The Government of Spain has encountered a wall in Brussels after approving a decree that imposes harsh restrictions on new nicotine products without combustion. The norm, which forces generic containers, prohibits flavors and sets a limit of 0.99 mg of nicotine per bag (six times less than the European average), equivalent in practice to a de facto prohibition, since with that amount the product loses its usefulness as a substitute for the fuel tobacco for the smokers and that was subject to opinions reasoned by six Member States (Romania, Hungary Italy, Sweden and Greece), which automatically activated a suspension of the TRIS procedure until July 28, 2025.
According to an analysis published by the European Center for International Political Economy (ECIPE) On July 16, 2025, this decree has become a case study on how public health defense can collide with the principles of free movement in the single market. “They will have to modify the law or withdraw it,” says a senior official of the General Directorate of Food Health (DG Sante) of the European Commission, who participates in the follow -up of the file.
You may be interested
The Spanish and French beaches close to tobacco and even the non -smokers come out against the law: “I do not smoke, but this violates freedom”
The United Kingdom National Health Service issues an urgent statement for the recent “corn popcorn lung” disease
The answer has not come only from European partners. The National Commission of Markets and Competition (CNMC) already questioned the proportionality of the decree and warned of the lack of legal basis for some measures. Among the most critical states include Sweden, Denmark, Italy and Romania, which defend these products as a less harmful alternative to traditional tobacco. France, on the other hand, has gone further and has decreed its total prohibition.
The clash reopens an old European crack, which is the tension between the protection of public health and the free circulation of goods. The case reminds that of the Swedish SNUS, the oral tobacco forbidden in the EU since 1992 except in Sweden and Norway, which became a symbol of cultural differences between the north, where it is committed to the reduction of damage, and the south, more prone to prohibition measures.
To this regulatory pulse is added another fiscal nature. The European Commission, under the impulse of Teresa Ribera and with its climate commissioner, Wopke Hoekstra, prepares a nape rise seen in tobacco taxes and electronic cigarettes. Brussels aspires to raise several billions of euros a year (the most reliable estimates, such as reuters, talk about 11.2 billion, although some calculations raise the figure to 30,000 million), but the directive needs the unanimity of the 27. Several countries, including Italy and Greece, have already advanced their rejection.
Between the “imposite” or the risk to the black market
To this regulatory pulse is added another fiscal nature. The European Commission, under the command of Teresa Ribera and its Climate Commissioner, Wopke Hoekstra, prepares a unprecedented rise in tobacco taxes Already electronic cigarettes. Brussels aspires to raise up to 30,000 million euros a year, but the directive needs the unanimity of the 27. Several countries, including Italy and Greece, have already advanced their rejection.
Risk, as have warned kpmg And Euromonitor, is that each tax rise feeds the black market. In 2024 more than 15,300 million falsified cigarettes were consumed in Europe, 20% more than the previous year, and in the Netherlands the smuggling doubled after a record increase. Spain, as a large merchandise gateway from Asia and other parallel markets (from the Middle East to Eastern Europe), is emerging as the country most vulnerable to an avalanche of falsified Vapers, whose weight in the European market does not stop growing.
The future of the Spanish norm will now depend on how negotiations in Brussels are resolved. Sweden threatens to go to the EU Court of Justice to force the withdrawal of the restrictions, while the Commission observes the pulse with interest, since each dispute reinforces its role as an arbitrator and paves the way to a more strict and centralized community legislation.
For everything explained, Spain and France face a dilemma. Withdrawing or postponing its measures could avoid a judicial wand, but would also weaken its negotiating position for the imminent reform of the tobacco directive. Maintaining them, on the other hand, exposes both countries to a defeat in Luxembourg that could condition the future European policy against tobacco and nicotine.