Public health policy is often guided by good intentions, but history has repeatedly shown that intentions are not enough to guarantee success. Overly harsh restrictions, normally based on strong principles, can produce consequences far worse than the problem they aim to solve. Nowhere is this more visible than in tobacco and nicotine regulation, where aggressive taxation and prohibitionist approaches are increasingly driving products underground—out of regulatory reach and into the hands of organised crime. Recent developments in Australia and Belgium illustrate how these policies are undermining public health, consumer safety and government authority alike.
Australia’s tobacco tax disaster
Australia’s cigarette market has reached a tipping point. According to estimates from the federal Illicit Tobacco and E-cigarette Commissioner, roughly 55 percent of cigarettes sold in the last financial year were illegal, with some assessments placing the figure closer to 60 percent. This means that the majority of cigarettes consumed in Australia now bypass all regulatory oversight.
The financial impact is staggering. The federal government is losing up to AU$11.8 billion per year in excise revenue—funds that were once justified as necessary to support healthcare and smoking cessation programs. But the deeper concern is that illicit products are entirely unregulated. Consumers have no assurance about ingredients, manufacturing standards or contamination risks, while organised crime networks are thriving on the profits.
This situation did not emerge overnight. Australia’s tobacco excise strategy initially appeared successful. Sharp tax increases reduced smoking rates and pushed revenue to a peak in 2019. However, continued hikes eventually priced legal cigarettes out of reach for many smokers. Excise on a standard pack rose from around AU$8 in 2010 to approximately AU$30 by 2025, pushing retail prices beyond AU$40 per pack. In contrast, black-market cigarettes now sell for under AU$15, making illegal purchases not only tempting but routine. What was once a marginal activity has become normalised across socioeconomic groups.
Can the damage be reversed?
What’s worse, economists at the e61 Institute are warning that at this stage, the damage may be irreversible. While high excise rates helped create the illicit market, simply cutting taxes would not necessarily restore legal sales at this point. Criminal supply chains are now deeply entrenched, and consumer habits have shifted. Rolling excise back to 2019 levels could either raise or reduce revenue depending on how illicit operators respond—highlighting how fragile the system has become.
Then again, authorities have rejected tax reductions, arguing that competing on price with criminals would undermine decades of tobacco control. Instead, the government has doubled down on enforcement, allocating AU$300 million over two years and seizing more than 2,200 tonnes of illicit tobacco in 2024–25 alone. Yet enforcement alone struggles to succeed when demand remains high and legal alternatives are scarce or unaffordable.
A stark warning for Europe
And while Australia’s crisis centres on cigarettes, developments in Belgium reveal another alarming consequence of prohibition: the contamination of illicit nicotine products. Belgium’s drug commissioner, Ine Van Wymersch, has warned that over 80 percent of illicit refillable vape pods seized by authorities now contain synthetic opioids. These substances are impossible to detect through taste or smell, creating a grave risk for unsuspecting users—particularly children and teenagers.
Van Wymersch cautions that minors using illegal vapes may become dependent on opioids before they even understand what they are consuming. Beyond addiction, she warns of potential interference with brain development and long-term health damage. Belgium and the Netherlands are major hubs for synthetic drug production, with precursor chemicals legally imported from Asia before being diverted into criminal manufacturing networks.
These developments underscore a critical point often ignored in policy debates: when legal, regulated products disappear, illicit substitutes do not remain benign. Criminal organisations have no incentive to ensure safety. Instead, they maximise profit and market reach—often by adulterating products with more potent substances.
Bans create opportunities for criminals
Van Wymersch has linked the popularity of flavoured vapes to criminal recruitment strategies. Fruit and candy flavours, she argues, make it easier for traffickers to introduce adulterated products to young people. This concern has fuelled political momentum in Belgium, where Health Minister Frank Vandenbroucke is pushing for one of Europe’s toughest flavour bans.
Yet tobacco harm reduction experts warn that such bans actually exacerbate the problem, and risk repeating Australia’s mistake. Removing regulated flavoured products does not eliminate demand; it transfers that demand to the black market—where flavours persist, oversight disappears and contamination risks multiply.
The broader social consequences are also troubling. Criminal groups increasingly recruit vulnerable teenagers, including unaccompanied minors, by offering easy money and status. Investigations have uncovered corruption involving port workers, police officers and legal professionals, raising fears about institutional infiltration. While Van Wymersch stops short of calling Belgium a narco-state, she warns that failing to confront organised crime’s financial power could push the country further down that path.
The contrast with harm-reduction-oriented countries is stark. Jurisdictions that regulate safer nicotine products, such as vaping, snus and nicotine pouches, see lower illicit trade and faster declines in smoking. When smokers have access to affordable, appealing alternatives, they switch. When those alternatives are banned or restricted, smoking persists—and black markets flourish.
A choice with clear consequences
Australia and Belgium offer a clear warning. Policies that prioritise punishment over pragmatism do not eliminate nicotine use; they eliminate safety, transparency and control. They empower criminal networks, expose consumers to unknown risks and ultimately undermine public health goals.
Tobacco harm reduction is not about defending nicotine—it is about preventing disease and death. Evidence increasingly shows that regulation works where prohibition fails. Ignoring that evidence risks repeating the same mistakes, at an ever-greater human and social cost.
Leaked WHO Documents Uncover Europe’s New Senseless Nicotine War
