ethical reasons for reaching this decision, which often means that they are willingly forgoing potential profit.

That leaves the rest of us who are, to be blunt, less scrupulous. This gives rise to a reduced investor universe for some really big sin counters, which in turn means that opportunities abound.

What’s more all these sin stocks share some common big positives. For example: strong cash flow, then there’s very high profit margins (except for fast food which relies on volume), not forgetting rather remarkable brand loyalty that produces a solid customer base.

On the flip side of this coin is the knowledge that these stocks tend to be highly volatile; the gambling sector is particularly vulnerable. Then there are regulatory issues that have a strong impact on sales because there is nothing that politicians like doing more than tut-tutting over signs of sin.

So, in some ways, investing in sin is a risky old business but, as they say in the investment world, without risk there is little profit. Yet the risks here tend to be predictable.

Who does not know that tobacco consumption is injurious to health? Who can’t get their head around the idea that the world of gambling can be both risky and dangerous?

And so on. The fact is that precisely because these risks are very well known they are priced-in.

Heaven forbid that any of the above can be taken as a exhortation to dash out and buy sin stocks because not only is this column an advice-free zone, but more fundamentally, I can clearly understand why some people view this kind of investment as highly objectionable.

However this subject gives rise to hypocrisy which is also pretty unsavoury, as seen when the well-healed sneer at “common folk” for woofing down Big Macs, while saying nothing about the considerable health dangers of foie gras. It is hard to avoid the impression that snobbery is at play here. This also applies to things like betting where a visit to the horses is considered to be just fine and dandy while a night spent in a Macau casino is just too vulgar for words. Yet what’s the bottom line at both these places?

Sin will not disappear anytime soon nor are so called sin stocks going away, so…

Stephen Vines is a Hong Kong broadcaster, writer and entrepreneur

________________________________________
Source URL: http://www.scmp.com/business/article/1946658/why-i-love-cigarettes-even-though-i-dont-smoke

Chinese, Vietnamese eye projects in tobacco industry

TALKS are underway between the government and investors from Vietnam and China to put up investment projects in tobacco processing and cigarette manufacturing.

http://dailynews.co.tz/index.php/home-news/49907-chinese-vietnamese-eye-projects-in-tobacco-industry

Trade, Industry and Investment minister Charles Mwijage told the National Assembly yesterday that the government is on the right course to bring such investors to engage in production of cigarettes and also to set up tobacco processing factories in regions where the crop is grown.

The minister was responding to a basic question from Tabora Urban Member of Parliament Emanuel Mwakasaka (CCM) who wanted to know government’s plans to set up a tobacco processing factory in Tabora region.

The MP argued that despite being a leading tobacco producer, Tabora Region has for many years lacked a factory to process the cash crop. In response, the minister said that it is the commitment of the Fifth Phase Government to ensure that every region has a factory depending on crops produced in that particular area or other economic activity.

He said last year Tabora Region produced 39,502 tons of tobacco which were all ferried to Morogoro Region for processing and value addition. Tobacco produced in Tabora and other regions of the country is being processed at the Morogoro-based two factories of Tanzania Tobacco Processing Limited (TTPL) and Alliance One Tobacco (AOTT).

Mwijage said that this Sunday a team of investors from China will visit the Tabora Region to study the environment before deciding to set up a factory.

“Our aim is to have serious investors who will be manufacturing cigarettes which conform to international standards using the locally-produced raw material,” he said. He said the move will help farmers have a reliable market and to create more employment opportunities for Tanzanians.

He also said that he has already tasked his Permanent Secretary responsible for Investment to meet with his counterparts in the ministries of agriculture and labour to chart out areas where social security funds can invest.

He was responding to Mwakasaka’s supplementary question on efforts to engage pension funds in building and developing factories in the country. The minister’s directive to his PS came few days after President John Magufuli advised pension funds to change their mindsets and start investing in building factories.

The President had hinted that by eyeing the setting up of factories, the pension funds will register benefits in a short period of time while creating more employment opportunities.

The minister also said that his ministry has already surveyed key areas in Kigoma which government wants investors to focus as the region has good infrastructure to facilitate investment activities. According to Mwijage, areas of investment include palm tree growing, cement and sugar industries.

