The CNCT publishes a critical analysis on the disinformation surrounding the parallel tobacco markets

The National Committee Against Smoking (CNCT) presented a study to the National Assembly detailing how tobacco manufacturers shape the debate on illicit markets. From oversupplying border markets and exerting political influence to disseminating biased data, the report highlights the industry's responsibility in maintaining illicit tobacco markets and the need for independent public governance.

Industrial estimates that are very different from public data

According to the report, KPMG, funded by Philip Morris International to the tune of €11 million annually, has been publishing assessments on the illicit trade for over a decade that systematically overestimate the scale of the phenomenon. In 2024, the KPMG report claimed that nearly half of the tobacco consumed in France came from parallel channels, while official sources—OFDT, Public Health France, INSEE, and Customs—place this figure between 10 and 20 percent, a figure that has remained stable for ten years.

The CNCT emphasizes that these discrepancies stem from major methodological biases employed by KPMG: biased and heterogeneous samples, lack of independent verification, reliance on industry-linked service providers, and a failure to rigorously distinguish between legal cross-border purchases, smuggling, and counterfeiting. Thus, according to official data, legal cross-border purchases represent approximately 141% of consumption, while smuggling and counterfeiting account for no more than 51%.

The report notes that figures from manufacturers, regularly cited in public debate, influence the perception of parallel trade and weaken political support for public health policies, including tax increases.

Business practices that perpetuate parallel markets

Beyond the production of disputed data, the CNCT highlights the active role of manufacturers in supplying the parallel market, particularly through the oversupply of certain European markets. Luxembourg is a prime example: each inhabitant there is supplied with 21.5 cigarettes per day (smoker or non-smoker), 36 times more than in the United Kingdom.

Between 2019 and 2024, tobacco sales in Luxembourg increased by 53 million tons, while they decreased by 31 million tons in France and 28 million tons in Belgium. These excess volumes encourage cross-border sales and circumvent national tax policies. These practices cost France an estimated €4 billion in annual tax losses, €1.7 billion of which is attributable to Philip Morris International. For the CNCT (National Committee Against Tobacco), these findings confirm that parallel markets are not a phenomenon imposed upon them, but an integral component of manufacturers' business models.

A need for transparency and independence in public policies

The report also highlights the strong influence of the tobacco industry in parliamentary and media debate. Between 2020 and 2025, 229 amendments relating to the parallel market were tabled in the National Assembly, 31 of which were directly inspired by the industry, particularly the Confederation of Tobacconists (29). In 97 of these cases, the figures cited exceeded official estimates, and 94 of the amendments attributed the supposed rise in the parallel market to taxation, compared to only 2 that mentioned the responsibility of manufacturers.

The analysis of media discourse conducted by the CNCT reveals a similar trend: out of 2,700 articles studied, 55 %s cite industry data, compared to 8 %s based on public sources. Only 3 %s cite public health actors related to this topic.

In light of these findings, the CNCT (National Committee Against Tobacco) calls for the tobacco product monitoring and traceability system to be brought into compliance with the obligations of the WHO Protocol. This compliance can be achieved within the framework of the upcoming revision of the European Tobacco Products Directive. According to the CNCT, the traceability system must be completely independent of manufacturers, both directly and indirectly, whether legally, financially, or organizationally. For example, auditors could no longer be chosen by manufacturers, and their reports documenting the system's operation would be made public, which is not currently the case. The association also recommends:

• The establishment of supply quotas per country, proportionate to actual domestic consumption,
• Reducing the limits on purchasing cigarettes abroad to 60 per person,
• And strengthening the transparency of interactions between public authorities and the tobacco industry, in accordance with Article 5.3 of the WHO Framework Convention, provisions also included in the Protocol to Combat Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products.

©Generation Without Tobacco

AE