Tobacco guidelines: a public consultation influenced by coordinated campaigns from industry

The European Commission published the factual summary report of the public consultation on 12 October 2026[1] on the revision of the Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) and the Tobacco Advertising Directive (TAD). Of the 41,693 contributions collected between May 22 and August 14, 2026[2], More than a third of the responses came from 32 coordinated campaigns, the vast majority of which opposed stricter regulations. Responses categorized as "citizens" represented 95.4% of respondents and rejected most of the proposed measures, while civil society organizations specializing in tobacco control, public authorities, and research institutions largely supported a more protective framework, particularly regarding new products and digital marketing. The Commission reiterates that these results do not constitute a representative sample of the European population's opinion and do not prejudge its position. Its legislative proposal, accompanied by an impact assessment, is expected by the end of 2026.

This consultation is part of the review initiated following the publication of the 2026 evaluation of the directives. The evaluation concluded that smoking prevalence remains high in the European Union, particularly among young people, and that the current framework is outdated due to market developments and the growth of digital marketing. The options considered by the Commission include extending the legislation to new nicotine products, regulating or even banning flavorings, disposable e-cigarettes, nicotine pouches, and digital marketing, as well as expanding plain packaging. The legislative proposal, supported by an impact assessment, is expected by December 2026 and should contribute to achieving the goal of a tobacco-free generation by 2040, as set out in the European plan to defeat cancer.

Participation was dominated by citizen responses to campaigns organized by industry.

Of the 41,694 contributions received, the citizens category represents the vast majority, with 39,794 responses (95.4 per 100,000), including 35,677 from EU citizens and 4,117 from third-country nationals. Economic operators accounted for 31 per 100,000 contributions (1,079 companies and 157 professional associations), civil society for 0.6 per 100,000 (including 135 NGOs, 59 academic or research institutions, 33 consumer organizations, and 22 trade unions), and public authorities for 0.1 per 100,000, totaling 33 responses. Polish was the most frequently used language (34.1 per 100,000 contributions), followed by Swedish (111 per 100,000) and English (9.2 per 100,000).

The Commission identified 32 coordinated campaigns by industry stakeholders, totaling 14,418 responses, representing 34.6% of the total. The largest campaign, with 6,048 responses (14.5% of the total), originated almost exclusively from Poland, the second largest (4,877 responses, 11.7% of the total) from Spain, and the third largest (1,036 responses, 2.5% of the total) primarily from North Macedonia. Twenty-seven of these campaigns, representing 14,233 responses, opposed stricter regulations, four were generally unfavorable, and only one, out of 19 responses, predominantly answered "don't know." Four campaigns also reproduced the same standard text in open-ended questions.

The report also indicates that 169 of the 787 professional associations, civil society organizations and respondents classified in the "other" category (21.5 %) report having received support from the tobacco industry in the past five years.

Opposing positions between citizens and public health actors

The results reveal a marked divide according to respondent categories. When asked about the most attractive products for young people, 71.4% of responses classified as "EU citizens" cited cigarettes and rolling tobacco, while public authorities (81.8%) and NGOs (73.3%) primarily indicated e-cigarettes containing nicotine, followed by nicotine pouches (48.5% and 52.6%). For 88% of public authorities and 73% of NGOs, these new products have become more accessible and/or more popular among young people. Similarly, 81.8% of public authorities and 71.9% of NGOs believe that the scope of legislation has not kept pace with market developments, an analysis rejected by 80% of responses classified in the EU "citizens" category.

Neutral packaging illustrates this divergence: 86.7% of responses categorized as "EU citizens" oppose it on the grounds of the internal market's functioning, while 64.4% of responses from NGOs and 69.7% of public authorities support it. The six measures relating to labeling and health warnings are rejected by 74.7% to 87.3% of responses categorized as "EU" according to the measures, while large warnings are considered effective by 75.8% of public authorities, 65.9% of NGOs, and 50.8% of research institutions.

Regarding digital marketing, 74.6% of all respondents dispute the idea that exposure to online promotion influences young people's initiation into smoking, and a large majority reject any further EU action on user-generated content (78.4%) or on promotion by brands and influencers (73.2%). Public authorities, NGOs, and researchers, on the other hand, generally believe that digital promotion has an effect on young people. Among businesses, 59.8% reject the idea that a ban on flavorings in e-cigarettes and nicotine pouches would protect public health, while 67.4% anticipate a high or significant impact of such a measure on their business.

A questionnaire that was contested in the name of "differentiated risks"«

Several pro-vaping organizations, including the European vaping user association network ETHRA, criticized the questionnaire for not differentiating products according to their risk level. Six consumer associations contacted the European Ombudsman on July 27; the Directorate-General for Health responded that the questionnaire respected the principle of neutrality and was not intended, at this stage, to differentiate between products. This differentiation based on risk is precisely the central argument of the tobacco industry and its allies to obtain more favorable treatment for their new products. This argument has now found an echo in the European Parliament: in the final version of the report on the prevention of cardiovascular diseases, adopted on September 16, 2026, the recognition of distinct "risk profiles" replaced the previous classification of nicotine products as equal, and the call to accelerate the revision of the TPD (Tobacco Products Directive) was removed.[3].

For its part, the CNCT (National Committee Against Tobacco) pointed out the blind spots of the consultation as early as August 14th. These blind spots failed to address the independence of the traceability system from manufacturers, environmental impacts, protection against industry interference, or cross-border distance selling. The CNCT also contested the balancing of public health against the regulatory burden on businesses, as well as the absence of any option to ban nicotine pouches and disposable e-cigarettes. It argued that even a simple European framework could weaken the enforcement of the ban in Member States that have opted for this measure.[4].

These results illustrate the powerful influence of industry interests opposed to stricter regulations. The volume of coordinated campaigns, their concentration in a few countries generally favorable to the sector's interests, the copy-and-paste of industry arguments in the responses, and the proportion of organizations declaring tobacco industry funding all testify to their strong mobilization against a text likely to harm their interests. The scarcity of supplementary documents (2.3% of contributions) confirms a strategy focused on quantity rather than facts and a reasoned, scientifically validated analysis. Faced with this mobilization, Article 5.3 of the FCTC requires the Commission to base its proposal on independent scientific evidence submitted by public authorities, NGOs, and researchers, and not on the sheer number of responses.

AE

[1] European Commission, Factual summary report of the public consultation on the revision of EU rules on tobacco products and tobacco advertising, Ares(2026)9595105, October 12, 2026, accessed October 14, 2026.

[2] European Commission, DG HEALTH, Call for contributions for an impact assessment: Tobacco products and tobacco advertising, revision of EU rules, Ares(2026)5013006, May 18, 2026, accessed October 14, 2026.

[3] Tobacco Free Generation, EU: Following the cardiovascular report, the cancer plan is under the same pressure from the tobacco industry lobby., September 2026, accessed October 14, 2026.

[4] CNCT, Revision of European tobacco directives: the CNCT warns of blind spots in the consultation and calls on the Commission to legislate in the name of public health, August 14, 2026, accessed October 14, 2026

National Committee Against Smoking |