The European Commission’s evaluation of the EU tobacco legislation falls short of the evidence-based standard it set for itself. After four years and significant resources, the report relies on assumptions, selective interpretation, and acknowledged data gaps rather than robust and evidence-based analysis.
It fails to establish clear causal links between policy measures and outcomes and largely ignores real-world evidence from Member States. Sweden, for example, has reduced daily smoking to just 5.3%, achieving the lowest smoking rates in the EU alongside markedly lower rates of smoking-related diseases, a success closely linked to the availability of smokeless alternatives. Similarly, countries such as Greece and Czechia have recorded steep declines in smoking prevalence in recent years. These national experiences demonstrate that outcomes vary significantly across the EU and that consumer behaviour and access to alternatives play a decisive role, factors the report does not meaningfully assess.
Instead of learning from what works in practice, the report leans toward further restrictions while overlooking key challenges on the ground. In the Netherlands, stricter measures have coincided with rising illicit trade and increased underage vaping, while Belgium is seeing similar trends, with a significant share of the vapour market estimated to be illegal. These examples highlight a critical gap between policy design and real-world impact. By failing to address enforcement, illicit trade, and the role of harm reduction, the Commission risks advancing measures that may be ineffective or even counterproductive.
A credible revision of EU tobacco rules must be grounded in real-world outcomes, assess relative risks, and strike a balance between public health objectives, economic sustainability, and effective enforcement.
