Tobacco Asia

Tobacco Asia 13 Q&A THE TA And it's ECMA's objective to let it sink in with regulators that our sector's production patterns are different because the individual producers are different, most of them being very specialized manufacturers that make their particular artisanal brands in comparatively small volumes; and nothing else. The one-size-fits-all method is unfair because it forces players with different financial and human resources into the same regula- tory criteria. TA: I also would argue that cigars, especially premium cigars, are artisanal products. You don't smoke two boxes of cigars a day like you would, for example, smoke two packs of cigarettes, right? It's like comparing apples and oranges. PV: Exactly. Cigars or cigarillos are predominantly consumed on an occasional basis. They are not consumed daily, thus do not drive smoking prevalence at population level. TA: But what about the "we must protect children and youths" mantra so often recited in order to justify excessive tobacco control measures? PV: Well, I am explicitly for protecting children from tobacco and nicotine addiction. But I am also very confident in saying that this is not a policy aspect that we [as cigar and cigarillo manufacturers] need to be afraid of. All relevant recent and publicly funded studies confirm and support the argument that cigars and cigarillos are niche products that are not typically consumed by young people. The last Eurobarometer study - publicly funded by the European Commission - confirmed two very important things. Firstly, 82% of cigar or cigarillo smokers in Europe are over 35 years old. Secondly, the study could not statistically identify any daily consumption among young people aged 15-24. Zero! And these data simply confirm our narrative that we are a traditional artisanal niche product with a very specific consum- er profile. We are not products that attract children and young people in droves, leading them into nicotine addiction. TA: But there still is the next revision of the European Union's Tobacco Products Directive – TPD – to reckon with. Do you have any concerns regarding the upcoming TPD3? PV: Yes, I do, of course. … Cigars and cigarillos in the EU are currently regulated differently from cigarettes, and so our main threat is to have these exemptions or differentiated regulations removed [in TPD3]. TA: What do you mean? PV: To give you a proper example, we [currently] have smaller health warnings than cigarettes. Another example would be that cigars and cigarillos in the EU are still permitted to be flavored – though it's traditional, natural flavors. So, when revising the TPD, regulators will of course look into these aspects, and we are worried that they might simply decide that it's getting too complicated with all these exemptions for cigars, cigarillos, or all these other new product categories that came to market since the last TPD revision. So, our fear is that TPD3 might simply equalize regulations across all tobacco and nicotine categories. TA: What is ECMA actively doing to prevent this possible, well, disaster scenario? PV: The vast majority of EU legislation is fortunately driven by processes. Revising legislation is actually quite formatted. Not every rogue cowboy can enter the saloon and start shooting regulations. There is a process step in which the EU opens calls for evidence to stakeholders regarding concerns, challenges, issues. And so, our maybe most important shot at influencing legislation is to provide evidence to regulators as per why cigars or cigarillos should be treated differently [from other tobacco products]. Luckily, all the indicators are green here. In 2012 and 2014, respectively, the European Commission, the EU Council, and the European Parliament actually recognized these specificities [of cigars and cigarillos] and granted us conditional exemptions. We can clearly and convincingly prove that nothing has changed in the conditions for these exemp- tions. Hence, there are no conceivable reasons why there should be a complete reworking of the regulatory framework for our segment. I nevertheless would like to remind everybody that these conditional exemptions as they stand now are not a blank check. For example, if cigar sales would suddenly skyrocket, or if cigars became irresistibly attractive to young people, the EU Commission does have the power to slap us with the same regulations to which cigarettes are subjected. But to put minds to rest: these thresholds have not been reached. TA: So, you are very confident that TPD3 will turn out in your favor? PV: "Confident" is a big word. I'm simply saying that if revising the TPD is an evidence-based process, then the evidence that we and other stakeholders have filed will speak for itself. Now, of course we have to be cautious of ideology. There are parties that would love nothing more than to eradicate tobacco from the face of the earth. Our goal obviously is to put facts before ideology. It's too soon to say or predict whether our work will yield the results that we hope it will. TA: There is, of course, another very recent development that could be seen as some sort of a success for your particular sector. On June 17, 2026, the European Parliament resoundingly rejected a European Commission proposal to, once again, revise excise duties for tobacco products, including cigars and cigarillos. In European Commission speak "revising" always only means one thing: hiking up the tax. So, does that rejection alleviate some of your members' concerns? PV: Absolutely. I think this vote is a clear reminder of how democracy works. It wasn't simply a vote with a thin majority against tax revision. A solid 68% of parliament members rejected the commission's original proposal, which also had aimed at equalizing all products across the board. If successful, it would have increased the tax burden on cigars and cigarillos by up to 1,000%! So, let's just say that the original EU Com- mission proposal was clearly crazy. More information at ecma.eu

• Cover