After the resolution (RDC 14/2012) was issued
Discursive strategyDomainArgument
Unanticipated costs to economy and societyThe economyLoss of jobs (specially farmers) and sales, impossibility to grow burley tobacco.
Loss of tax revenue due to increase in illicit trade.
Law enforcementRise of illicit trade as adults who smoke flavoured cigarettes will purchase them in illicit market, thus increasing contraband.
The lawANVISA has no mandate to ban additives in tobacco products
Politics/governanceThe resolution is a typical example of the nanny state, the government is over reaching in its regulatory mandate.
Intended public health benefitsThere is not enough evidenceThere is no scientific evidence about the relation between additives use and attractiveness of tobacco products.
Policy will not workThe additive ban will be ineffective to avoid kids start to smoke.
Unintended benefits to undeserving groupsSmugglers will profitThe additive ban will rise illicit trade.
Expected tobacco industry costsAdditives ban will reduce sales and jobsThe additive ban will increase illicit trade and not allow grow burley tobacco generating poverty and loss of jobs.