fbpx

Harm Reduction Campaign

States Ranked on Vapor Regulations

The Consumer Choice Center (CCC) has published an index ranking each U.S. state on the consumer-friendliness of its vapor regulations.

Rankings are assigned based on a legislative actions, including restrictions, taxation, and online sales prohibitions.

According to the index, California is the “worst state for vaping.” New York, California, New Jersey, Massachusetts and Rhode Island are also among the least consumer-friendly states. Virginia, Colorado, Texas and Maryland each received “A” scores.

“The worst states … are far behind all the other states because of flavor bans, exorbitant taxation on vaping products, and restrictions on online sales,” said David Clement, North American affairs manager and deputy director at the CCC. “Our research indicates these states go above and beyond to deter adult smokers from switching to vaping, which could vastly improve and prolong their lives.”

“What lawmakers should note is that a number of states are providing a positive framework of regulation for vaping that boosts consumer choice while contributing to public health by encouraging smoking cessation,” said Yaël Ossowski, who is also North American affairs manager and deputy director at the CCC.

“Excessive flavor bans, taxes, and prohibitions on online commerce grow the black-market sector and harm consumers who want less harmful alternatives to smoking. If states want to innovate in 2020 and provide adult smokers with an alternative that is less harmful, they should look to reform their state laws to better accommodate this new technology that is helping millions.”

The report shows that 25 states allow flavored vaping products with no additional taxes and no shipping restrictions. Twenty states have previous flavor bans, some taxes and a few shipping restrictions. There are five states that have partial flavor bans, high taxes and shipping restrictions.

The center stated that the focus is on state regulation of vaping, “as it plays a big part in their availability to adult consumers who want to switch away from combustible tobacco.”

The weighted scoring system analyzes additional flavor restrictions, taxes and the ability to sell vaping products online. Regulations are assessed on stringency in addition to Food and Drug Administration regulations.

States that received between 0 and 10 points received an “F” grade, between 11 and 20 points is “C” and states with points between 21 and 30 received an “A” grade.

Originally published here.

Quanto sono importanti gli aromi delle sigarette elettroniche?

Cosa succederebbe se i liquidi per le sigarette elettroniche con gusti differenti dal tabacco venissero proibiti? A rispondere a questa domanda pensa un rapporto denominato “Why vape flavors matter”, cioè “Perché gli aromi del vaping sono importanti”, che è stato da poco pubblicato dal Ccc, il Consumer Choice Center. Ebbene, secondo questo report proibire gli aromi all’interno dei liquidi per le sigarette elettroniche potrebbe innescare delle conseguenze negative a livello sociale. In particolare, due potrebbero essere gli effetti più probabili: da un lato i vapers potrebbero ricominciare a usare le sigarette tradizionali; dall’altro lato potrebbero affidarsi al mercato nero, il che sarebbe deleterio sia dal punto di vista legale che sul piano della salute.

Dove comprare gli aromi per le e-cig

Chi è alla ricerca di un aroma sigarette elettroniche oggi può fare affidamento sul catalogo di Vape in Italy, che mette a disposizione un ampio assortimento di gusti e una straordinaria varietà di marchi per andare incontro a ogni tipo di richiesta. Nelle schede tecniche, per altro, sono riportati i suggerimenti dei produttori, che permettono di godersi al massimo tutto il piacere del vaping. Gli aromi possono essere con o senza nicotina. Va ricordato, inoltre, che gli aromi delle sigarette elettroniche sono del tutto innocui per la salute: in effetti sono gli stessi che vengono adoperati in ambito alimentare, ma semplicemente sono più diluiti.

Il ruolo del vaping

Come mette in evidenza il report del Consumer Choice Center, il vaping merita di essere considerato una risorsa molto efficace a disposizione di chi ha intenzione di smettere di fumare, e in questo scenario un ruolo di primo piano è proprio quello svolto dagli aromi. Gli autori della ricerca hanno preso in esame le conseguenze di un eventuale divieto applicato ai liquidi: un tema molto attuale, soprattutto negli Stati Uniti.

