Our Success Stories

Victory of Science over Fear for Essential Oils

The Issue:

As part of the Green New Deal in 2023, the European Union’s Chemical Agency (ECHA) planned to promote a “sustainable-by-design” point of view. To that end, it shifted its attitude toward essential oils from a risk-based approach to a hazard-based mentality, reflected in new versions of REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorization, and Restriction of Chemicals) and CLP (Classification, Labeling, and Packaging) regulations. This meant that the ECHA would consider essential oils hazardous complex chemicals of more than one constituent substance if just one molecule could hypothetically pose a threat under laboratory conditions. In practice, essential oils would have been unjustifiably labeled as dangerous despite their safety record and potentially being banned altogether.

These regulations would have dire consequences, with a domino knockdown effect on these products and the clean beauty market in top EU producer states such as Bulgaria, France, Italy, and Spain and consumers in Czechia, Poland, Estonia, and beyond. The Consumer Choice Center had to act for the sake of European consumers and a widely beloved industry.

CCC Response:

We understood that a policy standard based on hazard was conceptually confused, empirically unfounded, and economically disastrous. Adopting a standard of zero risks through test data analogs and Q-Sar predictions in a sterile laboratory setting was not how consumers ever could or even wanted to navigate the real world. Exposure and the conditions of that exposure mattered. It also went against the scientific evidence for essential oils, which have proven to be safe and environmentally friendly repellents and vital ingredients for perfumes and cosmetics thanks to their hydrophobic, anti-inflammatory, anti-microbial, and antioxidant properties. Most of all, it completely ignored its economic consequences for those working in these industries and the impact on every EU consumer (particularly those in Eastern Europe) during an acute cost of living crisis and a hostile geopolitical environment.

Once we learned of the proposed regulatory changes, we began conducting extensive research, contacting media outlets and affected member states, and urging decision-makers in the European Parliament, Commission, and ECHA to change course before it was too late.

On the 26^th of April, 2023, we published our findings in the report “Hazard vs. Risk: EU’s Green Deal Fragrance Misstep,” where we made the full case against hazard-based thinking and argued for a grounded risk-informed method using the best available research. The report confirmed our worst fears about the regulatory change in numbers. While the future of the €2.29 billion market became uncertain, countries such as Bulgaria, France, Italy, and Spain stood to lose a combined 892 million euros in export revenue.

We made sure to inform decision-makers and the broader public about these facts. Our articles were featured in the Parliament Magazine, Brussels Times, Brussels Report, Emerging Europe, and CEA Magazine. We discussed the issue extensively on our own ConsEUmer podcast and were featured on the CEA podcast.

The Outcome:

The EU responded on the 26^th of September 2023 – and agreed with our assessment. They introduced Amendment 32 to the CLP, that exempted substances of renewable botanic origin from hazard-based thinking. The derogation was reconfirmed on December 5, 2023, when the trialogue (comprising the EU’s Commission, Council, and Parliament) agreed to exempt essential oils from the CLP revision.

We will continue to fight for evidence-based policy. But for now, consumers can enjoy their favorite essential oils products in peace.

Victory Against the UK’s Generational Smoking Ban

In a remarkable turn of events, the UK government’s proposed generational prohibition on smoking and certain vaping products has been thwarted. The bill, which aimed to prohibit adults born on or after January 1, 2009, from ever purchasing tobacco products legally, faced opposition from the CCC and a united front of consumers and advocates for personal freedom.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s proposal intended to introduce an arbitrary age restriction, risking a society where individuals born just days apart could have vastly different legal rights regarding tobacco use. Additionally, restrictions on vape flavours threatened the progress made in reducing smoking rates and the UK’s effort in reaching a smoke-free target by 2030. The CCC argued these measures were more about control and scoring political points, which would have placed children and future generations at greater harm and vulnerable consumers unprotected in the black market.

The CCC launched a vigorous campaign, gathering signatures in opposition. We encouraged consumers to contact their MPs directly, providing clear data and talking points. Policy wise, the CCC engaged with MPs, drafted amendments, submitted evidence to consultations and committees, highlighting inconsistencies with the government’s impact assessments economically and the harm that these measures inflict on consumers.

