Editorial de "The Washington Post" del 28 de abril de 2011

Opinions

Why we need a ban on menthol cigarettes

By Joseph A. Califano Jr. and Louis W. Sullivan, Published: April 28

No action the Food and Drug Administration and the Obama administration could take would do more to save lives, reduce health-care costs and curb the tobacco industry’s exploitation of children and minority teens than to ban menthol flavoring in cigarettes.

Consider these findings from a March report by an FDA panel:

l Eighty percent of adolescent African American smokers use menthol cigarettes.

l Most adolescent Hispanic American smokers use menthol cigarettes.

l Most Asian American middle-school smokers use menthol cigarettes.

l Almost half of 12- to 17-year-old smokers use menthol cigarettes (and, as other research has found, more than 90 percent of adult smokers are hooked as teens).

The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, enacted in 2009, bans flavoring a cigarette with any herb or spice, or strawberry, grape, orange, clove, cinnamon, pineapple, vanilla, coconut, licorice, cocoa, chocolate, cherry or coffee flavor — except for menthol. Why was menthol flavoring not prohibited as we and many public health professionals urged when Congress considered the bill?

Here’s what senior members of Congress told us: If the bill bans menthol flavoring, Philip Morris will withdraw its support and the legislation will not pass. After all, Philip Morris and the other tobacco companies have spent about $20 million a year lobbying for the past 12 years. The tobacco companies also sprinkle campaign contributions to legislators across party lines; last year alone, it gave $1.5 million to Republican members and $800,000 to Democratic members.

The 2009 law did establish a scientific advisory committee to evaluate health issues and make recommendations to the FDA. At our urging, it required the committee to act promptly on menthol flavoring in cigarettes. The committee’s recently issued reportputs the ball of banning such flavoring in the FDA’s court because it concluded that menthol cigarettes have an “adverse impact on public health by increasing the numbers of smokers with resulting premature death and avoidable morbidity.”

Thanks to the committee’s work, we know why Philip Morris, R.J. Reynolds and the rest of the tobacco industry fought so fiercely to keep menthol flavoring in cigarettes. The committee found that menthol reduces “the harshness of smoke and the irritation from nicotine, and may increase the likelihood of nicotine addiction in adolescents . . . who experiment with smoking.” The committee charged the industry with exploiting teens and children: “[I]ndustry documents . . . confirm that the industry developed menthol marketing to appeal to youth.” While aiming this charge specifically at the Newport brand, the committee found “that strategy was also adopted by other tobacco companies. Marketing messages positioned menthol cigarettes as an attractive starter product for new smokers who are unaccustomed to intense tobacco taste. . . .” The committee noted that “adolescent menthol cigarette smokers are more dependent on nicotine than adolescent non-menthol cigarette smokers.”

The committee also found that the tobacco industry cynically targeted black people and “developed specialized brands and tailored marketing strategies to promote menthol cigarettes to African Americans”; that “menthol cigarettes are disproportionately marketed per capita to African Americans”; as a result, “menthol cigarettes are disproportionately smoked by African American smokers.”

More than 80 percent of black smokers use menthol cigarettes, compared with 24 percent of white smokers. More than 47,000 black Americans die each year from smoking-related diseases. More black women get lung cancer than get breast cancer, and black men are 50 percent more likely to get lung cancer than white men are.

Lorillard (maker of Newport, Kent and others) and R.J. Reynolds have gone to court to block the FDA from considering the committee’s report. They allege that the membership of the committee “lacks fair balance.” That the tobacco companies would question the integrity of committee members after having been found by a U.S. district judge to have lied to the American public for 50 years about the health hazards of smoking is beyond chutzpah.

The FDA response to the committee’s recommendation will be a test of the Obama administration’s commitment to health care and reducing its costs. In the Tobacco Control Act, Congress found: “Reducing the use of tobacco by minors by 50 percent would prevent well over 10 million of today’s children from becoming regular, daily smokers,” and “Such a reduction in youth smoking would also result in approximately $75 billion in savings attributable to reduced health care costs.”

A ban on menthol flavoring in cigarettes would be a slam-dunk for an administration that trumpets its commitment to cutting health-care costs and protecting children.

