The European Commission is currently collecting comments on its proposal to tax new nicotine products, including nicotine pouches and e-liquids. The proposal has provoked strong reactions, especially in Sweden, where many are concerned that higher taxes will hamper efforts to reduce smoking.
“Together we can stop the madness of the EU bureaucrats” proposals", writes the Swedish Snus Association on its social media.
The European Commission is now seeking comments from consumers and other stakeholders on its proposed tax package for new nicotine products, including a tax on nicotine-free e-liquids and a substantial increase in the tax on nicotine pouches. So far, over 13,000 Europeans have submitted comments.
These include many Swedish contributions, not least because the European Commission's proposal would mean a sharp increase in the price of nicotine pouches. The consumer organisation Snusarnas Riksförbund has urged its members to participate in the consultation, which is clearly reflected in the comments.
“I am so tired of the EU repeatedly ignoring what we in Sweden actually know. We have lived with snus and white snus for a long time. We've seen what works in reality - not just in papers and PowerPoints. When you now talk about stricter rules for nicotine portions, it sounds nice in meetings in Brussels, but it will be wrong in practice,” writes an anonymous Swede to the European Commission.
”Young people easy targets in black markets”
They also express concern about the consequences of overly strict regulation of smokeless nicotine.
“If you push too hard, sales will move to the black market. It's always like that. There is no control over what is in the bags, no traceability, no age checks. Adults who want a legal alternative will still buy, but they are forced to do so without protection. And young people become easy targets because the border disappears into the shadows.”
Users vs. the tobacco industry
A recurring theme in the Swedish comments is that snus is seen as an important part of efforts to reduce smoking in Sweden. European Commission officials have so far dismissed similar arguments as attempts to influence the “tobacco industry”. The same applies to arguments about harm minimisation in the nicotine market. However, this view is not shared by Swedish users.
“Talking about tobacco control with one hand and penalising the products that actually contribute to fewer cigarettes with the other is contradictory. Evidence and reasonableness must outweigh symbolic politics. The proposal to raise taxes on nicotine pouches to the same levels as smoking tobacco is a particularly clear example. Taxes should reflect risk - otherwise we are steering the wrong way. Equalising taxes with cigarettes sends the signal that the risks are the same. They are not. We risk slowing down smoking cessation, pushing people back to the most harmful and rewarding the black market. This benefits no one,” writes another Swedish user.
“Give people realistic alternatives and many will give up cigarettes on their own. It's not surprising. It's easier to switch to something less harmful when it is available, clearly regulated and controlled. When you cut off the options, you leave people in the lurch and reinforce the very harm you say you want to reduce,” writes another.
”Better age verification measures”
Many Danish users have also submitted comments to the European Commission. Here, the focus is mainly on differences in risk between smoking and smokeless nicotine - especially e-cigarettes, which are significantly more popular than nicotine pouches in Denmark.
Despite a ban on flavours other than artificial tobacco and menthol almost three years ago, underage use is on the rise. Critics say the ban has driven parts of the market underground and that the illicit trade is targeting young buyers.
“The issue of young people using the products should be addressed to a greater extent through automated age verification systems, for example linked to payment cards or other forms of ID, rather than through unnaturally high taxation,” writes a Danish user. “Products should be taxed according to the health risks associated with their use. Smokeless products such as nicotine pouches, e-cigarettes and heated tobacco are less harmful than cigarettes and other smoking tobacco, and should therefore be taxed less. Taxation of smokeless tobacco and nicotine products should be low enough to act as an incentive for smokers to switch to smokeless alternatives.”
French votes for harm minimisation
The issue of taxes on e-liquid and the regulation of nicotine pouches has also engaged many French users this year. Over 130,000 French people have openly protested against the French government's plans to tax e-liquids along the same lines as the European Commission is now proposing.
Even among French commentators, there is a widespread view that smokeless nicotine should be taxed more lightly than smoking tobacco. Several also emphasise the importance of attracting smokers away from cigarettes through financial incentives - something that critics say contrasts with the European Commission's current approach.
“The proposed taxation under the EU Nicotine Products Directive raises many concerns, especially regarding the crucial distinction between smoking and non-smoking products. By gradually aligning the taxation of e-cigarettes with that of conventional cigarettes, the European Commission risks discouraging smokers from switching to less harmful alternatives, jeopardising risk reduction efforts. Such an approach, which does not take into account the relative harmfulness of products, could not only exacerbate the development of the black market, but also aggravate the situation of French traders who are already facing fierce competition,” they write in a commentary.
Threats to national strategies
Similar reasoning is echoed in other French contributions, which describe the European Commission's proposal as a threat to national strategies to reduce smoking.
“By harmonising taxation without taking into account national health policies, countries like France risk weakening their efforts to reduce smoking. Excessive taxation may discourage smokers from switching to less harmful alternatives and thus undermine the risk reduction objective. Imagine a consumer hesitating between a conventional cigarette and an electronic cigarette - deterred by an excessive price difference,” writes a French user.
Calling on more people to have their say
The European Commission will keep the comment boxes open until 31 October 2025. The Swedish Snus Association and several other stakeholder organisations urge their members to stay engaged until the end.
“Together we can stop the madness of the EU bureaucrats. We need to show Elisabeth Svantesson that she has the Swedish people behind her on this issue - not just to save traditional snus from a tax grab, but also to defend our approach to harm reduction. Make your opinion heard!” writes Snusarnas Riksförbund on their social media.
I think we should think about or consider leaving the EU, they have nothing to do with Swedish snus at all. Otherwise we will have to fight back and pay the fines that will be, there would be an outcry people would be outraged if touched our Snus.
We should never have joined the EU in the first place! We never wanted to join the EU but we were forced to when it was decided over our heads. Of course it is all about the tobacco industry wanting to make money and have a monopoly. Blaming children and young people is bullshit! Children and young people throughout the ages have been attracted to the ”forbidden” chewing tobacco, cigarettes, snuff. All ages have been involved in this.