La situazione negli Usa

Diversi Stati americani, infatti, hanno imposto dei divieti a proposito dei gusti nei liquidi: una decisione che è stata adottata sulla scia di ciò che è successo lo scorso anno, con un notevole incremento dei casi di patologie polmonari che è stato attribuito all’uso di cartucce con Thc illegali. Il governo Usa, con l’obiettivo di evitare la diffusione del vaping tra i più giovani, ha proibito per tutti i sistemi a cartuccia i liquidi che abbiano aromi diversi dal mentolo, dalla menta e dal tabacco. Ma la questione non è importante solo al di là dell’Oceano Atlantico: anche alle nostre latitudini ci sono Paesi che stanno puntando sulla strada proibizionista, se è vero che sia la Danimarca che i Paesi Bassi hanno reso nota l’intenzione di ridurre gli aromi all’interno dei liquidi per le sigarette elettroniche.

Cosa potrebbe succedere

Che cosa potrebbe accadere, dunque, nel caso in cui questa misura prendesse sempre più piede? In base al report menzionato in precedenza, una situazione del genere finirebbe per ridurre in misura consistente la reale utilità delle e-cig come mezzo di contenimento del danno, così che tante persone sarebbero indotte a ritornare a usare il tabacco combustibile per fumare. Come è facile capire, tutto questo rappresenterebbe un danno importante per la salute pubblica.

L’importanza degli aromi

Gli autori del rapporto hanno analizzato le ricerche condotte sul tema per comprendere quanto siano importanti gli aromi sul piano della cessazione. Ciò avviene dal momento che i fumatori desiderano un gusto gradevole, diverso da quello delle sigarette classiche. Varie ricerche scientifiche hanno messo in evidenza che gli adulti che usano le e-cig con gusti non tabaccosi smettono di fumare con più probabilità rispetto agli altri. Ecco perché gli autori del report sono convinti che se si vietassero gli aromi nei liquidi il numero di fumatori aumenterebbe: si avrebbero ben 15 milioni di fumatori in più tra l’Italia, la Polonia, la Danimarca, la Germania, i Paesi Bassi, la Spagna, la Francia, gli Stati Uniti e il Canada, vale a dire i Paesi che lo studio ha analizzato.

Originally published here.

Consumer advocacy group critical of California vaping regulations

FAIRFIELD — California is the “worst state for vaping.”

Typically, such a statement is followed by findings that show vaping use is high in the state, such as the report that more than 20% of high school students – more than 3 million – said they vaped in 2018, a rate twice as high as in 2017.

But the finding that California is the worst state for vaping this time comes from a report by the Consumer Choice Center, which ranks each state “based on its consumer-friendly regulatory approach to vaping products.”

“California is far behind all the other states because of its local flavor bans and its exorbitant taxation on vaping products,” David Clement, North American Affairs manager at the Consumer Choice Center, said in a statement released with the report Tuesday. He was co-author of the study. “Our research indicates California’s policies deter adult smokers from turning to vaping, which could vastly improve and prolong their lives.”

Korey Temple, 31, of Fairfield, smokes cigarettes, but has tried vaping, too. Temple agrees that the state’s regulations and taxes on smoking products are unfair.

“California spends all this money to get people to stop smoking, and when the numbers drop, the revenues drop, so they raise taxes, again,” Temple said.

“I think the state should just make tobacco illegal if they want people to stop, but they would have to find something else to tax to make up for the lost (revenues)” she said. “It’s just about money.”

Gov. Gavin Newsom in August signed into law a bill than bans flavored tobacco, with an exemption for hookah. Proponents argue the flavored products are just an attempt to get more people hooked on nicotine.

Health officials also disagree that vaping is less harmful than cigarettes, and point to some research that shows that people who vape are more likely to start smoking.

Solano County has a no-smoking policy for its buildings and its parks. It also offers a cessation program.

“Government surveys show the sleek devices – and multitude of copycat products – are far more popular among high school students than adults. While the legal age to buy e-cigarettes is 18 in most states – and 21 in California – the products are widely available online and not all sellers require proof of age. And vaping kits now come in the form of pens, flash drives, key fobs, even watches – making them both stylish and easy to disguise,” California Healthline stated.

