Brussels has become the central battleground for the tobacco industry's efforts to shape European regulation. New data from Transparency International's Integrity Watch database reveals a significant surge in lobbying activity, with meetings between industry representatives and Members of the European Parliament rising by 57% — from an average of 14.7 per month to 23 by June 2026. This increase comes as the EU pushes forward with its ambitious goal of a “tobacco-free generation” by 2040 under the Beating Cancer Plan.
The sector's financial firepower is formidable: an estimated €8 million to €10 million is spent annually on direct lobbying of EU institutions, supported by more than 100 registered lobbyists. This figure excludes the additional influence wielded through public relations firms, law firms, consultancies, and industry-backed think tanks. Advocacy groups argue that this scale of access creates a stark imbalance between commercial interests and public health voices.
“If we look specifically at the top 20 of where the tobacco industry is really lobbying, we find virtually no NGOs. So, they definitely have more access,” said Raphaël Kergueno, Senior Policy Officer at Transparency International EU. During one key legislative period, public health NGOs secured only 12 meetings with influential MEPs, while Philip Morris International alone held 121 meetings.
At the heart of this lobbying campaign are the world's largest tobacco companies — Philip Morris International, British American Tobacco, Japan Tobacco International, and Imperial Brands — alongside trade associations like Tobacco Europe and advocacy groups such as the World Vapers' Alliance. While each company pursues its own commercial priorities, they broadly seek lower taxes and lighter regulation for emerging nicotine products such as heated tobacco, vaping devices, and nicotine pouches.
“Obviously, if there's this many meetings, it means that there's also an interest in trying to influence legislation,” Kergueno noted. He added that “vaping is one of the main topics of the lobbying. If you look at the meetings, vaping is a subject that comes repeatedly. Clearly, this is a main subject area, trying to shape the regulation around vaping.”
A political text nobody liked
This intensified lobbying has had tangible consequences. On June 17, the European Parliament rejected the Tobacco Taxation Directive (TTD) with 439 votes to 181, a rare defeat that reflected deep divisions over the final text. The rejection was partly attributed to the Kubin report, a controversial legislative draft that embedded industry arguments by proposing drastically reduced minimum tax rates for vapes and nicotine pouches.
Erin Roman, Director of the Smoke Free Partnership, criticised the report in a press release: “Kubín's report approved last month by the [Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) Committee] substantially suggested to weaken the Commission's proposal. The text included several problematic elements, including a 'less harm, less tax' approach... Altogether, it reflected long-standing tobacco industry narratives on 'harm reduction', while overlooking the growing body of independent evidence on nicotine addiction, youth uptake, and the risks associated with new products.”
Roman added: “The absence of an adopted opinion is preferable to a weakened position that directly mirrors industry framing, creating an important opportunity to restore the public health ambition of the Tobacco Taxation Directive. The final legislation must deliver meaningful price increases, greater convergence across Member States and effective taxation of all tobacco and nicotine products to protect Europe's youth and reduce tobacco-related harm.”
Thomas Kubin, the Patriots for Europe MEP who served as rapporteur, defended his approach in comments to Euronews: “With the rising of taxes, you will not save the world. I mean, you will not prevent people from smoking. [...] If we go the way of the Commission proposal, then in all the states the tax earnings will start to fall down and the illicit trade - mostly smuggling but also counterfeit products - will be rising.”
The report that reached the plenary was no longer a coherent proposal. After months of negotiations, the original Commission draft had been extensively amended to make tax increases more gradual, particularly for newer nicotine products such as e-cigarettes, heated tobacco and nicotine pouches. Public health organisations argued these changes weakened the proposal by introducing a “less harm, less tax” approach and giving novel products more favourable treatment than originally planned.
The rejection of the TTD has opened a window for a more health-focused revision, but the tobacco industry's lobbying machine remains active. As the EU prepares to update its tobacco tax rules and the broader Tobacco Control Framework, the balance between commercial interests and public health will be tested again. The sweeping tax overhaul that the Commission originally proposed now faces an uncertain future, with industry influence threatening to dilute its ambition.
For public health advocates, the stakes are clear. The EU's commitment to reducing tobacco-related harm — a leading cause of preventable death across the continent — depends on resisting industry pressure. As Kergueno put it, the sheer volume of meetings signals a clear intent: “Obviously, if there's this many meetings, it means that there's also an interest in trying to influence legislation.”