Joseph A. Califano Jr. is founder and chairman of the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University. He was secretary of health, education and welfare during the Carter administration. Louis W. Sullivan is president emeritus of the Morehouse School of Medicine. He was secretary of health and human services under President George H.W. Bush.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-we-need-a-ban-on-menthol-cigarettes/2011/04/27/AFNCM08E_story.html

Editorial de "The Washington Post" del 28 de abril de 2011

Opinions

Why we need a ban on menthol cigarettes

By Joseph A. Califano Jr. and Louis W. Sullivan, Published: April 28

No action the Food and Drug Administration and the Obama administration could take would do more to save lives, reduce health-care costs and curb the tobacco industry’s exploitation of children and minority teens than to ban menthol flavoring in cigarettes.

Consider these findings from a March report by an FDA panel:

l Eighty percent of adolescent African American smokers use menthol cigarettes.

l Most adolescent Hispanic American smokers use menthol cigarettes.

l Most Asian American middle-school smokers use menthol cigarettes.

l Almost half of 12- to 17-year-old smokers use menthol cigarettes (and, as other research has found, more than 90 percent of adult smokers are hooked as teens).

The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, enacted in 2009, bans flavoring a cigarette with any herb or spice, or strawberry, grape, orange, clove, cinnamon, pineapple, vanilla, coconut, licorice, cocoa, chocolate, cherry or coffee flavor — except for menthol. Why was menthol flavoring not prohibited as we and many public health professionals urged when Congress considered the bill?

Here’s what senior members of Congress told us: If the bill bans menthol flavoring, Philip Morris will withdraw its support and the legislation will not pass. After all, Philip Morris and the other tobacco companies have spent about $20 million a year lobbying for the past 12 years. The tobacco companies also sprinkle campaign contributions to legislators across party lines; last year alone, it gave $1.5 million to Republican members and $800,000 to Democratic members.

The 2009 law did establish a scientific advisory committee to evaluate health issues and make recommendations to the FDA. At our urging, it required the committee to act promptly on menthol flavoring in cigarettes. The committee’s recently issued reportputs the ball of banning such flavoring in the FDA’s court because it concluded that menthol cigarettes have an “adverse impact on public health by increasing the numbers of smokers with resulting premature death and avoidable morbidity.”

Thanks to the committee’s work, we know why Philip Morris, R.J. Reynolds and the rest of the tobacco industry fought so fiercely to keep menthol flavoring in cigarettes. The committee found that menthol reduces “the harshness of smoke and the irritation from nicotine, and may increase the likelihood of nicotine addiction in adolescents . . . who experiment with smoking.” The committee charged the industry with exploiting teens and children: “[I]ndustry documents . . . confirm that the industry developed menthol marketing to appeal to youth.” While aiming this charge specifically at the Newport brand, the committee found “that strategy was also adopted by other tobacco companies. Marketing messages positioned menthol cigarettes as an attractive starter product for new smokers who are unaccustomed to intense tobacco taste. . . .” The committee noted that “adolescent menthol cigarette smokers are more dependent on nicotine than adolescent non-menthol cigarette smokers.”

The committee also found that the tobacco industry cynically targeted black people and “developed specialized brands and tailored marketing strategies to promote menthol cigarettes to African Americans”; that “menthol cigarettes are disproportionately marketed per capita to African Americans”; as a result, “menthol cigarettes are disproportionately smoked by African American smokers.”

More than 80 percent of black smokers use menthol cigarettes, compared with 24 percent of white smokers. More than 47,000 black Americans die each year from smoking-related diseases. More black women get lung cancer than get breast cancer, and black men are 50 percent more likely to get lung cancer than white men are.

Lorillard (maker of Newport, Kent and others) and R.J. Reynolds have gone to court to block the FDA from considering the committee’s report. They allege that the membership of the committee “lacks fair balance.” That the tobacco companies would question the integrity of committee members after having been found by a U.S. district judge to have lied to the American public for 50 years about the health hazards of smoking is beyond chutzpah.

The FDA response to the committee’s recommendation will be a test of the Obama administration’s commitment to health care and reducing its costs. In the Tobacco Control Act, Congress found: “Reducing the use of tobacco by minors by 50 percent would prevent well over 10 million of today’s children from becoming regular, daily smokers,” and “Such a reduction in youth smoking would also result in approximately $75 billion in savings attributable to reduced health care costs.”

