Altria To Spin-Off Philip Morris Unit
Separation Of International Operations Frees It From U.S. Regulatory And Legal Constraints
-
Photo
(AP)
-
Timeline
Tobacco Road
Review a history of the tobacco industry, court battles and smoking's health risks.
-
Interactive
U.S. Markets
Are you a Bull or a Bear? Review the history of investing in America and learn key terms.
Separating the operations of Altria's domestic and international tobacco companies, makers of the popular Marlboro cigarette brand, would free each to pursue profit more aggressively on their own, and would clear the international business from the legal and regulatory constraints facing its U.S. counterpart, Philip Morris USA.
The company announced it would finalize its decision and announce the exact timing of the spin-off at its board meeting on Jan. 30.
Altria Chief Executive Louis C. Camilleri will become the new CEO of Philip Morris International, once the spin-off is completed.
Michael E. Szymanczyk, the current CEO of the domestic cigarette business Philip Morris USA in Richmond, Va., would assume the top post at Altria.
The proposal needs to be cleared by the Internal Revenue Service and the Securities and Exchange Commission, the company said in a statement.
A spin-off of PMI would be the latest step in a restructuring process started in March when New York-based Altria Group Inc. spun off its majority stake in Kraft Foods Inc.
The international tobacco spin-off would leave Altria as the parent company of Philip Morris USA and Philip Morris Capital Corp., as well as owner of a 29 percent stake in the beer company SABMiller.
Both Philip Morris cigarette businesses plan to use the Marlboro brand in expansion efforts in and out of the U.S.
Executives at the international cigarette company's Lausanne, Switzerland, headquarters oversee operations in more than 160 countries.
Plans for the proposed spin-off had been widely anticipated.
© MMVII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.



I GUESS IT''S BETTER TO LEAVE THEM ON THE MARKET AND RAISED TAXES ON THEM SO THEY CAN PAY FOR THE MEDICAL EXPENSES. WOULD''NT IT BE BETTER JUST TO BAN THEM?