These combined efforts led to the bill not being selected to be nodded through, in the wake of the Prime Minister announcing a general election. In the process, MPs recognised the flaws and public opposition, demonstrating the power of collective action in preserving individual freedoms. The CCC will oppose these measures if they were to be introduced again by the new government.

The UK’s success in tobacco harm reduction continues for now. The CCC remains vigilant, committed to defending consumer rights, protecting their health and interests, and ensuring future laws respect personal freedoms.

Victory for Vermont: Neonicotinoid Ban Vetoed

Governor Phil Scott of Vermont vetoed Bill H.706, which aimed to ban neonicotinoid-treated seeds. This veto is a significant win for farmers, consumers, and science-based policymaking. The Consumer Choice Center played a crucial role in opposing the ban, with Senior Policy Analyst Bill Wirtz emphasizing the importance of these seed treatments for crop protection and economic stability.

Recent data shows bee colonies are at record highs, contradicting claims that neonicotinoids harm pollinators. The Vermont bill, influenced by a 2020 Cornell report, lacked strong scientific backing.

Governor Scott’s veto protects Vermont’s agricultural sector, ensuring farmers can continue producing high-quality crops efficiently. This decision benefits the local economy and consumers, highlighting the importance of science-based policies and effective advocacy.

Success Story: Reducing the burden of compulsory licensing on Brazilian consumers

The Issue:

In 2021, the Senate introduced a bill (Projeto de Lei n° 12, de 2021) to suspend the obligations of the Federative Republic of Brazil to implement or apply the TRIPS Agreement in relation to the prevention, containment or treatment of COVID-19 while the public health emergency remained in force. In other words, a law that would introduce compulsory licensing for all COVID-19 vaccines and technologies – something that was not only unprecedented but would also go against the TRIPS agreement, to which Brazil is a signatory.

The bill was passed in Congress in both houses and went to the approval of President Jair Bolsonaro. However, the President vetoed three key paragraphs:

8, “The holder of the patent or patent application subject to a compulsory license must provide the necessary and sufficient information for the effective reproduction of the object protected by the patent.”

9, “If there is biological material essential for the practical realisation of the object protected by the patent or by the patent application, the holder must provide such material to the licensee”, and

10, Imposed penalties if the holder of the patent or patent application refuses to provide the information or biological material

The redacted bill went back to Congress to further discussion and final voting that could have overridden the veto and reinstated the removed paragraphs.

The entire bill n° 12 of 2021, but particularly paragraphs 8, 9 and 10, would have had terrible consequences for consumers and patients in Brazil, depriving them of future vaccines and medical innovations. The Consumer Choice Center promptly intervened to protect consumers.

CCC Response:

We understood that the vetoed provisions were simply unprecedented and inconsistent with the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights and denied innovators the certainty and predictability needed to confidently invest and accelerate the launch of new medicines in Brazil. Consequently, the bill would have deprived consumers and patients of life-saving drugs and vaccines because of government-created legal uncertainty.

The moment the bill hit the Congressional floor, we began working with members of Congress and the Caucus to inform them about the risks of such legislation and the unnecessary burden to consumers and to persuade the policymakers to keep the vetoes. We sent letters presenting our arguments to both the Presidents of the House and the Senate.

Furthermore, we put the discussion to public debate, reacting, commenting and giving our expert opinion to news outlets. We were featured in a handful of influential media outlets, including Metropolis’s website, the most important about Brazil politics.

We argued that Intellectual Property was never a barrier to accessing the COVID-19 vaccines. In fact, it facilitated the collaborations among manufacturers and suppliers necessary to promote investment and access. An example of such collaboration includes the Pfizer Inc./BioNTech SE agreement with Brazilian biopharmaceutical company Eurofarma Laboratórios SA to manufacture COVID-19 mRNA vaccines for distribution within Latin America.

Pursuing flawed compulsory licensing initiatives coupled with mandatory technology transfers would have hindered Brazil’s desire to foster innovation and facilitate access to medicines. Indeed, it called into question how seriously Brazil took its international commitments and obligations.

The Outcome:

On July 5th, 2022, the bill was passed, maintaining the vetoes and thus reducing the impact and burden to consumers of the compulsory licensing.

Even though the bill was enacted into law, we were able to keep the veto of the more egregious elements of PL nº 12/2021 including (1) provisions related to mandatory technology transfer (including trade secrets, technical information, and know-how) and the sharing of biological material related to an issued compulsory license; and (2) a provision that would have applied compulsory licensing mechanisms to COVID-19 related products, including treatments and vaccines.

