Tobacco Documents Online

B_BONM & WILLIAMBON TOBACCO CQRPONATIOH IBTEBHAL COP, P, ESPDNOENCE TO: C. G, NEWTON CC: K.A. HUTCHISON D. N, AELMAN J. L. BRUHLEVE FROM: E.M. OENKHOFF DATE: JUNE~IDgO SUBJECT: MINNESOTA INDWTRY puroose The attached graphs summarize observations made about the Industry and individual manufacturers in Minnesota. In this state, the cigarette industry is faci~g a growing opposition which is responsible mast recently for t~ J On June 1, iDOl, the tax on a pack of cigarettes was raised to $.3B, up from $,~3. MDA shipment data reveals that the Industry reacted to the new tax By increasing shipments prior to June. Thereafter, a sharp decline in shipments was seen until mid 1988. The only connecting state exhibiting any compensation for this loss is Iowa, which showed a growth in Industry during the time period stated above (at this time the tax in ]owe was raised to ~$.34). The gain in Iowa accounts for only about nO% of the loss, ~ e=r~e-l}f~d~&LA n e.~irr~Mi n n ~co~t~has~z'owL=~-con~l)R~r ~/fiost manufacturers contributed to the decline while Philip Morris near~y /" maintained volume throughout the time Qf rapid decrease. Liggett reacted similar to other manufacturers until December, 198B; since then, showing an increase in volume which can be attributed to Pyramid. All other compcnies have slowed their rate of decline since late 1988. If additional information is required, please let me know. Attachment E, M, Denkhoff ~s[0603 465 9 1151

---