A Smaller Coalition
If the absence of measures targeting e-cigarettes in the budget might have suggested that France had put vaping to one side, that is far from the case. On October 6, 2026, eight European Union Member States wrote to Olivér Várhelyi, European Commissioner for Health and Animal Welfare, calling in particular for a market freeze on new nicotine products and a broad flavour ban. The document is signed by ministers from eight countries, including seven health ministers: the Netherlands, Belgium, Finland, France, Hungary, Latvia, Slovenia and Spain.
There are fewer signatories than to the previous letter, sent to the same commissioner by twelve Member States in March 2025. Estonia, Ireland, Lithuania, Luxembourg and Malta did not sign this time, while Hungary joined the group. According to the decision note from the Dutch Ministry of Health, published as an annex to its letter to Parliament, discussions over the co-signatories were still ongoing in late September. The note also states that the date on which the letter was sent was coordinated with the other signatories and strategically chosen in light of discussions in Brussels, as the Commission is expected to present its proposal for the revision of the TPD by the end of the year.
A Rewritten 2040 Goal
After noting that the tobacco and nicotine landscape has changed profoundly since the TPD was adopted in 2014, the signatories call for a shift from “a reactive approach, focused on regulating existing products” towards “a proactive and preventive framework capable of anticipating future market developments, closing regulatory loopholes and protecting current and future generations from nicotine addiction.” The ongoing revision of the TPD would therefore represent “a key milestone in achieving the EU ambition of a smoke-free generation by 2040, as set out in the European Beating Cancer Plan.”
Yet the European Beating Cancer Plan aims for a “Tobacco-Free Generation,” defined as less than 5% of the population using tobacco by 2040, not a smoke-free generation, let alone a nicotine-free one.
To achieve this objective, however, the eight countries put forward six recommendations.
Market Freeze
The letter calls for an end to the nicotine industry’s ability to “continuously introduce new nicotine-containing products onto the European market using aggressive marketing and unfounded reduced-risk claims, with the aim of getting (young) EU citizens addicted for the industry’s financial gain.” The signatories say such a freeze could be achieved because “this can be achieved by banning all non-TPD regulated products containing nicotine or substances with nicotine-like properties as consumer products.” They add: “This should also cover products that contain neither nicotine nor nicotine-like substance but resemble products that do.”
“Unfounded” Claims?
First, it is worth recalling that the TPD already prohibits, on the packaging of products within its scope, including e-cigarettes, any suggestion that one product is less harmful than another (Articles 13 and 20). If these are the claims the signatories are referring to, they are already prohibited on packaging, at least for products covered by the current Directive.
Second, while the argument regarding marketing is understandable, the reference to “unfounded reduced-risk claims” raises serious questions about the eight ministers’ understanding of the issue.
In the United States, as early as 2018, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) found1 “conclusive” evidence that “completely substituting e-cigarettes for combustible tobacco cigarettes reduces users’ exposure to numerous toxicants and carcinogens present in combustible tobacco cigarettes.”
In the United Kingdom, a literature review conducted by King’s College London for the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities (OHID), an agency under the Department of Health, found in 2022 that vaping resulted in substantially lower exposure to harmful substances than smoking, based on biomarkers associated with cancer and cardiovascular and respiratory diseases.2
In 2024, a Royal College of Physicians (RCP) report made more than 50 recommendations3 and concluded that “e-cigarettes remain an important tool to reduce the burden of smoking.”
In 2026, the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety (Anses) stated in its report4 that “based on current knowledge, it appears that although e-cigarettes cause fewer harmful effects than tobacco smoke, their use is not without risk, although these risks remain lower than those associated with smoking.”
As for their effectiveness in helping people quit smoking, the Cochrane systematic review5, which included 80 scientific studies and 29,861 participants, stated in August 2026 that “it is clear that they [nicotine e-cigarettes, editor’s note] are a proven and viable option for people who want to quit smoking traditional cigarettes.”
Flavours: The Risk of a Return to Smoking
The eight countries state that “it is crucial that the TPD reduces attractiveness of existing tobacco, nicotine and non-nicotine -containing products, especially for young people.” They therefore call for the Commission to “apply strict maximum nicotine levels across all products, implement a broad flavour ban for all products, implement standardised products and devices and introduce plain packaging for all products.” The letter adds: “All products that are allowed on the market should also be regulated to the same extent in order to prevent continuous substitution between different product categories.”
The current TPD already sets the maximum nicotine concentration permitted in e-liquids and limits emissions from combustible cigarettes. Does this mean reducing the limits for these products, or simply introducing limits for products that currently have none, such as heated tobacco, cigars or roll-your-own tobacco?
Several studies nevertheless suggest that flavours encourage adult smokers to switch to vaping6, while most recent evaluations of flavour restrictions in the United States and Canada have observed increases in cigarette sales or consumption6-10. Banning them could therefore deprive some European smokers of a less harmful alternative.