Consumers in Brazil may now enjoy, for a bit longer, the marvellous and proven benefits and innovations that strong IP laws provide. We’ll be watching closely if new developments in this area arise.

Canada is repealing the excise tax on non-alcoholic beer

April 12, 2022
By Consumer Choice Center
In Alcohol, Blog, Our Success Stories, Taxes
2 comments

Non-alcoholic beer has been subject to federal excise taxes despite not containing virtually any alcohol at all.

Our North American Affairs Manager, David Clement pointed out several problems with this tax and was invited to meet with the Ministry of Finance to explain the arguments against the tax. For example, non-alcoholic wine and spirits are exempt from the tax, which created a huge disparity for non-alcoholic beer. Removing tax would reduce costs for health-conscious consumers, who are looking for a healthier alternative to their favorite drink. This would also be consistent with the principles of harm reduction, a policy approach the current government has taken upon other issues.

Fortunately, Budget 2022 removes alcohol excise taxes on beer containing no more than 0.5% alcohol by volume. This is another great victory for Canadian consumers!

This is a step in the right direction and hopefully the start of a national discussion on modernizing the alcohol excise duty structure.

For more information, listen to this Consumer Choice Radio episode

Ontario Government Legalizes iGaming

In the first week of April the government of Ontario launched a legal private online gambling market, which allows for consumers to wager on casino games, sporting events and other gambling activities on websites and apps that are approved by the province’s regulator.

The CCC’s North American Affairs Manager David Clement was invited to participate in the province’s consultation process with both the Attorney General’s Office and the Minister of Finance’s office. In those meetings we highlighted the need for a legal market in Ontario to ensure consumer safety in the online gambling market, and shift consumers away from the black market.

The CCC is excited to see a safe and legal iGaming market thrive in Ontario, and hope that other provinces follow Ontario’s lead.

Ontario makes cannabis delivery and curbside pickup permanent

Ontario retailers were granted a temporary permit to offer cannabis delivery and pick-up services during the pandemic when alcohol and cannabis retail were deemed essential businesses.

Our Northern American Affairs Manager David Clement went a step further and argued in favor of making cannabis delivery permanent. According to him “It would significantly benefit retailers. But more importantly, it would benefit consumers by expanding and enhancing their options.”

We are happy to hear that the “provincial government has permanently green-lit the ability of cannabis retailers to offer delivery and curbside pickup services”.

This is a step taken in the right direction but more needs to be done for making the cannabis delivery process smoother. There are a strict set of rules that need to be followed to comply with approved delivery or curbside pickup, and for now, third-party delivery is not permitted.

Delivery can only be done by a retail store authorization holder or its employees, which makes it hard to keep up with the rising demand. Retailers aren’t equipped with the capital nor the expertise to operate a fleet of vehicles. The Ontario government should allow the use of third-party services to deliver, which we already permit for alcohol. Having a chance to outsource delivery to a third-party service, like delivery apps, gives legal retailers a leg up on the black market, which is still very prevalent.

Delaying the proposed law on content quotas

In February 2021, the Mexican senate proposed a new law (Ley Federal de Cinematographia y de Audiovisual) that would require a national audiovisual content quota of 15%. If the law passed, streaming services and digital platforms would have to reduce their content offer to meet a 15% national quota. To meet the quota, Prime Video, for example, would have to delete two-thirds of its library.

CCC hosted a successful webinar to discuss the negative effects this policy would have on consumers, while not even achieving its purpose of increasing production and consumption of national content. Webinar created quite a buzz and was featured in more than 50 Mexican news outlets! CCC also interacted with members of the Mexican senate and other stakeholders to stop the law.

Fortunately, our efforts didn’t go unnoticed, the law has been delayed and will have to go under a full review and be debated in parliament according to Mexico’s legislation. We hope the Mexican parliament will leave it up to Mexican consumers to decide what movies and series they prefer to watch.

Paid plasma collection coming to Alberta

Blood plasma is a valuable resource used to create medicines that treat burns, help those with immune deficiencies, coagulation disorders and respiratory diseases.

The Voluntary Blood Donations Act in Alberta banned paid plasma donation in 2017. However, the voluntary system only provides 20% of supply needed, making the Province of Alberta, and the country, reliant on foreign sources.