California joined New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts and Rhode Island with “F” grades, while Virginia, Colorado, Texas and Maryland each received “A” grades” for more consumer-friendly vaping regulations.

“What lawmakers should note is that a number of states are providing a positive framework of regulation for vaping that boosts consumer choice while contributing to public health by encouraging smoking cessation,” Yael Ossowski, North American Affairs manager and deputy director of the Consumer Choice Center, said in the statement.

“Excessive flavor bans, taxes, and prohibitions on online commerce grow the black market sector and harm consumers who want less harmful alternatives to smoking,” Ossowski said. “If states want to innovate in 2020 and provide adult smokers with an alternative that is less harmful, they should look to reform their state laws to better accommodate this new technology that is helping millions.”

The report states that 25 states allow flavored vaping products with no additional taxes and no shipping restrictions. Twenty states have previous flavor bans, some taxes and a few shipping restrictions. There are five states that have partial flavor bans, high taxes and shipping restrictions.

The center stated that the focus is on state regulation of vaping, “as it plays a big part in their availability to adult consumers who want to switch away from combustible tobacco.”

The weighted scoring system analyzes additional flavor restrictions, taxes and the ability to sell vaping products online. Regulations are assessed on stringency in addition to Food and Drug Administration regulations.

States that received between 0 and 10 points received an “F” grade, between 11 and 20 points is “C” and states with points between 21 and 30 received an “A” grade.

Look at the U.S. Vaping Index 2020 

To look at the vaping index, go to https://consumerchoicecenter.org/united-states-vaping-index/


Originally published here.

New Jersey Ranked One of the Worst State in the Union for Vaping Regulations

TRENTON, NJ – In an index published Tuesday by the Consumer Choice Center, the state of New Jersey has been named one of the worst U.S. states for vaping.

The Consumer Choice Center’s 2020 US Vaping Index categorizes and ranks each state based on its consumer-friendly regulatory approach to vaping products.

The study authors, David Clement and Yael Ossowski, North American Affairs Manager and Deputy Director of the Consumer Choice Center, said recent actions on flavored vaping products sunk it to the bottom of the list.

The full graph is below:

us-vaping-index.png

“New Jersey is far behind all the other states because of its flavor ban and its exorbitant taxation on vaping products,” said Clement, North American Affairs Manager at the Consumer Choice Center. “Our research indicates New Jersey’s policies deter adult smokers from turning to vaping, which could vastly improve and prolong their lives.”

New Jersey joined the states of New York, California, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island as the worst in the nation with a grade of “F”, while states like Virginia, Colorado, Texas, and Maryland each received “A” scores for more consumer-friendly vaping regulations.

“What lawmakers should note is that a number of states are providing a positive framework of regulation for vaping that boosts consumer choice while contributing to public health by encouraging smoking cessation,” said Ossowski. “Excessive flavor bans, taxes, and prohibitions on online commerce grow the black market sector and harm consumers who want less harmful alternatives to smoking.

“If states want to innovate in 2020 and provide adult smokers with an alternative that is less harmful, they should look to reform their state laws to better accommodate this new technology that is helping millions,” said Ossowski.

Read the full US Vaping Index Here

Originally published here.

A vaping flavour ban sets back public health

Vaping is under attack, and that is bad news for public health and smoking cessation, argue David Clement, Michael Landl and Yael Ossowski.

Vaping has been proven to be an effective harm reduction tool for adults who are trying to quit traditional cigarettes.

It reduces the harms posed by smoking by decreasing or removing the combustion of tobacco altogether, which is why in 2015, Public Health England declared vaping was 95% less harmful than combustible tobacco and began recommending current smokers switch to electronic cigarettes.

Countries like Canada and New Zealand followed their lead helping to save millions of lives. In fact, vaping achieved, in a short period of time, what public health authorities hoped to accomplish in a far greater time span: fewer people smoking traditional cigarettes. 

