As the European Commission’s consultation on the revision of the Tobacco Products Directive and Tobacco Advertising Directive closes today, 14 August 2026, GINN has submitted its response. The review is necessary. But how Europe chooses to modernise its rules will matter as much as the decision to modernise them.
The European Commission opened its public consultation on 22 May following the evaluation of the EU tobacco control framework. The Commission says the consultation will inform a revision of the legislative framework planned before the end of 2026. Its own evaluation concluded that existing EU rules have contributed to declines in smoking and tobacco-related deaths, while identifying challenges created by newer tobacco and nicotine products.
GINN welcomes the review and has responded to the consultation. There is a clear case for updating legislation that has struggled to keep pace with changes in products, consumer behaviour and routes to market.
Yet several pertinent issues deserve particular attention as the Commission considers what comes next.
GINN’s position is that novel nicotine products should be regulated. The more difficult question is how. A framework designed principally around combustible tobacco should not automatically become the template for every product containing nicotine.
That distinction should sit at the centre of the next phase of the debate.
Europe’s nicotine market has changed
The Tobacco Products Directive was developed in a very different market.
The Commission’s Joint Research Centre notes that smoking prevalence has fallen since 2012, while e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products have become increasingly established. The Commission’s evaluation now expressly considers e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products and nicotine pouches as part of the evidence base informing future policy.
Nicotine pouches add another category that does not fit neatly into legislation built around tobacco leaf or inhaled products.
This is why GINN supports bringing tobacco-free nicotine products within a harmonised European framework, but as a distinct category.
A distinct category would allow policymakers to set appropriate requirements for manufacturing, ingredients, nicotine content, packaging, labelling, age restrictions, marketing and market surveillance without assuming that every nicotine product has the same characteristics or risk profile.
GINN’s accompanying paper, Beyond Tobacco: Why Europe’s TPD Revision Must Recognise Novel Nicotine Products, makes the same case: Europe needs a framework capable of distinguishing between fundamentally different products rather than repeatedly adapting tobacco legislation each time a new nicotine category emerges.
Adult preferences matter to proportionate regulation
Regulation also needs to recognise that nicotine products serve different adult consumer populations.
Among adults over 25, combustible cigarettes and roll-your-own tobacco remain important established forms of nicotine consumption. E-cigarettes have developed an adult user base as a smoke-free alternative, while nicotine pouches have established a smaller and highly variable presence across Member States.
The precise distribution differs by country and product, which is itself important.
A cigarette, e-cigarette and nicotine pouch should not be treated as interchangeable simply because each can deliver nicotine. Their composition, route of administration, patterns of use and toxicant exposure differ.
This is the basis for risk-proportionate regulation. It does not mean weak regulation. It means designing rules around the characteristics and evidence relevant to each category.
GINN therefore supports robust product standards and consumer protections while cautioning against regulatory approaches that erase meaningful differences between combustible and non-combustible products.
Youth initiation requires a more precise response
Protecting children and adolescents must remain central to European nicotine policy.
There is strong evidence that smoking initiation often occurs at a young age. EU material based on the 2023 Eurobarometer reports that 54% of current and former smokers began smoking regularly before 19, including 14% before 15.
The patterns surrounding newer nicotine products require similarly careful analysis. They should not simply be assumed to mirror cigarette initiation.
GINN’s consultation response draws attention to differences between product categories and to the role of social access, online availability and non-compliant markets. Evidence and experience across Member States indicate that youth access can involve friends and peer networks, social-media and messaging-app sellers, informal sellers and retailers with inadequate age controls.
This distinction has practical consequences.
If young people are obtaining illegal or non-compliant products through social and online channels, imposing additional requirements only on compliant manufacturers and retailers will leave an important part of the problem untouched.
The Commission is already pursuing privacy-preserving digital age-verification solutions and has scrutinised major online platforms over how they prevent minors from accessing illegal products, including vapes. These developments show that stronger digital age assurance is increasingly feasible.
GINN supports strong age verification, enforcement against illegal sellers and restrictions on marketing and presentation designed to appeal to children.
The illicit and non-compliant market cannot be treated as secondary
This is one of the most important practical issues in the consultation.
Illegal and non-compliant products can evade the very safeguards regulation is intended to provide. Products sold through illicit online or offline channels may avoid age verification, ingredient requirements, nicotine limits, packaging standards and other controls applicable to legitimate operators.