A ban on menthol flavoring in cigarettes would be a slam-dunk for an administration that trumpets its commitment to cutting health-care costs and protecting children.

Joseph A. Califano Jr. is founder and chairman of the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University. He was secretary of health, education and welfare during the Carter administration. Louis W. Sullivan is president emeritus of the Morehouse School of Medicine. He was secretary of health and human services under President George H.W. Bush.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-we-need-a-ban-on-menthol-cigarettes/2011/04/27/AFNCM08E_story.html

Amherst News, 28 de abril de 2011

Tobacco still too accessible

Published on April 28, 2011

Topics :

Tobacco-Free Nova Scotia , Nova Scotians , Nova Scotia

Moving Toward a Tobacco-Free Nova Scotia is an ambitious strategy aimed at decreasing smoking rates across the province by targeting younger smokers so they never light up for the first time.

As much as government deserves a pat on the back for going after the youngest Nova Scotians, it is going to face a tough sell considering far too many young people still consider smoking cool. Despite the best efforts of the province there still remains an ample supply of illegal, contraband cigarettes that threaten the harpoon any strategy or plan government comes up with.

The new tobacco strategy plans to build on the successes of previous plans that, among other things, banned smoking in public establishments such as bars and restaurants and changing how cigarettes and tobacco products are advertised by eliminating the so-called power walls of cigarettes behind the counter in convenience stores.

Over the next five years, the province wants to reduce the smoking rate among 20-24 year olds by 20 per cent and reduce the number of teens, ages 15-19, smoking from 15 per cent to 10 per cent .

It’s also going to explore legislation that will help with smoking reduction efforts, expand treatment options and programs for those wanting to quit and focusing on the behaviour of the tobacco industry by looking at sales to minors compliance rates and tobacco advertising.

Over the last decade, smoking rates have declined to the point that it’s mostly the hard-core smokers that continue to light up. Despite these best efforts, though, tobacco remains the number one preventable cause of disease in Nova Scotia. Yes, those nine-foot-tall dinosaurs and artifact boxes that have been making their way around the province are effective at demonstrating that smoking is a thing of the past.

Unfortunately, the fact remains that children and teens who want to smoke still find it too easy to find tobacco. Even if corner stores are completely compliant there’s still a way where there’s a will to do it and the abundance of contraband tobacco easily fills the void.

Tomado de:

http://www.amherstdaily.com/Opinion/Editorials/2011-04-28/article-2463539/Tobacco-still-too-accessible--/1

BBC 28 de abril de 2011

China set to introduce new rules on smoking in public

By Chris HoggBBC News, Shanghai

hina's health ministry will renew its push to end smoking in public places with new regulations due to come into force on 1 May. These will outlaw smoking in places like bars, restaurants and buses, but not workplaces.

More than one in three people smoking a cigarette in the world right now is lighting up in China.

The country's authorities believe smoking kills more than one million people every year and that figure is predicted to triple by 2030.

The new smoking ban is an attempt to prevent that prediction coming true.

Penalties unclear

From 1 May, businesses will not be allowed to use vending machines to sell cigarettes in public areas, but there will not be a blanket ban on smoking in the workplace.

Crucially, the authorities have not set out penalties for infractions, or specified how the law will be enforced.

Continue reading the main story

“Start Quote

I don't think this policy will make much difference”

Shanghai office worker

Across the country, different provinces will impose different sizes of fine.

One smoker in Shanghai told the BBC she was unsure whether China was really taking the issue seriously.

"I don't think this policy will make much difference," said the young office worker. "Particularly in the smaller cities in the countryside, where smoking is more part of the culture."

Shanghai introduced its own ban on smoking in public places in March last year.

The city plans to expand the regulations to cover more venues from 1 May.

Roger Chu, who runs an Australian restaurant in the city, said the ban has affected his business.

"A lot of customers don't want to come into the restaurant because they can't smoke inside," he said.

Mr Chu said he hoped that, as time went on, people would realise it was a government regulation and not the restaurant's own policy that was stopping them from smoking.

"Then our business will get better," he said.

Those comments were echoed by the manager of a Japanese restaurant, who declined to give his name.

"It's more about inconvenience than economic cost," he said. "Sometimes it's led to arguments between customers and staff."

