New Mexico Sues Tobacco Companies over Breach of Settlement Agreement

Dec.06.2022
New Mexico Sues Tobacco Companies over Breach of Settlement Agreement
New Mexico sues tobacco companies for breach of settlement agreement and conspiracy, alleging over $84 million in losses.

The state of New Mexico is currently suing several tobacco companies, alleging they conspired and breached contracts.


New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas announced a legal challenge on Tuesday, alleging that tobacco companies have been withholding annual payments required by a multi-state settlement that resolved dozens of lawsuits seeking reimbursement for healthcare costs related to smoking-related illnesses.


Complaints from New Mexico are focused on a specific provision of a 1998 settlement agreement, alleging that the company's abuse of that provision has resulted in the state losing over $84 million in the past 14 years.


In a statement, Balderrama said, "These baseless tactics of delay have no end, and now is the time to compel tobacco companies to pay the damages owed to New Mexico - providing funding for much-needed health initiatives.


The companies did not immediately respond to requests for comment regarding the lawsuit in the state of New Mexico.


According to a settlement agreement, each company is obligated to make annual payments to the state of New Mexico. However, the Attorney General's office claims that these companies often raise disputes every year, resulting in a certain percentage of payments being withheld and potentially leading to arbitration procedures that could last for years.


For example, the arbitration payment made in 2004 concluded last month, while the arbitration payments made from 2005 to 2007 have only recently begun.


Officials from the state government have stated that the average annual cost paid is between $30-40 million, which only covers less than 5% of New Mexico's healthcare costs directly attributed to smoking. They estimate that healthcare costs related to smoking will exceed $980 million by 2021.


In 2020, Montana launched a similar legal challenge and successfully retrieved over $49 million in payments that tobacco companies had wrongly withheld. The state also reached an agreement with these companies, ensuring they would not contest annual payments to Montana over the next ten years.


Officials in the state of New Mexico have stated that the amount of settlement money being withheld each year is increasing.


According to the lawsuit, defendants - including tobacco giants Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds - did not disclose to the state of New Mexico how much money they withheld or where the funds were held. The practice of withholding taxes may also vary from year to year.


According to state prosecutors, the best estimates suggest that defendants in New Mexico are withholding between $6 million and $9 million annually due to a lack of transparency. "This scheme is a calculated strategy designed to permanently and fraudulently reduce the contractual payments defendants are obligated to pay under settlement agreements, and to undermine the purpose of such agreements," the complaint stated.


The Office of the Attorney General has stated that many states have been renegotiating with tobacco companies for years to avoid continuing arbitration regarding annual payments and to concede more favorable terms to the companies.


Officials in New Mexico state that only eight states are still demanding full payment of the funds they are entitled to under a settlement agreement.


2FIRSTS will continue to report on this topic, with future updates available on the "2FIRSTS APP." Scan the QR code below to download the app.



Disclaimer

This article is provided solely for professional research, industry discussion, and informational purposes. Any references to brands, companies, products, technologies, or policies are made for factual reporting and analytical purposes only, and do not constitute endorsement, recommendation, promotion, or advertising by 2Firsts.

Nicotine-containing products, including but not limited to cigarettes, e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products, and nicotine pouches, carry significant health risks. Readers are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions, including age restrictions and access limitations.

The information contained in this article should not be regarded as investment, legal, medical, regulatory, or commercial advice. While 2Firsts strives to ensure the accuracy and reliability of its content, it does not assume liability for any direct or indirect loss arising from errors, omissions, inaccuracies, or reliance on the information contained herein.

This article is not intended for individuals below the legal age for accessing tobacco or nicotine-related information in their jurisdiction.

 

Copyright Notice

This article is either original content produced by 2Firsts or content reproduced, translated, summarized, or adapted from third-party sources with attribution where applicable. The intellectual property rights of the original content remain with 2Firsts or the respective original rights holders.

No individual or organization may copy, reproduce, distribute, republish, modify, translate, or otherwise use this content without prior authorization. Any unauthorized use may result in legal action.

For copyright-related inquiries, corrections, or removal requests, please contact: info@2firsts.com.

 

AI-Assisted Translation and Editing Notice

Portions of this article may have been translated, edited, or reviewed with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools to improve efficiency and readability. Due to the limitations of AI-assisted translation and editing, discrepancies, omissions, or inaccuracies may exist when compared with the original source.

Where applicable, readers are advised to refer to the original source for the most complete and accurate information. If you identify any errors or believe that any content infringes upon your rights, please contact us at info@2firsts.com, and we will review and address the matter promptly.

