Is there an "Appeal to Motive" fallacy?

Recently I've been thinking about an argument style I've been hearing a lot, and it seems fallacious to me but I don't see any named fallacy for it.

I've been calling it the appeal to motive, mainly because that's the best way I know to describe it.

What I usually hear is something to the effect of your argument is flawed or invalid because you have a personal (or professional) motive to prove the argument true.

For example, in my state, I've been seeing a lot of posters recently in opposition to cigarette taxes.

I noticed at the bottom of one of the posters that these ads and this campaign is being funded by Philip Morris USA.

Pretty much, to put the argument in context, somebody would be arguing that you shouldn't trust the ads or trust the arguments made by the ads because Philip Morris has a vested interest, being a tobacco company, to prove that cigarette taxes are bad.

Somehow this kind of argument seems fallacious to me but I don't know for certain. I'd really like to hear somebody's opinion on this.