Despite vaping’s efficacy as a harm reduction tool, it has become a target for politicians and activists, with new regulations, restrictions and bans popping up around the world. Right now the prime target for legislators is flavoured vaping products.

Unfortunately, there are efforts to ban or restrict the sale of flavoured vapes in countries such as the United States and the Netherlands, with several others following their lead. If flavour bans go global, it would be disastrous for public health.

New research from the Consumer Choice Centre and the World Vapers’ Alliance shows that flavours in vapes are essential for helping smokers quit. In our recent policy paper entitled, ‘Why Flavours Matter’ we were able to show that banning flavours would have a profoundly negative effect on society, pushing smokers back to cigarettes or to the dangerous black market.

Two-thirds of current vapers are using some form of flavoured liquids. Vapers prefer flavours over tobacco flavoured e-cigarettes, mainly because flavours don’t remind them of the taste of cigarettes.

Because of this, researchers at Yale concluded that vapers who use flavours are 2.3 times more likely to quit smoking than those using tobacco flavoured e-cigarettes. It is reasonable to assume that restrictions and bans on flavours will significantly limit the usefulness of vaping as a cessation tool and will drive vapers back to cigarettes, which is nothing worth celebrating.

“While proposed flavour bans are well-intentioned, they have disastrous outcomes. Legislation on vaping flavours must take the facts of smoking cessation and harm reduction into account, and we urge legislators against the widespread implementation of such bans”

Our research looked the impact a flavour ban would have across nine countries. If enacted, in the US alone, 7.7 million vapers could switch back to smoking. In the Netherlands, a quarter of a million vapers could revert back to smoking if nothing is done to stop flavour bans.

In Germany, 1.3 million people could switch back to cigarettes with a flavour ban in place. That’s about the same number of people as the population of Munich. In France, 1.6 million smokers could re-emerge if a flavour ban is in place. That’s nearly the population of Paris.

Another option for vapers who prefer flavours is to resort to the black market. Flavour bans could balloon the illegal market for vapes. Because of the ban on flavoured vaping products in Massachusetts, the market for illicit products is expected to reach $10bn.

Flavour bans have driven some to create vaping liquids in their own homes without any legal oversight, developing unregulated and potentially dangerous products. These illegal sales are outside a state’s tax regime, which means t they lose revenue they otherwise would have acquired if these products were legal.

While proposed flavour bans are well-intentioned, they have disastrous outcomes. Legislation on vaping flavours must take the facts of smoking cessation and harm reduction into account, and we urge legislators against the widespread implementation of such bans.

Banning flavours would disproportionately harm smokers who are trying to quit, which runs against the goals of public health agencies. But good intentions in themselves, do not matter; only good outcomes.

Originally published here.

Vaping emerging as smoking alternative

Many smokers in Bangladesh are choosing vaping as a medium of quitting smoking as they consider it a safe alternative to cigarettes.

Physicians in the UK and USA recommend vaping as a quitting tool. 

According to a study conducted by a US-based organisation, the Consumer Choice Center, over 6.23 million smokers in Bangladesh can potentially quit cigarettes and if right measures are taken.

The Center, which works for consumer preferences, conducted the study on vaping in 61 countries. They tried to get an idea about the future expansion of relatively safe e-cigarettes market by reviewing the current regular and irregular vaping rates.

Reviewing the situation of Bangladesh, the organisation said that if e-cigarettes are systematically encouraged by following methods that of the UK, 25 percent smokers may quite conventional cigarettes. 

According to the report of World Health Organisation (WHO) in 2018, Bangladesh has 24.9 million smokers.

According to the research, more than 196 million smokers in 70 countries will be interested in quitting conventional cigarettes if e-cigarettes are encouraged.  

The highest number of smokers may decrease in China. Bangladesh ranks sixth out of 61 countries in this list of smoking quittances.

Organizations who are working in this sector believe that a significant reduction in smoking would have a positive effect on the global health situation. 

According to an article published by the Royal College of Physicians in the UK, an e-cigarette contains a mixture of nicotine, propylene glycol or vegetable glycerine and flavours. 