EU governments have themselves raised concerns about cross-border online sales and social-media distribution of nicotine products to young people.
Stronger rules therefore need stronger enforcement.
A framework that places increasingly detailed obligations on the regulated market while failing to control sellers operating outside it risks producing an unintended imbalance: compliant products become harder to sell while non-compliant products remain readily accessible.
Youth protection cannot succeed under those conditions.
Flavours, presentation and youth appeal should not be treated as the same question
GINN also believes the debate around flavours needs greater precision.
Concerns about products using cartoon imagery, confectionery-style names, animals or other youth-oriented presentation are legitimate. These can be addressed directly through marketing, packaging and product-presentation rules.
That is different from concluding that every flavour ingredient or flavoured product has the same appeal, use pattern or public-health consequence.
GINN’s submission supports controls on youth-oriented descriptors and presentation alongside effective age restrictions and enforcement. Its accompanying paper argues that regulating how flavours are described and marketed can provide a more targeted response than treating flavour itself as a proxy for youth appeal.
For adults who already smoke or use nicotine, product acceptability may have a different significance. Regulation should be capable of recognising that distinction.
Fragmentation is becoming a problem in its own right
Nicotine pouches demonstrate the consequences of regulatory fragmentation particularly clearly.
Member States have developed different approaches covering nicotine limits, notifications, packaging, labelling, market access and, in some jurisdictions, prohibition.
GINN believes harmonisation is increasingly important.
Bringing tobacco-free nicotine products within a coherent EU framework as a distinct category could establish common standards, improve consumer protection and give enforcement authorities clearer rules while reducing unnecessary fragmentation within the single market.
The alternative is an increasingly complex patchwork in which the same product may face fundamentally different regulatory treatment depending on which side of an internal EU border it is sold.
This creates uncertainty for consumers and regulators as well as businesses, with smaller manufacturers particularly exposed to the cost of navigating multiple national systems.
Consultation design also matters
There is another pertinent issue: whether the consultation itself adequately captures these distinctions.
GINN’s accompanying submission notes that some consultation questions combine combustible tobacco and novel nicotine products within the same response options. Binary answer formats can also make it difficult to explain issues such as relative risk, market fragmentation and differences between product categories.
That does not diminish the value of consultation. It does mean the results should be interpreted carefully.
Questionnaire responses should form one part of a broader evidence-gathering process that includes scientific research, detailed written submissions and engagement with researchers, regulators, clinicians, toxicologists, consumers, manufacturers and other stakeholders.
Good regulation requires more than counting responses. It requires understanding what those responses mean.
Future-proofing without sacrificing scrutiny
There is a reasonable case for creating mechanisms that allow EU regulation to respond more effectively to scientific, technical and market developments.
Nicotine regulation cannot remain static while products and evidence change.
A more adaptable framework could help close regulatory gaps, update product standards and respond to new categories without years of uncertainty. But adaptability also requires appropriate safeguards.
GINN’s accompanying paper cautions against using the pace of product development as justification for expanding regulatory powers without appropriate legislative scrutiny.
The objective should therefore be responsive regulation with accountability: a framework capable of incorporating new evidence and addressing genuine gaps while maintaining transparency, scientific scrutiny and appropriate legislative oversight.
The consultation closes. The harder work begins.
The deadline of 14 August 2026 marks the end of the public consultation, not the end of the policy debate.
GINN has responded because the forthcoming revision represents a significant opportunity to improve European nicotine governance.
There is considerable common ground. Children should not use nicotine. Products placed legally on the market should meet appropriate standards. Consumers should receive accurate information. Non-compliant sellers should face meaningful enforcement. Regulation should be capable of responding when evidence changes.
The difficult questions concern how those principles are translated into legislation.
For GINN, the next framework should distinguish between products rather than treating nicotine as a single regulatory category. It should recognise tobacco-free nicotine products as a distinct category, address illicit supply alongside the regulated market, strengthen meaningful age verification, reduce fragmentation between Member States and ensure that regulatory requirements remain proportionate to product characteristics and evidence.
Europe has an opportunity to build rules for the nicotine market that exists today, while creating a framework capable of dealing with what comes next.
That opportunity should not be reduced to simply extending yesterday’s tobacco rules to tomorrow’s products.
Global Institute for Novel Nicotine (GINN)
EU Transparency Register ID: 207263897934-45
