Article Text

Download PDFPDF
A discarded cigar package survey in New York City: indicators of non-compliance with local flavoured tobacco restrictions
  1. Marin K Kurti,
  2. Kevin R J Schroth,
  3. Cristine Delnevo
  1. Center for Tobacco Studies, Rutgers School of Public Health, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Marin K Kurti, Center for Tobacco Studies, Rutgers School of Public Health, New Brunswick, NJ 08854, USA; marin.kurti{at}


Introduction In 2009, New York City (NYC) restricted the sale of flavoured tobacco products. We assessed product availability as a proxy for potential non-compliance by analysing discarded cigar, cigarillo and blunt wrap packages in New York City.

Methods A discarded cigar package survey was conducted in 2016, in a stratified random sample of 94 block groups in NYC resulting in the collection of 886 discarded cigar packages. Each package was coded for brand name, flavour description (explicit and implicit) and size.

Findings Overall, 19.2% of the cigar packages were explicitly flavoured. An additional 9.4% of the packages reflected implicit flavours. Explicit flavoured cigar packages were at increased odds of being found in Staten Island (adjusted OR (AOR)=3.96, 95% CI=1.66 to 9.46), in packaging size of two or three (AOR=8.49, 95% CI=4.24 to 17.02) or four or more (AOR=4.26, 95% CI=1.95 to 9.30).

Conclusion Nearly one out of three cigar packages were flavoured products suggesting a problematic level of non-compliance and continued availability. Potential non-compliance is likely fueled by licensed wholesalers and retailers who continue to sell restricted flavoured products. Some retailers may be unaware that implicitly named cigars are typically flavoured and are, therefore, illegal. This lack of awareness of implicit flavoured cigars may be exacerbated by NYC’s lack of education or enforcement specific to implicitly flavoured tobacco products.

  • non-cigarette products
  • illegal trade
  • policy evaluation

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


  • Contributors MK conceptualised the study and led data collection efforts. MK and CD coded and analysed the data. Paper was written and edited by MK, CD and KRJS.

  • Funding This study was funded by Rutgers School of Criminal Justice Dean’s Research Grant (2015-2016) and the National Cancer Institute (U54CA22973).

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.