But the justification given in the letter, “in order to prevent continuous substitution between different product categories”, is unambiguous: the signatories simply reject any form of risk-proportionate regulation.
Pouches: Conflating Them With Snus
Nicotine pouches, described as “highly harmful and addictive”, are also targeted. The signatories call for Member States to be allowed to adopt strict national measures, “including a total ban on nicotine pouches,” and to “implement strict measures for other nicotine products without tobacco.” They also call for “reinforcement of the EU wide oral tobacco ban.”
The letter itself notes that oral tobacco, or snus, has been banned in the EU since 1992, with the exception of Sweden. But because nicotine pouches contain no tobacco, they fall outside both this ban and the rest of the TPD. Nevertheless, the signatories argue that “Nicotine pouches are strikingly similar to oral tobacco and can be seen as a circumvention of the oral tobacco ban.” “Reinforcing” that ban would therefore mean extending it to tobacco-free products simply because they resemble snus, rather than on the basis of their level of risk.
It is worth recalling that in the United States, the Food and Drug Administration recently authorized twenty ZYN nicotine pouch products11 to be marketed with the claim that using them instead of cigarettes “reduces the risk of mouth cancer, heart disease, lung cancer, stroke, emphysema, and chronic bronchitis.”
Advertising, Online Sales and Jetable Vapes
Advertising ban: “Advertisement bans should apply to all tobacco and nicotine-containing products, as well as to the devices used with them and should cover all communication channels including social media,” the document states. It calls for these restrictions to apply to all parties, including third parties, citing content creators, influencers and “other intermediaries acting on behalf of commercial interests.” Social media platforms are specifically targeted, with the letter stating that the revised legislation should require them “to proactively remove such content, and to prevent it from being uploaded in the first place.”
Preventing cross-border distance sales: well aware that some national bans are circumvented by purchasing products from countries with more permissive legislation, the Member States call on the Commission “to adopt proposals that protect citizens, improve the functioning of the internal market and effectively address the banning of cross-border distance sales within the EU, to keep these harmful products out of young people’s reach.”
Disposable vapes in the crosshairs: stating that environmental considerations should be fully incorporated into the revision of the TPD, the signatories argue that “the Member States should be given sufficient flexibility to introduce national bans to decrease the environmental impact of tobacco and other nicotine products, including but not limited to strict rules on single use electronic cigarettes.”
The Goal: Zero Nicotine
“EU-level regulation should therefore be as ambitious as possible, so that it does not create unnecessary barriers for Member States wishing to go further than the minimum standards set out in the WHO FCTC. To achieve our shared goal of a smoke-free generation by 2040, we must use our internal market powers to fully support ambitious public health action. The revised directives must establish a strong and future-proof regulatory framework capable of addressing evolving products and market developments and prioritizing the prevention and reduction of tobacco and nicotine use and, ultimately, phasing out nicotine dependence across the European Union,” the letter concludes.
Sources
1 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2018). Public health consequences of e-cigarettes. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24952
2 Nicotine vaping in England: 2022 evidence update main findings, Gov.uk
3 E-cigarettes and harm reduction: An evidence review, Royal College of Physicians
4 Évaluation des risques sanitaires liés aux produits du vapotage, Avis de l’Anses, Rapport d’expertise collective
5 Lindson N, Livingstone-Banks J, Butler AR, McRobbie H, Bullen CR, Hajek P, Wu AD, Begh R, Theodoulou A, Ma C, Notley C, Rigotti NA, Turner T, Fanshawe T, Hartmann-Boyce J. Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2026, Issue 8. Art. No.: CD010216. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010216.pub11.
6 Friedman, A. S., & Xu, S. (2020). Associations of flavored e-cigarette uptake with subsequent smoking initiation and cessation. JAMA Network Open, 3(6), e203826. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3826
7 Friedman, A. S., Pesko, M. F., & Whitacre, T. R. (2024). Flavored e-cigarette sales restrictions and young adult tobacco use. JAMA Health Forum, 5(12), e244594. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamahealthforum.2024.4594
8 Cheng, D., Lee, B., Jeffers, A. M., Stover, M., Kephart, L., Chadwick, G., Kruse, G. R., Evins, A. E., Rigotti, N. A., & Levy, D. E. (2025). State e-cigarette flavor restrictions and tobacco product use in youths and adults. JAMA Network Open, 8(7), e2524184. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.24184
9 Friedman, A. S., Liber, A. C., Crippen, A., & Pesko, M. F. (2026). E-cigarette flavor restrictions’ effects on tobacco product sales. American Journal of Health Economics, 12. https://doi.org/10.1086/734689
10 Davis, B. A., Friedman, A. S., & Pesko, M. F. (2026). Restricting sales of flavored nicotine vaping products: Effects on nicotine vaping product and cigarette sales in Canada (Working Paper No. 2604). Department of Economics, University of Missouri. https://ideas.repec.org/p/umc/wpaper/2604.html
11 FDA Authorizes 20 ZYN Nicotine Pouches to Be Marketed with Specific Modified Risk Claim, Fda.gov