Although e-cigarettes contain nicotine, however nicotine does less harm than conventional cigarette chemicals (such as tar and carbon monoxide).

Doctors believe that vaping may be one of the most effective ways to quit smoking and suggest that the government take the issue positively, because it gradually reduces the body’s need for harmful chemicals.

Originally published here.

Backing #Vaping to beat #Cancer

The upcoming European Union’s Beating Cancer Plan is a historic chance to improve public health in Europe. Cancer is the second leading cause of death in the EU. 1.3 million people die from cancer each year in the EU and 700,000 of those deaths are associated with smoking. Despite these terrifying numbers, approximately 140 million Europeans are still smoking. The European Union is right to tackle the disease with a holistic approach, writes Michael Landl (pictured).

A comprehensive approach needs to include prevention and harm reduction. While it is important that lawmakers do everything, they can to prevent people from starting smoking, it is equally important to support current smokers in their quest to quit. Including e-cigarettes (vaping) in the EU Beating Cancer Plan will help millions of European who are struggling to quit smoking and consequently prevent many deaths associated with cancer from smoking.

E-cigarettes contain liquid which is heated and turned into vapour. There is no tobacco nor tar in e-cigarettes and many of the toxins in cigarettes are not present in e-cigarettes. In 2015, Public Health England declared that vaping is 95% less harmful than smoking and began recommending that current smokers switch to electronic cigarettes. Countries like Canada and New Zealand followed their lead and have helped save millions of lives. In fact, these policies promoting vaping arguably achieved more in a short period of time than what lawmakers tried to accomplish for years: fewer people smoking cigarettes. 

We know that abstinence is not as effective as alternatives, such as vaping. According to a 2019 study from Queen Mary University London of 100 smokers trying to quit cold turkey, only three to five succeed – while according to the same study, vaping is even more effective for smoking cessation than nicotine-replacement therapy, like patches or gums.

Despite the weight of evidence, a number of governments have considered new restrictions on vaping, rather than make it more accessible. While often well intentioned most newly proposed regulations, such as flavour liquid bans or higher taxes, would disproportionately harm smokers who are trying to quit. This runs directly against the goal of beating cancer.

The EU Beating Cancer Plan is a massive opportunity to ramp up the fight against smoking. Lawmakers should include vaping in the plan as a harm reduction tool to prevent cancer. The European Union’s institutions and governments should follow the lead of countries like the United Kingdom, Canada and New Zealand and encourage the use of vaping as a less harmful alternative for adult smokers.

If the European Union is serious about improving health, we must back vaping to beat cancer.

About the World Vapers’ Alliance

The World Vapers’ Alliance (WVA) amplifies the voice of passionate vapers around the world and empowers them to make a difference for their communities. The alliance partners with 19 groups representing vapers worldwide and represents individual vapers. Michael Landl, the WVA’s director, is an experienced policy professional and a passionate vaper.

Originally published here.

Millones de exfumadores podrían recaer si se prohíben los sabores en el vapeo

Una nueva investigación publicada por el Consumer Choice Center (Centro de Elección del Consumidor) y World Vapers Alliance (Alianza Mundial de Vapeadores) muestra que 15 millones de exfumadores de ocho países podrían volver a fumar si se promulgan las prohibiciones de los sabores del vapeo de nicotina.

El informe “Why Vape Flavors Matter?” analizó la situación en 8 países (Estados Unidos, Canadá, Holanda, Polonia, Alemania, Francia, España, e Italia). De acuerdo con este, hay tres consecuencias negativas de prohibir los sabores en el vapeo:

1. La prohibición llevará a los vapeadores a comprar productos de vapeo con sabor en otras jurisdicciones legales;
2. Los vapeadores podrían recurrir a comprar productos de vapeo con sabor en el mercado ilegal;
3. Los vapeadores podrían volver a fumar.

El análisis también encontró que los vapeadores que usan sabores distintos a tabaco son 230% más propensos a dejar de fumar que aquellos que usan solo sabores de tabaco. 