He admitted, though, that he felt the ban made sense on health grounds.

'Very old tradition'

Many non-smokers, of course, approve of the new policy.

"I hate those people who smoke," said one young worker in a foreign company. "So I hope this policy can be implemented fully."

He, too, was unsure though whether the ban would work.

"Smoking is a very old Chinese tradition," he added.

The tobacco companies have huge influence in China.

The government operates a monopoly on tobacco sales, which brings in huge amounts of money in tax receipts.

Campaigners say it is difficult to promote anti-smoking policies because of the lobbying that officials face from both foreign and Chinese tobacco firms.

The cost of a packet of cigarettes is significantly lower in China than in many western countries.

Chinese health officials say unless more is done to cut the number of smokers, then, in less than 20 years time, one in every four people here who dies will be a victim of a smoking-related disease.

The costs to the country's healthcare system - and its economy - could dwarf the amount of tax it gets from tobacco sales today.

Tomado de:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/13219118

Especial BBC: Nuevas emdidas contra el tabaco en China

Smoking ban for Chinese capital

By Jill McGivering BBC News Smoking is deep-rooted in Chinese culture A ban on smoking in most public buildings has come into force in the Chinese capital, Beijing. The move is an attempt to discourage some of China's 350 million smokers and also part of wider efforts to clean up the city in the run up to the Olympics. For every three cigarettes lit worldwide, one is smoked in China. Almost 25% of the Chinese smoke. Smoking is also contributing to a rapid rise of cancer and heart disease in the world's most populous country. Enforcement team In Beijing, the smokers are everywhere - and it feels like it. But now that may change. The city authorities have imposed a ban on smoking in most public buildings. They say they are organising 100,000 existing employees to act as an enforcement team. The authorities had wanted restaurants and bars to be mostly smoke-free as well, but there was too much resistance. Instead, they must provide non-smoking areas or rooms. "If measures are not taken, with so many smokers in China, in 10, 20, 30 years, the health system will have even higher burden to manage patients with cardio-vascular diseases, with cancer and so on," says Dr Hans Troedsson, the China representative for the World Health Organization. "So it's a kind of sub-acute health threat here in China," he says. The imminent Olympic Games have also strengthened motivation. China wants to promote Beijing as a progressive, modern and clean city. Less smoke and fewer cigarette butts could really help. Smoking is deep-rooted in Chinese culture and there is still a general lack of awareness about the impact on health. The WHO is discussing further measures with the government, like an increase in taxes on cigarettes. But smoking is big business, and some officials are worried about damaging that. However, financial loss now could be more than off-set by savings on health care in the future. Tomado de: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7376560.stm

Panorama mundial del tabaco por la BBC

Smoking curbs: The global picture

Continue reading the main story

A guide to smoking bans around the world as governments seek to improve the health of their populations.

Australia

The state of Western Australia introduced the strictest anti-smoking laws in the country in September 2010, with bans in cars carrying children, on sections of beaches and within 10m (32ft) of playground equipment.

Australia also plans to force tobacco companies to use plain packaging carrying graphic health warnings from July 2012.

Across the country, smoking is already banned inside all airports, government offices, health clinics and workplaces.

New Zealand

New Zealand has announced a ban on smoking throughout prisons from July 2011.

Officials said high levels of smoking were a risk to staff and prisoners, and they dismissed concerns that the ban would spark violence. It is believed that two-thirds of the New Zealand's prison population are smokers.

New Zealand already bans smoking in bars, clubs, restaurants, offices, workplaces and shops, and on public transport.

Canada

Canada's strict anti-smoking laws have been credited with cutting hospital admissions for heart and respiratory problems by about a third.

A study published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal in April 2010 monitored admissions in the city of Toronto since smoking bans were introduced in 2001.

Smoking levels in Canada have long been among the lowest in the world, with about 21% of Canadians over the age of 15 reported to be smokers in 2002, according to government statistics.

In addition to bans on smoking in workplaces and many public places, cigarette packets bear graphic images of the damage done to internal organs by smoking.

China

China banned smoking in hospitals in May 2010 but activists say there have seen no signs of the government introducing a promised national ban on smoking in public places.

Many Chinese cities have their own regulations on where people can light up, but enforcement is varied.

