questions are being raised about the organisations helping shape that debate. Photo credit: Vladimir Konstantinov/Shutterstock
If you gave up smoking years ago, the last thing you probably expected was to find yourself caught up in a Brussels argument about what should replace the cigarette you stopped buying. Yet that is exactly where Europe’s latest tobacco debate is heading, with vaping, nicotine pouches and heated tobacco products now at the centre of a fight over how much regulation they should face.
At the same time, questions are being raised about the organisations helping shape that debate, including claims that some receive substantial EU funding while campaigning for tougher restrictions. A new analysis has put €12.8 million in annual public funding received by nine Brussels-based organisations under the microscope, claiming that 96.8 per cent of the funding identified comes from the European Commission. The figures come from the Hungary-based Free Market Foundation and are being promoted by Michael Landl, director of the World Vapers’ Alliance.
Europe is rewriting its tobacco rules
The timing is important, the European Commission is reviewing the EU’s Tobacco Products Directive, the rules governing tobacco and related products across the bloc. Its evaluation, published in April 2026, found that existing EU tobacco rules had contributed to a significant fall in smoking and tobacco-related deaths. But the Commission also identified a new problem: the rapid growth of products such as e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products and nicotine pouches, particularly among young people.
The Commission has since opened a consultation on revising the tobacco rules, with the legislative revision planned for 2026. Its stated objective remains creating a “tobacco-free generation” by 2040, meaning tobacco use by less than 5 per cent of the population. That is where the dispute over alternative nicotine products comes in.
Supporters of tobacco harm reduction argue that products which do not involve burning tobacco should not automatically be regulated in the same way as cigarettes. Their argument is based on the difference between inhaling tobacco smoke and using products without combustion. Public-health organisations generally take a more restrictive approach, pointing to nicotine addiction and concerns about young people taking up products that could create a route into tobacco use.
The EU has already faced questions over funding
This is not the first time concerns have been raised about the organisations involved in European tobacco policy. In January 2023, the European Health and Digital Executive Agency awarded a framework contract to a consortium led by Open Evidence, with the European Network for Smoking Prevention (ENSP) and the University of Crete also involved. The contract was worth around €3 million and covered research and consultancy work supporting EU tobacco-control policy. The involvement of ENSP prompted a complaint to the European Ombudsman over an alleged conflict of interest.
The Ombudsman investigated the Commission’s handling of the issue and, in February 2025, concluded that no further inquiry was justified. The decision records that the Commission had examined declarations concerning conflicts of interest and the qualifications of consortium members. It said ENSP’s role was limited to facilitating access to experts and providing technical and scientific information. That finding is important because the allegation of a proven conflict of interest should not be presented as established fact.
Scientists challenge the direction of travel
The argument over regulation has nevertheless become increasingly heated. A letter signed by more than 100 scientists and public-health experts and addressed to Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has criticised the treatment of nicotine alternatives in the EU’s regulatory process. The signatories claimed that 131 relevant scientific studies had been left out of the analysis and argued that the main health damage from conventional smoking comes from tobacco combustion rather than nicotine itself.
The Commission’s own evaluation, however, stresses the health risks associated with novel nicotine products and says their increasing use, particularly among young people, presents new challenges for tobacco control. There is also a documented disagreement over the Commission’s regulatory assessment itself. Its Regulatory Scrutiny Board issued a negative opinion in December 2025 on the draft evaluation, after which the Commission says it revised the document in response to the Board’s recommendations.
What happens to smokers trying to quit?
This is ultimately the issue behind the increasingly fierce argument. One side wants stronger restrictions to prevent nicotine products from attracting new users, particularly children and young people. The other argues that treating every nicotine product in essentially the same way could remove alternatives used by existing smokers trying to leave cigarettes behind.
The funding controversy adds another layer. The €12.8 million figure comes from an analysis by the Free Market Foundation, rather than from an EU finding that the organisations involved are improperly influencing policy. The European Commission’s own documents confirm that it funds tobacco-control organisations and that it is currently working on a major revision of the bloc’s tobacco rules.
For former smokers, therefore, the outcome could eventually affect far more than the wording on a Brussels policy document. It could determine which nicotine alternatives remain available, how they are taxed and marketed, and how closely they are regulated alongside conventional cigarettes. The EU has not yet adopted the revised Tobacco Products Directive. The debate over what those new rules should contain is still very much underway.
Uncategorized1 week ago
%1 week ago
Argentina2 weeks ago
Austin2 weeks ago
Cody Gakpo1 week ago