MEPs are demanding answers from the Commission regarding its meetings with Philip Morris

Members of the European Parliament have questioned the European Commission following revelations contained in documents disclosed in a report NGOs Contre-Feu and STOP, then relayed by the media Politico[1] and The Examination[2], The report indicates that European officials met on several occasions with representatives of Philip Morris International (PMI) without these exchanges being systematically declared in the European Union's transparency registers. These meetings, which took place between 2022 and 2024, reportedly occurred within the Directorate-General for Trade and concerned requests for assistance from the tobacco company regarding regulatory and tax frameworks applicable to its products in third countries.

The initiative was launched by five MEPs from different political groups: Nicolas González Casares (S&D), who submitted the written question to the Commission, Barry Andrews (Renew Europe), Tilly Metz (Greens/EFA), Romana Jerković (S&D), and Stine Bosse (Renew Europe). These MEPs believe that these interactions raise serious questions about the Commission's institutional practices' compliance with the European Union's international commitments, particularly those stemming from the World Health Organization's Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). The FCTC requires countries and institutional organizations that have ratified it to protect their public health policies from the influence of tobacco industry interests. In practical terms, this obligation means that any interaction between representatives of institutions and representatives of the tobacco sector must be limited to what is strictly necessary and must be conducted transparently. MEPs are therefore requesting detailed explanations and want representatives of the Commission to be heard before the European Parliament's Health Committee.

These undeclared exchanges raise questions about European governance.

According to documents obtained through access to information requests, European Commission officials met with representatives of Philip Morris International at least six times between September 2022 and 2024, without these exchanges being fully recorded in public transparency registers. However, European rules governing interactions with lobbyists, combined with the implementing guidelines of the UNFCCC, stipulate that contacts with the tobacco industry must be strictly limited and transparent when unavoidable.

These factors fuel the concerns of elected officials regarding the ability of existing transparency mechanisms to guarantee the effective enforcement of these obligations and to genuinely prevent any interference from the tobacco industry in the development and implementation of European policies. For the MEPs who initiated this action, the lack of complete traceability of these exchanges is likely to undermine public trust in European institutions and compromise the integrity of decision-making processes, particularly in an area where public health issues are well documented.

Requests for assistance in influencing regulations abroad

The analyzed documents show that PMI sought the support of the European Commission to lobby foreign governments on regulatory and tax policies affecting its products, particularly heated tobacco devices like IQOS. The company described these frameworks as "restrictive" or "discriminatory," seeking to promote regulatory classifications and tax regimes more favorable to its products. These actions are part of a broader strategy to secure access to key markets and to have these products recognized as distinct from combustible tobacco, with less stringent requirements.

In Mexico, PMI challenged a ban on new nicotine products adopted by the authorities as a public health measure. The company described the ban as a potential obstacle to international trade and asked the European Commission to raise the issue in the context of bilateral trade agreements. A notice published by Commission services did indeed mention the risk that this measure could constitute a barrier to trade, but the documents did not indicate any subsequent changes to Mexican regulations.

In Turkey, PMI's efforts focused on two key public policy levers: the high level of taxation on cigarettes and the requirement to incorporate a minimum proportion of locally produced tobacco in marketed products. The company requested that the Commission raise these issues with the Turkish authorities, particularly within the framework of assessments conducted by the World Trade Organization and reports on EU-Turkey relations. Exchanges did indeed take place between the Commission and the Turkish authorities on these topics, and some of these interventions were described by PMI, in internal correspondence, as "invaluable assistance.".

These examples illustrate how industry-specific categorical demands can be framed as classic trade concerns, trade barriers or tax distortions in order to influence public health policies implemented by the countries concerned.

Implications for public health and the credibility of European action

These revelations reignite the debate on the role of the European Union as a leading international player in public health. While the EU is regularly presented as a promoter of ambitious anti-smoking standards, particularly through its internal regulations and its commitment to the FCTC, the exchanges brought to light highlight, on the one hand, the extent to which European institutions are subject to intense lobbying by tobacco companies and, on the other hand, the lack of consistency between the Union's formal commitments and certain institutional practices.

For public health stakeholders, this case serves as a reminder that protecting public policies from the influence of the tobacco industry remains a central issue, and that the provisions ratified by the institutions apply to all public decision-makers and are by no means limited to healthcare professionals. These stakeholders also emphasize that these rules apply both within the European Union and in its external policy. Strict limitations on interactions with the tobacco industry, strengthened transparency mechanisms, and rigorous enforcement of the obligations stemming from the FCTC appear to be essential conditions for preserving the credibility and effectiveness of European public health action both within the EU and internationally.

©Generation Without Tobacco

AE

[1] EU officials acted to aid tobacco giant abroad, documents show, Politico, published January 15, 2026, accessed the same day

[2] Kathryn Kranhold, European legislators demand responses over undisclosed Philip Morris International meetings, The Examination, published on January 15, 2026, accessed the same day