These ties are reflected in EU decision-making. When France, for example, notified the European Commission in 2025 of its plan to ban oral nicotine products, several Member States—including Greece, Hungary, Italy, Sweden and Romania—pushed back, slowing the Commission’s authorisation process. The same governments also criticized a Spanish decree aimed at strictly regulating nicotine pouches.
Of the fifteen lobbying groups focused on promoting a false “harm reduction” narrative around addictive and harmful products such as heated tobacco products (HTPs), e-cigarettes and nicotine pouches, eight groups were created in the last three years. For example, the Global Institute for Novel Nicotine, which advocates for the commercialisation of nicotine pouches and HTPs, is led by a former PMI executive.
“These findings reveal either a repeated violation of the FCTC by the European Commission or, at the very least, an insufficient implementation of the treaty’s measures. In addition to undermining European efforts to protect people from tobacco harm on our continent, the EU also fails to protect non-European countries from undue tobacco industry influence,” declares Martin Drago, Advocacy Manager at Contre-Feu.
“Civil society organizations and the European Ombudsman have repeatedly expressed concerns about this lack of transparency. To rebuild trust and comply with its international commitments, the EU must stop engaging with the tobacco industry behind closed doors,” adds Cassandre Bigaignon, European Advocacy Officer at Contre-Feu.
Pressuring Countries Beyond the EU
The four biggest transnational cigarette companies are PMI, Japan Tobacco International (JTI), British American Tobacco and Imperial Brands. PMI and JTI are headquartered in Switzerland and all four companies produce tobacco products in European countries. The companies use their presence and economic activities to lobby the EU under the guise of supporting exports.
According to the report, industry lobbying to weaken, delay and block lifesaving health policies did not stop at Europe’s borders. Documents sourced from FOI requests reveal correspondence from PMI to the EU’s Directorate-General of Trade (DG TRADE), requesting that EU trade officials use trade arguments and the EU’s diplomatic power to pressure governments in at least 10 non-EU countries to change tobacco-related policies.
In Japan, PMI appeared to want the EU’s support in opposing changes in the taxation of HTPs.
In Türkiye, tobacco products must contain 30% local tobacco content. PMI provided the EU with questions on this issue, to be asked at a World Trade Organization meeting. PMI also requested that the issue be included in a report assessing Türkiye’s progress towards EU enlargement.
India banned HTPs in 2019 to protect public health. PMI asked EU trade officials whether the issue could be addressed during ongoing trade negotiations, framing it as an import ban. The company also suggested that the European Commission intervene on the ban on HTPs in Singapore, arguing that “any message to the Singaporean authorities would be useful to remove the prohibition given the country’s openness to trade.”
PMI sought to challenge the ban on HTPs in Mexico by framing it as a trade barrier, asking DG TRADE to raise the issue with Mexican authorities. PMI similarly framed Brazil’s ban on e-cigarettes and HTPs as a breach of EU trade agreements.
“It’s not enough for these tobacco companies to undermine health policy in Europe,” said Jorge Alday, Director, STOP at Vital Strategies. “This investigation clearly demonstrates that the industry is trying to weaponize the EU’s diplomatic power to challenge other countries’ sovereign right to determine health policy to protect their people, especially youth. We call on the EU to fully uphold its obligations under the WHO FCTC, limit contact with the tobacco industry and make every interaction public. To protect health from the industry’s vested interests, these recommendations need to be binding and embedded across all EU institutions.”