Reacciones al estudio

Michael Landl, director de la Alianza Mundial de Vapeadores, dijo que “prohibir los sabores tendría un efecto profundamente negativo en la sociedad, empujando a los fumadores de vuelta a los cigarrillos o al peligroso mercado negro. El vapeo es una herramienta muy eficaz para dejar de fumar y los sabores son una parte integral del éxito. La prohibición de los sabores podría hacer que millones de exfumadores volvieran a tomar el hábito”.

David Clement, director de Asuntos Norteamericanos del Consumer Choice Center, añadió: “Lo que queremos que la gente, especialmente los legisladores, reconozcan es que los sabores que se van formando no solo tienen que ver con el sabor y la comodidad para los usuarios adultos: son un factor importante para que la gente deje de fumar de forma tradicional”.

En el informe también se examinan otras consecuencias negativas de la prohibición de los sabores. Estas incluyen acceder a los mercados negros o fabricar sus propios líquidos de vapeo. Esto último puede ser muy peligroso si la persona no cuenta con el conocimiento y los ingredientes adecuados. 

“Sabemos que las prohibiciones de los sabores reavivan los problemas de la prohibición, lo cual es un neto negativo para la sociedad, tanto en lo que respecta a la actividad delictiva como a la seguridad de los consumidores”, dijo Yaël Ossowski, director adjunto del Consumer Choice Center. “A la luz de todas estas pruebas, países como los Países Bajos o Dinamarca deben reconsiderar sus planes sobre las prohibiciones de los sabores y, en su lugar, facilitar al máximo a los fumadores el cambio a alternativas menos perjudiciales en comparación con el tabaquismo”, dijo Michael Landl.

Originally published here.

Brüssel will Raucher und Dampfer wieder zur Kasse bitten

Die EU-weite Tabakmindeststeuer soll erhöht werden, auch das ‚Dampfen‘ betreffend. Geht gegen Einkaufstourismus, der durch noch höhere Steuern aber höchstens auf den Schwarzmarkt abgedrängt würde.

Im Juni billigte der Europäische Rat einen neuen Konsens über Verbrauchssteuern auf Tabakwaren. Die Mitgliedstaaten schlagen Änderungen vor, die den Tabakpreis erhöhen und auch Nicht-Tabakprodukte wie E-Zigaretten betreffen würden.

Seit 2011 gibt es in der Europäischen Union eine gemeinsame Mindestverbrauchssteuer auf Tabakwaren, wodurch sich die Zigarettenpreise in den europäischen Ländern mit vergleichsweise niedrigen Steuer deutlich erhöht haben. Nachbarländer mit höheren Steuern behaupteten, dass grenzüberschreitende Käufe ihre eigenen Ziele in der Gesundheitspolitik untergraben würden. Beispielsweise kaufen deutsche Pendler Tabak in Luxemburg, da der Preis dort niedriger ist als in ihren heimischen Geschäften.

Jetzt, da die Richtlinie von 2011 nicht die Ergebnisse gebracht hat, die einige Mitgliedstaaten erwartet hatten, oder, was eher anzunehmen ist, Steuereinnahmen nicht in der Höhe, die die Staaten in der aktuellen wirtschaftlichen Situation benötigen, wünschen sie eine Revision. Auch wenn Mitgliedstaaten Tabakpreise selbst erhöhen können, bringt jede Erhöhung auch eine Steigerung der Pendlerkäufe mit sich: Besonders deshalb will man höhere Mindeststandards. Hinzu kommt, dass politische Entscheidungsträger bei Kritik zu den neuen Preisen einfach auf Brüssel verweisen können.

