At a time when the European Union is seeking ways to reduce bureaucracy, boost investment, and make its economy more competitive, a new initiative by eight member states calling for stricter restrictions on tobacco and nicotine products raises questions about the coherence of European policy.
The Netherlands, Belgium, Finland, France, Hungary, Latvia, Slovenia, and Spain sent a joint letter to the European Commissioner for Health, Olivér Várhelyi, calling for a significant tightening of the European legislative framework in light of the revision of the directives on tobacco products and their advertising.
ΣΧΕΤΙΚΑ ΑΡΘΡΑ
Less bureaucracy, more restrictions
The proposals even include restrictions on the entry of new nicotine products into the European market, a fact that raises questions about the relationship between public health goals, competitiveness, and innovation.
The Contradiction with European Competitiveness Policy
Last September, 13 member states, led by Austria, called on the European Commission to exercise greater restraint in promoting new legislation and to systematically evaluate existing rules. The initiative of the “13” calls for a period of focus on the implementation and evaluation of existing legislation, with the aim of reducing bureaucracy, overlaps, and additional administrative burdens on European businesses.
Of particular interest is the fact that three countries—Latvia, Slovenia, and Hungary—are participating in both initiatives.
On the one hand, they are calling for greater caution in adopting new rules and in assessing their impact on competitiveness. On the other hand, they co-sign proposals for extensive restrictions, additional requirements, and bans on new products entering the European market.
Although the goals of public health and competitiveness are not necessarily conflicting, this particular case highlights the need for consistent application of the principles of proportionality and impact assessment for every new legislative intervention.
What the “8” proposals mean for the market and innovation
According to reports by Rapporteur and Eunews, the letter from the eight countries calls for a kind of “market freeze” on new nicotine products and related devices not covered by the current European framework.
At the same time, the proposals include broad bans on flavorings, maximum nicotine content limits, plain packaging, and greater flexibility for member states to impose additional national restrictions.
Beyond the implications for product distribution, the proposals raise questions about the costs of compliance for businesses and the functioning of the single European market. The possibility of imposing different national bans could lead to a more complex regulatory environment, with varying requirements by country and additional compliance costs.
At the same time, a blanket ban on the entry of new products could limit the potential for developing and marketing future technologies before their specific characteristics and potential risks have even been assessed.
Protecting public health, particularly that of minors, remains a key priority. However, the question arises as to whether these objectives can be achieved through targeted regulations and rigorous scientific evaluation, without blanket bans on future products.
The Economic Impact and Cyprus
The broader discussion also includes the issue of illicit trade, as the new regulations are intended to be implemented in a market where the illicit consumption of cigarettes remains significant.
According to KPMG’s annual report, in 2025, illicit cigarette consumption in the EU accounted for 10.3% of total consumption, with estimated tax revenue losses of €16.7 billion. In Cyprus, the corresponding rate stood at 16.3%, with estimated losses of €27 million.
The data do not prove that the proposed restrictions will increase illicit trade, but they do underscore the importance of assessing the economic impacts before making new decisions.
For Cyprus, as for other European economies, the revision of legislation may affect the business environment, commercial activities, and market functioning.
The letter from the eight countries does not constitute a legislative decision. However, at a time when competitiveness and the need to simplify regulations are priorities for European policy-making, it brings a fundamental question back to the forefront: how can the European Union formulate effective public health policies, while ensuring that new regulations are proportionate, scientifically grounded, and consistent with its broader economic priorities?
With information from Cnn.gr