Malaysia’s Top Pension Fund Plans Tobacco Stake Exit, CEO Says

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-05-13/malaysia-s-top-pension-fund-plans-tobacco-stake-exit-ceo-says

Malaysia’s $170 billion pension fund plans to sell its stake in British American Tobacco Malaysia Bhd. as it focuses on investing in assets deemed socially and environmentally responsible, Chief Executive Officer Shahril Ridza Ridzuan said.

The Employees Provident Fund has a 6.9 percent stake worth about 942 million ringgit ($234 million) in the Malaysia-listed company, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. EPF doesn’t have a specific timeline to sell its holdings, Shahril said.

“We are conscious that we don’t invest in gambling, alcohol or alcohol-related business,” Shahril said. “Historically, we have this stake in the tobacco company and that we will gradually over time look at disposing.”

The fund also won’t make any new investments in tobacco, he said.

A divestment would coincide with a broader global shift among money managers to increase exposure to investments considered socially responsible. Worldwide so-called sustainable assets under management grew 61 percent to $21.4 trillion from 2012 to 2014, according to a report by the Global Sustainable Investment Alliance. Yet Asia accounted for only $53 billion of the total — compared to Europe’s $13.6 trillion.

Malaysia’s stock exchange launched the FTSE4Good Bursa Malaysia Index in December 2014, comprising companies with “recognized corporate responsibility practices,” according to its website. The index, which includes Malayan Banking Bhd. and Petronas Chemicals Bhd., is down about 8.9 percent over the past 12 months, Bloomberg data show.

Malaysia’s sovereign wealth fund Khazanah Nasional Bhd. is considering paring 2 percent of its holdings in Tenaga Nasional Bhd., IHH Healthcare Bhd. and Axiata Group Bhd., people familiar with the matter said earlier this week. EPF owns shares in all three companies, and Shahril said the pension fund may look at increasing its stake should Khazanah sell.

“We don’t rule out the possibility,” Shahril said. “It all depends on whether the price makes it worthwhile for us to look at, from a risk-return point of view.”

The Kuala Lumpur-based fund recorded 44.2 billion ringgit of gross income from investments last year, 13 percent more than it earned in 2014, according its latest annual report. EPF had 684.3 billion ringgit in assets at the end of last year, with 51 percent invested in fixed income and 43.8 percent in equities, the report said.

High-Yield Funds With Cash to Burn Chase Tobacco Bonds’ 51% Gain

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-05-09/high-yield-funds-with-cash-to-burn-chase-tobacco-bonds-51-gain

High-yield municipal bond fund managers have cash to burn. So do American smokers, who have extra money after filling their gas tanks.

The two groups, each in their own way, are driving a rally in the $34 billion tobacco-bond market that’s outpacing just about every other investment.

High-yield tobacco securities have surged 10.2 percent in 2016, the most among all segments of the $3.7 trillion municipal market, Barclays Plc data show. That follows gains of 15.8 percent and 19.2 percent in the past two years. The 51 percent return since the start of 2014 beats more than 80 percent of stocks in the S&P 500 Index and close to 90 percent of the Russell 2000 Index of small-cap company shares, data compiled by Bloomberg show.

Capture

To explain much of the gain, one needs only to follow the money. Individuals added cash to high-yield muni funds for 100 of the past 122 weeks, lifting their assets to a record $82 billion from $58 billion at the start of 2014, according to data from Morningstar Inc. and Lipper US Fund Flows. With Puerto Rico heading toward an unprecedented restructuring, money managers who once snapped up the island’s bonds are now avoiding them, leaving the tobacco securities one of the few available alternatives.

The other side of the rally stems from signs that American smokers are using savings at the gas pump to buy more cigarettes. The shipments backing the debt as part of a 1998 settlement with tobacco companies increased last year by 1.9 percent, the most ever, according to data from the National Association of Attorneys General.

“If you’re getting lots of money into a high-yield fund and you’ve decided that you’re not going to buy Puerto Rico, like most people, really tobacco is your only other option,” said Craig Brandon, co-director of municipal investments in Boston at Eaton Vance Management, which oversees $32.5 billion of the debt. The uptick in smoking “gives you a credit reason to buy tobacco at a time when you really need a high-yield sector to invest in.”