„Illegaler Handel korreliert mit einer erhöhten Steuerbelastung.“


Diese Revision bezieht sich nicht nur auf konventionelle Tabakprodukte wie Zigaretten, Schnupftabak, Shisha oder Zigarren und Zigarillos. Zum ersten Mal fordert der Europäische Rat, dass auch Nicht-Tabakprodukte in die Tabakverbrauchsteuer-Richtlinie aufgenommen werden. E-Zigaretten oder Heat-Not-Burn-Geräte stellen Alternativen für Konsumenten von konventionellen Tabakprodukten dar. Einer offiziellen Untersuchung in Großbritannien zufolge sei der Konsum dieser Produkte 95 Prozent weniger schädlich als das Rauchen von Zigaretten. Der Europäische Rat kommt zu dem Schluss, „dass es daher dringend erforderlich ist, den Rechtsrahmen der EU auszubauen, um derzeitige und künftige Herausforderungen in Bezug auf das Funktionieren des Binnenmarkts zu bewältigen, indem die Begriffsbestimmungen und die steuerliche Behandlung von neuartigen Erzeugnissen (wie Flüssigkeiten für E-Zigaretten und erhitzte Tabakerzeugnisse), einschließlich nikotinhaltiger oder anderer Erzeugnisse, die Tabak ersetzen, harmonisiert werden, damit Rechtsunsicherheit und regulatorische Unterschiede in der EU vermieden werden”. Eine umständliche Formulierung für „mehr Steuern”.

Wie ernst ist es den EU-Mitgliedsstaaten mit der Verbesserung der Gesundheit, wenn sie mit ihrer Präventionspolitik die Steuerlast der Verbraucher erhöhen? Eine Untersuchung aus den Vereinigten Staaten zeigt, dass jede zehnprozentige Erhöhung des Preises von E-Zigaretten-Produkten zu einem elfprozentigen Anstieg der Zigarettenkäufe führt.

E-Zigaretten sind eine Sache, aber wir sollten uns nicht von der Vorstellung täuschen lassen, dass eine höhere Besteuerung von Zigaretten jemandem nützt. In den Schlussfolgerungen des Rates selbst wird anerkannt, dass Europa mit einer Welle des illegalen Tabakhandels konfrontiert ist, und es werden mehr Lösungen zu dessen Bekämpfung gefordert. Illegaler Handel korreliert mit einer erhöhten Steuerbelastung: Indem wir einkommensschwache Haushalte mit Zigaretten besteuern, die dennoch ein legales Produkt bleiben, drängen wir sie auf den Schwarzmarkt, wo kriminelle Elemente von einer solchen Gesundheitspolitik profitieren. In Frankreich zum Beispiel wurde in einem Bericht aus dem Jahr 2015 festgestellt, dass das Land mit einem Marktanteil von 15 Prozent Europas größter Konsument von gefälschten Zigaretten ist.

„Wir müssen Gesetzesänderungen nicht nur auf ihre erklärten Absichten hin analysieren, sondern auch auf ihre voraussichtlichen Ergebnisse.“


Da es keine Qualitätskontrolle gibt, stellen diese illegalen Zigaretten eine viel größere Bedrohung für die Gesundheit der Verbraucher dar. Hinzu kommt, dass die Einnahmen aus dem Verkauf dieser Zigaretten dem Terrorismus zugutekommen können – dem französischen Zentrum für Terrorismusanalyse zufolge finanziert der illegale Tabakverkauf sogar 20 Prozent des internationalen Terrorismus. Organisationen wie Al-Qaida und ISIS finanzieren ihre Aktivitäten auf diese Weise.

Die vom Europäischen Rat vorgeschlagenen Änderungen an der Richtlinie über Tabakverbrauchsteuern sind kontraproduktiv. Sie werden die Wahlmöglichkeiten einschränken und die Gesundheit der Verbraucher negativ beeinflussen. Wir müssen Gesetzesänderungen nicht nur auf ihre erklärten Absichten hin analysieren, sondern auch auf ihre voraussichtlichen Ergebnisse.

Originally published here.


The Consumer Choice Center is the consumer advocacy group supporting lifestyle freedom, innovation, privacy, science, and consumer choice. The main policy areas we focus on are digital, mobility, lifestyle & consumer goods, and health & science.

