Ironically, the Commission’s own impact assessments emphasize that harmonizing excise taxation should improve public health, ensure market stability, and prevent fraud. Yet the proposed tax rate on nicotine pouches would likely push consumer prices so high that it discourages the use of lower-risk alternatives. Worse still, the tax hike could open the door to unregulated markets, exposing consumers to potentially unsafe, illegal products – precisely alienating those trying to quit smoking and adopt safer nicotine choices.

This approach becomes even more perplexing in the face of Sweden’s noteworthy example. Sweden is the only EU Member State with a smoking rate below 5%, thanks to giving smokers access to oral nicotine products, supported by a moderate tax rate. TED, however, appears to disregard this success, and from a neutral observer’s perspective, seems intent on eliminating the very category that contributed to Sweden’s progress. It’s no surprise that Sweden has spoken out against the proposal.

The path forward is clear: a more progressive approach to EU-wide minimum rates that allows consumers to consider alternatives such as nicotine pouches and their reduced-risk profile. This approach would not only deliver stable fiscal revenues and maintain market equilibrium but also support harm reduction.