JUUL Purchasers Ask Ninth Circuit to Preserve Antitrust Classes in Case Over Altria’s $12.8 Billion Investment
JUUL Purchasers Ask Ninth Circuit to Preserve Antitrust Classes in Case Over Altria’s $12.8 Billion Investment
Private antitrust litigation stemming from Altria's 2018 $12.8 billion investment for a 35% economic interest in JUUL is advancing before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Direct purchasers, indirect purchasers and indirect resellers of JUUL products filed answering briefs this week seeking to preserve class certifications granted by a California federal court in February. Altria and JUUL argue that individual consumers and large distributors differ too much in purchasing terms to remain in a single direct-purchaser class, while a separate dispute concerns whether California antitrust law can apply to indirect purchasers across 27 jurisdictions. A September trial has been put on hold during the appeal.
Sep.23
Reynolds Seeks to Join Altria Lawsuit Challenging FDA PMTA Rule and Calculation of 180-Day Deadline
Reynolds Seeks to Join Altria Lawsuit Challenging FDA PMTA Rule and Calculation of 180-Day Deadline
Three R.J. Reynolds companies are seeking to intervene in a lawsuit filed by Altria subsidiaries Helix Innovations and NJOY challenging the FDA's 2021 PMTA final rule. The companies dispute how the agency uses Acceptance and Filing reviews and completeness determinations to establish when the Tobacco Control Act's 180-day decision period begins. Reynolds has also linked prolonged PMTA reviews to competition from unauthorized vaping products. The FDA, meanwhile, has been accelerating reviews and reducing its backlog.
Sep.14
Australia’s Victoria Steps Up Illegal Tobacco Enforcement With Store Closures and Penalties of Up to A$2.5 Million
Australia’s Victoria Steps Up Illegal Tobacco Enforcement With Store Closures and Penalties of Up to A$2.5 Million
Australia’s state of Victoria has activated new powers allowing Tobacco Licensing Victoria and police to shut premises suspected of selling, supplying or possessing illicit tobacco for up to 90 days. Longer closures can be ordered by a magistrates’ court. Businesses subject to closure orders must generally cease all trading and will be placed on a public list. Breaching a closure order can carry penalties of up to A$2.5 million and 20 years in prison.
Sep.10
Product | Philip Morris Japan Launches Ginza-Exclusive IQOS ILUMA i PRIME, Limited to 1,814 Units at First Global Flagship
Product | Philip Morris Japan Launches Ginza-Exclusive IQOS ILUMA i PRIME, Limited to 1,814 Units at First Global Flagship
Philip Morris Japan (PMJ) launched the IQOS ILUMA i PRIME Ginza Limited Model Set in Tokyo on September 4, 2026, alongside the opening of IQOS Flagship Ginza, the brand’s first global flagship store. The Oasis Blue edition is limited to 1,814 individually numbered units, with the figure derived from the store’s address at Ginza 1-8-14. The set also includes two Yamanaka-nuri glasses and special packaging, priced at JPY 11,980 and sold exclusively at the Ginza flagship.
Sep.07
Canada Considers Easing Pharmacy-Only Nicotine Pouch Sales Rules, Potentially Reopening Convenience Store Channel
Canada Considers Easing Pharmacy-Only Nicotine Pouch Sales Rules, Potentially Reopening Convenience Store Channel
Canada's federal government is considering changes to current restrictions on where nicotine pouches can be sold, potentially allowing authorized products to return to convenience stores and other general retail channels, although no decision has been made. Since 2024, emerging nicotine replacement therapy products such as nicotine pouches have been largely restricted to behind-the-counter pharmacy sales. Health Canada, meanwhile, continues to recall unauthorized and higher-strength nicotine pouches, indicating that the current discussion concerns retail access for authorized products rather than a broad relaxation of nicotine pouch regulation.
Sep.14
Juul Sublicense Reshapes Vuse Alto Patent Bill as Court Ends R.J. Reynolds’ 5.25% Royalty Obligation to Altria
Juul Sublicense Reshapes Vuse Alto Patent Bill as Court Ends R.J. Reynolds’ 5.25% Royalty Obligation to Altria
According to Law360 on August 31, 2026, a federal judge in North Carolina ruled that a patent sublicense between R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co. and Juul Labs Inc. relieves Reynolds of its obligation to continue paying royalties to Altria Client Services LLC over Vuse Alto. A jury had previously found that Vuse Alto infringed three Altria patents and awarded approximately $95.2 million in past damages, after which Reynolds was ordered to pay an ongoing royalty equal to 5.25% of positive net sales. The new ruling finds that a valid sublicense can eliminate future infringement, potentially ending what Altria described as hundreds of millions of dollars in future royalties.
Sep.01