To meet the domestic need for plasma therapies, Canada has imported more than 80 percent of these therapies from the United States, where plasma donors are compensated for their donations.

We have long advocated in support of paid plasma donations around the country and we are happy to see the Voluntary Blood Donations Repeal Act being passed. This allows private companies to pay donors for their plasma and plasma collection is expected to increase in Alberta, as it has in other jurisdictions. The CCC’s North American Affairs Manager David Clement has advocated for the allowance of paid plasma in The Western Standard, and the Toronto Star.

This is the news worth celebrating and here’s to hoping other provinces follow Alberta’s lead.

Implementing Virtual Affidavits

Manitoba’s Law Reform Commission Recommends Implementing Virtual Affidavits

After working closely with the Attorney General’s office in Ontario to bring forward virtual commissioning of legal documents via tele-conference, the CCC’s David Clement was asked to consult with Manitoba’s Law Reform Commission.

Specifically, Manitoba was looking for guidance on how they could modernize their legal system and enact similar changes.

On August 31st, the Law Reform Commission released their report, where they made the suggestion that Manitoba should in fact move forward with modernizing their legal system by allowing affidavits to be taken virtually via video-conference.

The Commission acknowledged the CCC in the following way:

The Commission gratefully acknowledges the following individuals for providing valuable feedback on this project: David Clement, North American Affairs Manager- Consumer Choice Center

The Commission officially made the following recommendation:

The Commission recommends that section 64(1) of The Manitoba Evidence Act be amended to remove the requirement that an oath, affirmation or statutory declaration be taken only in the presence of a person and to enable affidavits to be taken remotely using video-conferencing technology. (p 15)

Removing Sales Tax From Medical Cannabis

BC’s Finance Committee Recommends Removing Sales Tax From Medical Cannabis

Earlier this year our North American Affairs Manager David Clement appeared before British Columbia’s Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services to discuss cannabis taxation. In his presentation David explained that medical cannabis should be exempt from provincial sales taxes, for the following reasons:

Other prescription medicines are exempt from sales taxes. Removing the sales tax from medical cannabis would simply be treating medical cannabis like the prescription medicine it is.
Taxing medicine is cruel, given that many medical cannabis patients are chronically ill and have limited incomes.

In late August the Committee released their official report to the legislature, which includes a recommendation that BC remove the provincial sales tax from medical cannabis purchases.

The committee acknowledged the CCC with the following statement:

“The Committee also received recommendations to remove the PST on medical cannabis from several organizations, including Consumer Choice Center, Medical Cannabis Canada, and Aurora Cannabis Inc. They described the application of the PST as a barrier for most British Columbians who use medical cannabis, noting that many pay out-of-pocket as Pharmacare and many private insurers do not cover medical cannabis. The Arthritis Society, BC and Yukon Division shared that many individuals with arthritis use medical cannabis for pain management and that the cost barriers could lead individuals to the illicit market.”

The report officially made the following recommendation:

“Examine mechanisms in the taxation system to remove or rebate the PST for medical cannabis.”

Policy Victory Ukraine: Cancelled Tariffs on Imported Fertilisers

The Issue

In May, the Ukrainian government announced it was considering introducing tariffs on imported fertilisers from the EU. Though presented as a means to protect domestic industries, import quotas are not only highly protectionist but, more importantly, they are a sure sign there are some powerful domestic lobby interests at play. In the case of Ukraine and fertilisers, it’s the infamous oligarchs Firtash and Kolomoisky who initiated the review of Ukrainian trade policy. Both own large nitrogen enterprises and have a record of pursuing a monopolistic position on the Ukrainian market.

Small and medium farmers and Ukrainian consumers had the most to lose from the quotas.

The CCC Response

We have responded to the issue by writing extensively in Ukrainian media to criticise such a move. Trade protectionism is damaging and costly and threatens consumer choice. Our European Affairs Associate Maria Chaplia appeared in multiple Ukrainian outlets.

The Outcome

On June 24th, the Ukrainian government decided against the quotas in favor of free trade. Trade with the EU is especially beneficial to Ukraine as it allows cheaper food production at home in Ukraine and hence lower food prices for Ukrainians. We are very proud that we have played a role in bringing about this consumer-friendly outcome.