Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 1346
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 1346.02 (2026)

Joining settlement or making deposits into qualified escrow fund

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
September 26, 2003
Latest Legislation:
House Bill 95 - 125th General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

Any tobacco product manufacturer selling cigarettes to consumers within the state (whether directly or through a distributor, retailer or similar intermediary or intermediaries) after June 30, 1999 shall do one of the following:

(A) Become a participating manufacturer (as that term is defined in section II(jj) of the Master Settlement Agreement) and generally perform its financial obligations under the Master Settlement Agreement; or

(B)(1) Place into a qualified escrow fund by April 15 of the year following the year in question the following amounts (as such amounts are adjusted for inflation):

1999: $.0094241 per unit sold after June 30, 1999;

2000: $.0104712 per unit sold;

For each of 2001 and 2002: $.0136125 per unit sold;

For each of 2003 through 2006: $.0167539 per unit sold;

For each of 2007 and each year thereafter: $.0188482 per unit sold.

(2) A tobacco product manufacturer that places funds into escrow pursuant to division (B)(1) of this section shall receive the interest or other appreciation on such funds as earned. Such funds themselves shall be released from escrow only under the following circumstances:

(a) To pay a judgment or settlement on any released claim brought against such tobacco product manufacturer by the state or any releasing party located or residing in the state. Funds shall be released from escrow under division (B)(2)(a) of this section:

(i) In the order in which they were placed into escrow; and

(ii) Only to the extent and at the time necessary to make payments required under such judgment or settlement.

(b) To the extent that a tobacco product manufacturer establishes that the amount it was required to place into escrow on account of units sold in the state in a particular year was greater than the Master Settlement Agreement payments, as determined pursuant to section IX(i) of that Agreement including after final determination of all adjustments, that such manufacturer would have been required to make on account of such units sold had it been a participating manufacturer, the excess shall be released from escrow and revert back to such tobacco product manufacturer; or

(c) To the extent not released from escrow under division (B)(2)(a) or (b) of this section, funds shall be released from escrow and revert back to such tobacco product manufacturer twenty-five years after the date on which they were placed into escrow.

(3) Each tobacco product manufacturer that elects to place funds into escrow pursuant to division (B) of this section shall annually certify to the attorney general that it is in compliance with division (B) of this section. The attorney general may bring a civil action on behalf of the state against any tobacco product manufacturer that fails to place into escrow the funds required under this section. Any tobacco product manufacturer that fails in any year to place into escrow the funds required under this section shall:

(a) Be required within fifteen days to place such funds into escrow as shall bring it into compliance with this section. The court, upon a finding of a violation of division (B) of this section, may impose a civil penalty to be paid to the general revenue fund of the state in an amount not to exceed five per cent of the amount improperly withheld from escrow per day of the violation and in a total amount not to exceed one hundred per cent of the original amount improperly withheld from escrow;

(b) In the case of a knowing violation, be required within fifteen days to place such funds into escrow as shall bring it into compliance with this section. The court, upon a finding of a knowing violation of division (B) of this section, may impose a civil penalty to be paid to the general revenue fund of the state in an amount not to exceed fifteen per cent of the amount improperly withheld from escrow per day of the violation and in a total amount not to exceed three hundred per cent of the original amount improperly withheld from escrow; and

(c) In the case of a second knowing violation, be prohibited from selling cigarettes to consumers within the state (whether directly or through a distributor, retailer or similar intermediary) for a period not to exceed two years.

Each failure to make an annual deposit required under this section shall constitute a separate violation.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 2007–2012 · leading case: State ex rel. Cordray v. Makedonija Tabak 2000, 937 N.E.2d 595 (Ohio Ct. App. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State ex rel. Cordray v. Makedonija Tabak 2000, 937 N.E.2d 595 (Ohio Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 9× “{¶ 6} The complaint further alleged that appellant is a tobacco-product importer, as well as MT-2000’s agent and attorney-in-fact, for purposes of establishing, funding, and maintaining bank and escrow accounts to fund MT-2000’s escrow obligations under R.C. 1346.02. Appellee…”
State Ex Rel. Attorney Gen. v. Grand Tobacco, 871 N.E.2d 1255 (Ohio Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “The court also imposed a monetary fine against Grand Tobacco for violating the provisions of R.C. 1346.02. {¶ 7} On March 3, 2005, Grand Tobacco filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s February 1, 2005 entry granting appellee’s amended motion for summary judgment.”
Grand River Enter. Six Nations, Ltd. v. King, 783 F. Supp. 2d 516 (S.D.N.Y. 2011). “§ 66-291; Ohio Rev.Code Ann. § 1346.02; Or.Rev.Stat.”
State ex rel. Dann v. Nacional, 2011 Ohio 2818 (Ohio Ct. Cl. 2011). · cites it 4× “On June 23, 2003, the State brought suit against Tanasa alleging that Tanasa had failed to make sufficient deposits.”
State ex rel. Dann v. Tabacalera Nacional, S.A.A., 2012 Ohio 5300 (Ohio Ct. Cl. 2012). · cites it 2× “As such, Tanasa was required by R.C. 1346.02 either to participate in a 1998 Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) or to make deposits into a “qualified escrow fund” (escrow fund).”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 1346.02(B)(3) — 2 cases
State ex rel. Cordray v. Makedonija Tabak 2000, 937 N.E.2d 595 (Ohio Ct. App. 2010). “{¶ 6} The complaint further alleged that appellant is a tobacco-product importer, as well as MT-2000’s agent and attorney-in-fact, for purposes of establishing, funding, and maintaining bank and escrow accounts to fund MT-2000’s escrow obligations under R.C. 1346.02. Appellee…”
State ex rel. Dann v. Nacional, 2011 Ohio 2818 (Ohio Ct. Cl. 2011). “On June 23, 2003, the State brought suit against Tanasa alleging that Tanasa had failed to make sufficient deposits.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 1346.02(B)(3)(a) — 1 case
State ex rel. Cordray v. Makedonija Tabak 2000, 937 N.E.2d 595 (Ohio Ct. App. 2010). “{¶ 6} The complaint further alleged that appellant is a tobacco-product importer, as well as MT-2000’s agent and attorney-in-fact, for purposes of establishing, funding, and maintaining bank and escrow accounts to fund MT-2000’s escrow obligations under R.C. 1346.02. Appellee…”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 1346.02(B)(3)(c) — 1 case
State ex rel. Cordray v. Makedonija Tabak 2000, 937 N.E.2d 595 (Ohio Ct. App. 2010). “{¶ 6} The complaint further alleged that appellant is a tobacco-product importer, as well as MT-2000’s agent and attorney-in-fact, for purposes of establishing, funding, and maintaining bank and escrow accounts to fund MT-2000’s escrow obligations under R.C. 1346.02. Appellee…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.