Capture2

Buying tobacco bonds has long been considered a risky move. Most are rated junk because when governments first sold them more than a decade ago, which gave them advances on money they are set to receive from Reynolds American Inc., Lorillard Inc. and Philip Morris USA, they didn’t anticipate how quickly Americans would give up smoking. And the more cigarette sales fall, the longer it will take for governments to collect the payouts.

Moody’s Investors Service projects that a 4 percent annual decline in cigarette shipments would cause 80 percent of the bonds to default. From 2007 to 2014, the drop was even bigger: Shipments fell an average of 4.7 percent annually, according to NAAG data.

The decline in oil prices in the second half of 2014 — from over $100 a barrel to about $53 — halted the decline because gasoline fell, too, giving people more disposable income. The national average for a gallon of gas in the U.S. is $2.22, about 40 cents lower than a year ago, according to the American Automobile Association.

Smokers “save more because of lower gas prices and they tend to spend it on cigarettes,” said Vikram Rai, head of muni strategy at Citigroup Inc. While the boost in cigarette shipments “could be a flash in the pan,” he says high-yield investors should consider buying the securities and definitely hold onto those they currently own.

Some of the biggest and most-frequently traded tobacco bonds are at levels not seen since before the financial crisis.

Two of the three largest single tobacco bonds, from Ohio’s Buckeye Tobacco Settlement Financing Authority and California’s Golden State Tobacco Securitization Corp., traded in the past two weeks at about 100 cents on the dollar, the most since February 2008 and August 2007, respectively, data compiled by Bloomberg show. Both have a June 2047 maturity and ratings six steps below investment grade by Moody’s, which projects annual shipment declines of 3 percent would cause them each to default.

“I’m pretty cautious at these levels — there’s been a lot of gains,” said Alan Schankel, a managing director in Philadelphia at Janney Montgomery Scott. “The upside is limited as you approach par, and the downside is there.”

Capture3

Tobacco-bond returns have also dwarfed other junk asset classes. High-yield corporate bonds and loans returned 4.75 percent since the start of 2014, Barclays data show.

While buying after the rally isn’t the best entry point, the dynamics driving it don’t seem likely to change this year, Citigroup’s Rai said. Even if prices remain steady, the largest tobacco bonds offer investors yields above 5 percent at a time when top-rated munis maturing in 30 years deliver half as much.

“Tobacco bonds are priced properly because we know what the moving parts are; we know how to model that risk,” Rai said. “If you’re content with a 6 or 7 percent return, even if you buy them now, you’ll get that.”

We ban tobacco sponsorship of sport in the UK. Let’s stub it out in the arts, too

Medical professionals call for a smoke-free approach to arts sponsorship

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/commentisfree/2016/may/01/we-ban-tobacco-sponsorship-of-sport-in-the-uk-lets-stub-it-out-in-the-arts-too

Smoking is a leading preventable cause of ill health and premature death, and a major contributor to health inequality. Current estimates are that the tobacco industry will kill one billion people in the 21st century.

Tobacco advertising has now been banned, along with sponsorship of sport. However, tobacco companies continue to use sponsorship of some high-profile arts organisations to promote the spurious idea that they are responsible corporate citizens. We suspect that most members of the Royal Academy in London will be appalled to learn that Japan Tobacco International (JTI) has been a premier sponsor for its exhibitions. British American Tobacco is also a sponsor, a position it shares with, among others, the Marie Curie cancer charity and Bloomberg. The latter is of note given Michael Bloomberg’s passionate tobacco control stance while mayor of New York.

These sponsorship arrangements are morally unacceptable and must be brought to an end. As healthcare professionals who deal daily with the harm caused by the tobacco industry, we call on arts, cultural and heritage organisations to sign the smoke-free arts declaration (smokefreearts.org.uk) to affirm that tobacco sponsorship is unacceptable. We also call on sponsors of the arts to undertake that they will no longer support organisations that accept tobacco sponsorship.

Dr Nicholas Hopkinson

Reader in respiratory medicine, Imperial College, London on behalf of 1,104 other healthcare professionals