The CCC represents consumers in over 100 countries across the globe. We closely monitor regulatory trends in Ottawa, Washington, Brussels, Geneva and other hotspots of regulation and inform and activate consumers to fight for #ConsumerChoice. Learn more at consumerchoicecenter.org

Harga murah, rokok seludup jadi pilihan

KUALA LUMPUR 30 Julai – Disebabkan harga yang lebih murah dan mudah diperoleh, pasaran bagi rokok seludup di Malaysia terus laris dalam kalangan perokok di negara ini.

Pengarah Urusan Consumer Choice Center (CCC), Fred Roeder berkata, bilangan rokok haram yang diseludup masuk ke Malaysia adalah luar biasa.

“Pemerhatian kami menunjukkan permintaan bagi rokok seludup adalah tinggi kerana produk haram ini dijual pada harga semurah RM5.00 berbanding produk sah yang dibayar cukai.

“Jika trend ini berterusan, pasaran rokok Malaysia akan sama sekali ditakluki oleh produk haram dan murah hanya beberapa tahun lagi,” jelasnya dalam satu kenyataan hari ini.

Malaysia mempunyai kira-kira lima juta perokok dan sebilangan besarnya adalah mereka yang menghisap rokok seludup.

FRED ROEDER
Fred Roeder

Pasaran rokok haram mencacah 60% berdasarkan jangkaan daripada hasil rampasan yang dijalankan agensi-agensi penguatkuasaan.

Baru-baru ini juga, Jabatan Kastam Diraja Malaysia (JKDM) berjaya mematahkan cubaan menyeludup 456.03 juta batang rokok dari bulan Januari hingga Jun 2020.

Jumlah tersebut menunjukkan peningkatan mendadak berbanding 236.2 juta batang rokok yang dirampas pada tempoh sama tahun lalu.

“Perokok juga mungkin beranggapan produk yang murah dan tidak dibayar cukai adalah bagus untuk poket mereka berikutan kelembapan ekonomi akibat COVID-19,” katanya.

Pengguna juga berdepan dengan beberapa impak negatif seperti produk tiada pematuhan.

Kajian pada 2015 oleh Jabatan Bioteknologi, Universiti Malaya mendapati rokok haram mempunyai kandungan tiga kali ganda tar dan nikotin. 

Produk ini kerap dicemari oleh bahan yang tidak diketahui semasa proses penyeludupan yang mendedahkan pengguna kepada risiko kesihatan yang lebih besar.

Selain itu, peralihan kepada pasaran rokok seludup juga menjadi pemangkin kepada lonjakan pasaran gelap yang membolehkan pasukan penjenayah meluaskan pilihan produk pasaran gelapnya ke dalam negara.

Ekonomi gelap Malaysia dianggarkan bernilai RM300 bilion termasuk aktiviti pengedaran dadah, produk paslu dan manusia.

Dalam pada itu, aktiviti haram tersebut juga memberi kesan kepada dana awam yang memaksa kerajaan menanggung kerugian tahunan sebanyak RM5 bilion dalam aspek hasil cukai.

Jelas Roeder, pengguna perlu sedar hak dan kuasa mereka setelah mengetahui produk haram tidak memberi manfaat kepada mereka.

“Pengguna Malaysia haruslah menuntut supaya semua pihak berkepentingan seperti penggubal dasar, agensi penguatkuasaan, pengeluar dan peruncit mengambil tindakan tegas dalam membanteras masalah ini secara mutlak.

“Kerajaan juga harus mempertimbangkan untuk melakukan perubahan cukai sebagai langkah mengurangkan permintaan kepada rokok haram di samping mengurangkan beban pihak penguatkuasaan,” katanya lagi.

Originally published here.


The Consumer Choice Center is the consumer advocacy group supporting lifestyle freedom, innovation, privacy, science, and consumer choice. The main policy areas we focus on are digital, mobility, lifestyle & consumer goods, and health & science.

The CCC represents consumers in over 100 countries across the globe. We closely monitor regulatory trends in Ottawa, Washington, Brussels, Geneva and other hotspots of regulation and inform and activate consumers to fight for #ConsumerChoice. Learn more at consumerchoicecenter.org

Scroll to top
en_USEN