A government survey in August showed that only a quarter of the adult population believed that smoking increased the risk of cancer. Anti-smoking campaigns are failing to influence them, state news agency Xinhua reported.

In May 2008, in the run-up to the Olympic Games, a smoking ban for most public buildings came into force in the Chinese capital, Beijing. The country has an estimated 350 million smokers. For every three cigarettes lit worldwide, one is smoked in China.

Syria

In April 2010 Syria become the first Arab state to ban smoking in public places including restaurants and cafes.

The law also prohibits smoking in educational institutions, health centres, sports halls, cinemas and theatres, and on public transport.

The restrictions include the nargile, or hubble-bubble pipe, which is popular among locals and tourists.

Egypt

Egypt took its first steps in introducing a smoking ban earlier this year.

In July, the city of Alexandria began enforcing an existing law - usually flouted - that banned smoking in government buildings. Officials said they aimed to extend the ban to the city's cafes within two years.

Egypt is the biggest consumer of cigarettes in the Arab world, puffing its way through some 19 billion cigarettes every year.

Europe

Greece has long been regarded as Europe's biggest smoking nation and has struggled to make its citizens kick the habit. In September 2010 a fresh attempt was made with a law banning tobacco advertising and smoking in enclosed public spaces.

Critics of Spain's anti-smoking laws say bars will lose business as a result

In 2009 smoking was prohibited in hospitals and schools, vehicles and all public spaces but it was largely ignored in many areas.

Previous attempts to introduce a ban in 2002 and 2003 also failed.

Spain already has anti-smoking laws but tougher rules were announced in October which will give the country some of the strictest legislation in Europe. Lighting up will be banned in bars, cafes and restaurants and extend to open areas near hospitals, schools and children's playground. The new rules are due to come into effect in January.

Poland brought in anti-smoking laws in November 2010. The ban covers schools, museums, theatres, airports and railway and bus stations, public transport, stadiums, hospitals and playgrounds. Smoking is also banned in one-room restaurants and bars.

Estonia joined those European countries banning smoking in bars and restaurants on 5 June, 2007. The law bans smoking in cafes, restaurants, bars, nightclubs - except for special zones - and at bus stops and underground train stations. Offenders face a fine of 80 euros, while owners of cafes and restaurants can face a fine of up to 2,000 euros.

Finland introduced a similar measure on 1 June 2009.

France took a major step towards a total public ban when it announced it would prevent smoking in workplaces and other public buildings from 1 February 2007.

The law was extended in 2008 to include cafes, restaurants and bars.

Its first serious move to cut smoking levels came in October 2003, when it raised the price of cigarettes by 20%.

Correspondents say attitudes to smoking have changed dramatically in France since the 2007 ban, and any fears that people would generally ignore the laws have proved false.

Poland has joined a long list of countries to ban smoking in public places

In Germany, eight states, including Berlin, ushered in 2008 declaring their pubs and restaurants smoke-free.

German restaurants and pubs have strongly resisted the bans, not only because of the potential loss of income but partly because of an earlier crackdown on smoking initiated by Adolf Hitler's Nazi regime.

The sensitivity of the issue has prompted the authorities to allow special rooms to be set up purely for smokers.

The toughest rules in Germany have been brought in by Bavaria, where no smoking rooms have been allowed. Lighting up was recently banned at the Oktoberfest Munich beer festival for the first time.

The Republic of Ireland imposed tough anti-smoking legislation in March 2004, banning smoking in pubs, restaurants and other enclosed workplaces.

Anyone caught smoking in a prohibited location now faces a fine of up to 3,000 euros (£2,000).

Italy imposed a ban on smoking in all enclosed public places including bars and restaurants from midnight on 10 January, 2005.

Montenegro: In August 2004, Montenegro - then part of a union with Serbia - decided to introduce a sweeping ban on smoking in public places in the hope of overturning an established culture of smoking in offices, restaurants, bars and on buses.

Tobacco advertising and the portrayal of smoking on television are also banned.

The Netherlands: The Dutch government banned smoking for hotels, restaurants and the catering industry in 2008, but in November 2010 announced that it plans to exempt bars smaller than 70sq m (753sq ft), with no staff other than the owner.

All bars must put up a sign telling customers whether or not it is a smoking establishment.

