The announcement came like a thunderclap in the world of vaping: the government is planning a new tax on e-cigarette liquids as part of the 2026 budget. The measure, championed by Minister Lecornu, promises to shake up the vaping market. But behind the pennies on the bill lies a fundamental debate: is this fair taxation or tacit censorship of vapers? This rigorous, well-documented article examines the projectin the light of public finances, consumers and public health issues.
What is earmarked taxation?
The bill calls for taxing bottles of vape liquids on a sliding scale, with a possible rebate for low-nicotine models. The Minister has already announced an increase of several cents per milliliter, intended to replenish the national budget.
This new tax joins previous measures on tobacco, reinforcing the observation that vapers are no longer immune. The policy is clear – to restrict sales through taxation rather than a total ban.
Economic impact: a heavy financial burden for vapers
Imagine a vapoteur consuming 10 ml of liquid a week. With an increased tax, each bottle will cost more, until it rivals (or exceeds) the cost of a pack of cigarettes.
Added up over the year, this could amount to several extra euros a month – or even hundreds ofeuros a year. Tobacconists could see an impact on their sales of related electronic products.
Short-term budget savings? Undoubtedly. But in the medium term, this project risks pushing some vapoteurs towards traditional tobacco, generating costs for pensions, social security and taxes linked to smoking-related illnesses.
Public health and prevention: between coherence and contradiction
The project is presented as a preventive tool against tobacco, by heavily taxing the alternatives. However, this strategy seems contradictory: we are taxing what is supposed to help smokers quit.
Tax
This gradual freezing of margins can lead to the circulation of informal products or duty-free imports, weakening safety controls. We can foresee a slope where indirect censorship locks legal sales into a cumbersome and costly system.
The stakeholder perspective
- Vapoteurs denounce unfair taxation: why punish a substitution gesture rather than a tobacco reduction strategy?
- Tobacconists, some of them supporters of vaping, fear losing customer segments or suffering a market reversal.
- Minister Lecornu justifies: “We have to balance the budget, and distribute the charges as closely as possible to usage.”
- Health associations warn of the danger of a return to smoking, pointing out that price can be a dangerous brake on attempts to quit.
Scenarios and alternatives: towards a reasonable compromise?
To avoid an explosion in the cost of vaping, some voices are calling for :
- A progressive rebate for low nicotine liquids, to encourage gradual reduction.
- Windowed taxation: former vapoteurs (having quit smoking) could benefit from a reduced rate for a few years.
- Strong support forinformation and medical training on risks and safe use.
- Rigorous parliamentary monitoring of the impact on public finances, sales and consumers.
Bill 2026 could become a historic turning point in French health policy – for better or for worse.
In conclusion: fiscal prudence and transparency required
The new tax on e-liquids poses a balanced challenge between public finances and consumer freedom.
If the proposal is adopted, every vapoteur will have to pay more for an option recognized as less harmful than tobacco.
The challenge for the government will be to justify this tax without pushing smokers towards more harmful behavior. The words “ban” or “censorship” loom large in the debate, but they should not replace an enlightened approach.
The National Council, health associations, tobacconists and users need to work together as a matter of urgency to prevent a blind tax from jeopardizing the progress of the modern vapoteur. Because behind the euros of taxation lies the accessibility of vaping, and therefore, potentially, hundreds of thousands of smoking cessations ruined by an overly burdensome measure.
