Vaping: coordinated offensive against the regulation of the sector in France

As debates surrounding the regulation of vaping products intensify in France and at the European level, industry representatives are stepping up their lobbying efforts with public decision-makers. A survey published by Contexte[1] This highlights the strategies deployed by the two main federations in the sector, Fivape and France Vapotage, which embody two different but complementary approaches to interest representation. Behind their distinct positions, however, a common thread emerges: to defend a vaping market with as few restrictions as possible and to oppose several measures designed to strengthen the regulation, traceability, and control of nicotine products.

A divergence of methods serving converging interests

The representation of the vaping sector in France rests primarily on two organizations with distinct influence strategies: Fivape and France Vapotage. While their approaches differ significantly in form, they nevertheless pursue a common objective of limiting the new regulatory constraints applicable to vaping products.

Fivape, created in 2013, claims to represent independent players in the e-cigarette sector and asserts its independence from the tobacco industry. Its lobbying relies on a particularly visible and proactive strategy, based on media campaigns, public mobilizations, and a strong presence in parliamentary debates. During discussions surrounding the 2026 budget bill, the federation notably launched a national campaign against measures to tax and regulate the vaping market, increasing its public statements and communication efforts aimed at both elected officials and the general public.

France Vapotage, on the other hand, adopts a much more discreet strategy, focused on direct exchanges with ministerial offices, government agencies, and political decision-makers. Historically close to certain tobacco companies, the organization prioritizes behind-the-scenes technical and institutional influence, with limited media exposure. This approach aligns with interest representation methods historically used by the tobacco industry, which consist of acting less visibly to limit the risk of public criticism and avoid attracting the attention of civil society and public health stakeholders.

Despite these differences in positioning and communication, the two federations regularly converge in their opposition to several measures aimed at strengthening the regulation, traceability and control of nicotine products.

A recurring opposition to measures regulating the sector

In recent years, representatives of the vaping industry have regularly opposed several measures aimed at strengthening the control of nicotine products and their marketing.

Fivape has notably contested the introduction of specific taxes on vaping products, the proposed licensing of nicotine product vendors, the strengthening of sales control mechanisms, and certain measures intended to improve product traceability. During the debates surrounding Article 23 of the 2026 Finance Bill, the federation denounced what it called a "killing" of vaping and intensified its lobbying efforts with members of parliament and the government.

This trend also occurs within a context of rapidly increasing diversification of vaping products marketed in France and Europe: disposable e-cigarettes, devices with high nicotine concentrations, particularly appealing flavors, and hybrid products. Several European health authorities are now raising concerns about the strategies used to normalize these products among teenagers and young adults, particularly through social media and influencer marketing.

For public health stakeholders, traceability systems, regulations governing points of sale, and product controls are specifically designed to limit misuse and protect the most vulnerable populations. A key challenge is ensuring that vaping products remain harm reduction tools reserved for adult smokers who have not been able to quit using proven treatments, such as approved nicotine replacement therapies, medications, or specialized smoking cessation support.

Argumentative strategies similar to those of the tobacco industry

Several of the arguments put forward today by representatives of vaping are reminiscent of strategies historically used by the tobacco industry to oppose health regulations: highlighting a risk of parallel market, defending the "freedom of choice" of consumers, criticizing behavioral taxation or asserting that stricter regulation would encourage the market to evolve towards more harmful products.

According to several parliamentarians interviewed, the arguments put forward tend to shift the debate towards the supposed benefits of vaping for adult smokers, to the detriment of issues related to the normalization of nicotine use or the attractiveness of the products to minors.

The federations also repeatedly raise the risk of a parallel market developing if regulations are strengthened. This argument, frequently used by the tobacco industry in tax and regulatory debates, is now being used in discussions concerning vaping products.

The article also highlights a selective use of scientific data. Some communications emphasize conclusions favorable to vaping as a harm reduction tool without systematically mentioning the reservations expressed by health agencies regarding the toxic substances present in aerosols, the risks of nicotine addiction, or the increasing use among adolescents.

However, the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety (ANSES) reminds us in its recommendations that it is necessary «"to rule out actions likely to encourage people to start vaping, particularly non-smokers and young people, and to avoid any form of trivialization"»[2].

A growing influence in public debates

The intensification of lobbying activities by the sector comes at a time when several structural reforms are currently being discussed in France and at the European level, particularly concerning the taxation of nicotine products, advertising, flavors, disposable devices and product traceability.

According to declarations made to the High Authority for Transparency in Public Life (HATVP), France Vapotage spends tens of thousands of euros annually on its lobbying activities. Fivape, for its part, claims a strong media and parliamentary presence in order to influence public debate.

The survey also highlights the difficulties faced by public authorities in maintaining stable expertise on vaping-related issues, in a context marked by the rapid succession of political and administrative officials in charge of public health issues.

In this context, future European discussions on the revision of directives relating to tobacco and nicotine products should constitute a major battleground between public health objectives, economic interests of the sector and influence strategies of the various industrial players.

©Generation Without Tobacco

AE

[1] Antoine Messina, The two faces of vaping lobbying, Context, published on June 2, 2026, accessed on June 8, 2026

[2] Health risk assessment related to vaping products, ANSES Opinion - Collective Expert Report, December 2025, accessed June 8, 2026