In a landmark (and controversial) move, the Maldives has become the first country in the world to formally implement a generational ban on tobacco. Amendments to the country’s Tobacco Control Act now prohibit anyone born on or after January 1, 2007, from smoking, purchasing, or using tobacco products. While framed as a moral and social investment in future generations, the law has made its entrance alongside a sweeping ban on electronic cigarettes, vapes, and all related accessories. The sale, importation, free distribution, and use of any vape product will be illegal from December 15, 2024, with fines reaching MVR 50,000 (approx. USD $3,250) for importing such devices.
This means that not only is the Maldives the first country to enact a generational smoking ban, but also one of the only countries worldwide to simultaneously outlaw vaping. This combination, fear experts, leaving no access to low-risk alternatives at all, risks pushing smokers underground.
The reasoning behind such bans
The Maldivian government argues the policy will create a healthier generation, free from nicotine. President Mohamed Muizzu has framed the legislation as part of a broader effort to “foster a competent, morally upright, and diligent citizenry.” Supporters say the ban reduces long-term healthcare costs and sends a strong social signal discouraging tobacco use. Some public health groups applaud the idea of “phasing out” smoking one generation at a time, claiming it eliminates the intergenerational cycle of nicotine addiction.
The first government in the world to formally propose a tobacco generational ban was New Zealand in 2021. And although Although New Zealand’s new government repealed the law in 2024 before it took effect, several countries began considering similar policies later, including Malaysia, Denmark, Hong Kong, Scotland and the UK. In the UK, the proposed generational ban is currently moving through Parliament as part of the Tobacco and Vapes Bill. Hence the Maldivian move will likely be watched closely by policymakers worldwide.
Harm reduction experts sound the alarm
For the tobacco harm reduction (THR) community, the Maldivian approach represents exactly the kind of policy that risks doing more harm than good. Generational bans, when either paired with prohibitions on safer alternatives, or simply also applied to these products, ignore decades of evidence showing that safer nicotine products dramatically reduce smoking-related disease. Multiple independent reviews, including the UK’s own Office for Health Improvement and Disparities, confirm that vaping is at least 95% less harmful than smoking. Studies published in The BMJ, Cochrane Library, and others consistently show vaping to be one of the most effective tools for smoking cessation.
Yet the Maldives has taken the opposite route, criminalising both cigarettes and safer alternatives for an entire demographic group. Harm reduction experts warn that such policies will likely push consumers toward black markets. Countries that restrict vaping—such as Australia—have seen flourishing illegal markets. Enforcement agencies report unregulated imports, criminal involvement, and greater access for minors. Without legal products, the Maldives risks repeating this pattern at a much larger scale.
Restrictions that fail to differentiate between the risk profiles of the nicotine products affected, remove safer pathways for smokers who want to quit. A smoker born after 2007 will now have zero regulated cessation options. Without access to nicotine pouches, vapes, or even regulated heated tobacco, many will remain dependent on cigarettes, ironically worsening health outcomes. And last but not least, such bans criminalise ordinary people rather than protect them. Generational bans introduce new categories of offenders: adults whose only “crime” is being born after an arbitrary date.
Arguments supporters make, and why they don’t add up
Proponents claim generational bans reduce youth smoking. But the evidence is thin. Youth smoking rates have already fallen to historic lows in most countries due to education, taxation, and the availability of safer alternatives—not prohibition.
In fact, a 2023 RAND Corporation analysis found that restrictive tobacco laws for young adults often increase illicit demand, not reduce it. Similarly, studies in the International Journal of Drug Policy show that when safer nicotine products are restricted, smoking rates frequently stall or rise.
Countries with the lowest smoking rates ever recorded—such as Sweden—achieved success not through bans, but through harm reduction, particularly snus and nicotine pouches. Japan’s dramatic decline in cigarette sales—over 50% in less than a decade—was driven by heated tobacco products, not prohibition. While countries that ban vaping, like India and Thailand, continue to struggle with high smoking rates and expanding black markets.
Prohibition or pragmatism?
Generational bans are of course seen by some as bold leadership, but by many in the scientific and THR community as a dangerous experiment in prohibitionist ideology. Without legal reduced-risk products, the policy removes essential tools that help adults quit smoking. And by criminalising nicotine use for future generations, these bans create an enforcement-heavy system that punishes people instead of protecting them.
If policymakers truly want to reduce smoking-related disease, global evidence points toward regulation, education, and safer alternatives—not generational prohibition.
Scotland Announces Generational Tobacco Ban Which Includes Vaping