Health Minister Edith Schippers said consumers "will get more freedom of choice and personnel will remain protected against tobacco smoke".

In Norway a national ban was imposed on smoking in restaurants, bars and cafes from 1 June 2004.

Portugal introduced restrictions on 1 January 2008 but the rules not as tight as some other European countries. Portuguese bars smaller than 100sq m can still opt to allow smoking. Public buildings can still have smoking zones, provided they are clearly signposted and ventilated.

Smoking in Sweden was prohibited in all bars and restaurants from midnight in May 2005.

In the United Kingdom, smoking is banned in nearly all enclosed public spaces - including bars, restaurants and workplaces.

The ban came into force in England in July 2007. Scotland introduced a ban in March 2006, followed by Wales and Northern Ireland in April 2007.

The government also plans to ask tobacco firms to put only basic information and health or picture warnings on their packets. Making packets a plain colour would also protect children from taking up smoking in the first place, it suggests.

India

A ban on smoking in public places came into force in October 2008 in an effort to curb high levels of tobacco addiction.

The law also bans direct and indirect advertising of tobacco products and the sale of cigarettes to children.

Iran

Iran banned tobacco advertising and smoking in public buildings in October 2003 - but analysts say both measures have had little effect.

However, in July 2010 smokers were banned from taking high-ranking jobs in the Iranian government, the news agency ILNA reported.

Statistics show smoking among young Iranians is on the rise.

US

Many cities and states are considering - or already enforcing - bans on smoking. By November 2010, 27 states had banned lighting up in public places.

California has some of the toughest and most extensive anti-smoking legislation anywhere in the world.

A ban on smoking inside or within 1.5m of any public building came into force in 1993 - recently extended to 6m. Smoking is also banned in restaurants, bars and enclosed workplaces - and on beaches - throughout the state.

New York is also set to adopt tought new measures, having banned smoking in bars, clubs and restaurants since March 2003. It is now set to extend the smoking ban to municipal parks, beaches and pedestrian areas, including the one in Times Square.

Anti-smoking laws have provoked a strong debate in the US. Some bar owners say their businesses are suffering and smokers say their rights are being infringed, while non-smokers say they enjoy the smoke-free environment.

Russia

The Russian government has announced plans to ban advertising and promotion of cigarettes from 2011 and to introduce a complete ban on smoking in enclosed spaces by 2015.

The addiction kills up to 500,000 people a year in the country, Russia's RIA Novosti news agency reports.

A 2009 survey by the World Health Organization found that Russia has 43.9 million smokers - about 40% of the population. The survey also revealed that 60% of Russian men and 22% of Russian women smoke.

Uruguay

Uruguay - which recently hosted an international summit tobacco control - has introduced some of the world's toughest anti-tobacco policies, banning smoking in private as well as public enclosed spaces.

It requires 80% of every cigarette package to show graphic images of the consequences of smoking, including diseased lungs and rotten gums.

Kenya

In the capital, Nairobi, a ban on smoking in indoor public places came into force in July 2007, with a similar ban in Mombasa and the Rift Valley town of Nakuru.

Anyone smoking in offices, bus stations, airports and sports venue faces a fine of 50,000 Kenya shillings ($700; £375) or six months in prison.

Bars and restaurants without separate smoking areas are also affected.

Tanzania

Tanzania banned smoking in many public places in July 2003, with smoke-free zones declared on public transport, as well as in schools and hospitals.

The government also banned the selling of tobacco to under-18s and advertising on radio and television and in newspapers.

Bhutan

Bhutan says it is determined to become the world's first smoking-free nation. It banned the sale of tobacco in 2004 and smoking in public places in 2005.

The country's draconian law gives police sweeping powers to enter homes and search for tobacco products. In addition, it gives them the power to jail shopkeepers for selling tobacco and to arrest smokers if they fail to provide customs receipts for imported cigarettes - which are only permitted in very small quantities.

Smokers can legally import only up to 200 cigarettes or 150g (5.3oz) of other tobacco products a month - but a 100% tax is charged on such products. People found in possession of tobacco must provide a customs receipt when challenged by police, and can face jail for smuggling if they fail to provide their receipts.

There is a cash fine for breaking the ban, and shops also stand to lose their licence

Material tomado de la BBC en el sitio web

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11845158