ঢাকাবুধবার , ১৪ অক্টোবর ২০২৬
As the government brings nicotine pouches into the tax net while simultaneously approving a Philip Morris factory to manufacture them, Bangladesh’s tobacco control policy is caught between public health commitments and contradictory signals.
Bangladesh stands at a crossroads in its fight against tobacco. On one hand, the country has been praised by the World Health Organization for leading South-East Asia’s tobacco control efforts, with adult tobacco use projected to fall from 39.9% in 2010 to 29.5% in 2025. On the other, the government’s recent decisions on novel nicotine products—taxing them while approving domestic manufacturing—have created a policy paradox that public health experts warn could undermine decades of progress.
A Tobacco Burden Unlike Any Other
The numbers are staggering. Bangladesh has the highest tobacco use rate in South Asia at 35.3%, compared to 28.6% in India and 19.1% in Pakistan. Approximately 37.8 million adults currently use tobacco. According to the Tobacco Atlas, in Bangladesh, tobacco-related diseases kill nearly 200,000 people each year—roughly 18 deaths every hour.
The economic toll is equally severe. While tobacco generated around Tk 41,000 crore in revenue in fiscal year 2024-25, the combined economic losses from healthcare costs, premature deaths and environmental damage amounted to roughly Tk 87,000 crore—more than double the earnings, according to the study of Economics for Health.
Despite these figures, Bangladesh’s cigarette prices remain among the lowest in the world. A 10-stick pack of low-tier cigarettes officially costs just Tk 63 (approximately $0.51), and this segment accounts for nearly 75% of all cigarettes sold in the country.
The 2026-27 Budget: A Missed Opportunity
The budget for fiscal year 2026-27, presented by Finance Minister Amir Khosru Mahmud Chowdhury in June 2026, introduced marginal increases to cigarette prices. The minimum retail price for low-tier cigarettes rose from Tk 60 to Tk 62 (later adjusted to Tk 65 in September), medium-tier from Tk 80 to Tk 92, high-tier from Tk 140 to Tk 160, and premium from Tk 185 to Tk 210 .
Public health experts were quick to criticise the measures as insufficient. The low-tier price increase was merely Tk 2—a 3.33% rise that lags far behind the 10.27% growth in per capita income, meaning the real price of the cheapest cigarettes actually declined. The increase was insufficient to discourage tobacco use, particularly when inflation remains above nine percent. Tobacco companies could earn an additional tax-free profit of around Tk 5,512 crore from low-tier cigarette sales alone .
Experts had proposed a more aggressive approach: merging the low and medium tiers, setting the minimum retail price for a 10-stick pack at Tk 100, and imposing a specific tax of Tk 4 per pack while maintaining the existing 67% supplementary duty. If implemented, these measures could generate nearly Tk 44,000 crore in additional revenue, encourage around 500,000 adult smokers to quit, prevent 372,000 young people from starting, and avert nearly 400,000 premature deaths in the long term.
The Nicotine Pouch Dilemma: Taxing What You Ban
The most contentious element of the 2026-27 budget was the formal inclusion of nicotine pouches and heated tobacco products into the national tax framework. For the first time, new tariff classifications were introduced for nicotine granules and nicotine pouches, with a 350% supplementary duty proposed.
This move came against the backdrop of a controversial decision by the Bangladesh Economic Zones Authority (BEZA) to approve Philip Morris Bangladesh’s application to establish a nicotine pouch manufacturing facility in Narayanganj. The project, with an initial investment of $5.82 million, is expected to produce more than 536 million nicotine pouches annually, targeting the domestic market.
The decision drew sharp criticism from public health advocates. They warned that taxing these products “effectively granted legal recognition to emerging nicotine products and could “facilitate market expansion and increase the risk of nicotine addiction, especially among young people and adolescents.
The Additional Secretary of the Health Services Division at the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare in Bangladesh, Sheikh Momena Moni, stated that the NTCC was not consulted before the approval. “Nicotine pouch is a harmful product,” she said. “It is a nicotine-based substance, and nicotine itself is injurious to health.”
At least 16 countries, including Singapore, France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Russia, have banned nicotine pouches to protect public health and prevent nicotine addiction among young people. Youth advocates added their voices to the criticism. More than 100 anti-tobacco youth advocates called for a ban on the production, import, marketing and sale of e-cigarettes, nicotine pouches and other emerging nicotine products.
The E-Cigarette Ban: A Legal Battle Unfolds
While nicotine pouches were being brought into the tax framework, e-cigarettes faced a different fate. The Smoking and Tobacco Products Use Control (Amendment) Ordinance, 2025, which came into effect on January 1, 2026, imposed a complete ban on e-cigarettes, vapes, and other emerging tobacco products.
Under the new law, the production, import, export, storage, sale and use of e-cigarettes and emerging tobacco products were declared punishable offences, with violators facing up to six months in jail and fines of up to Tk 5 lakh (about $4,100). The definition of “tobacco products” was expanded to include e-cigarettes, Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS), Heated Tobacco Products (HTPs) and nicotine pouches.
The ordinance also introduced significant strengthening of tobacco control measures: all public places and public transport became smoke-free, fines for violations increased from Tk 300 to Tk 2,000, and comprehensive bans on tobacco advertising across traditional and digital media were imposed. Graphic health warnings covering 75% of package surfaces became mandatory .
However, the ban almost immediately faced legal challenges. In March 2026, the High Court Division of the Supreme Court issued a rule questioning the constitutionality of Section 6(G) of the 2005 tobacco control law—the provision banning vapes and e-cigarettes. The bench of Justice directed authorities not to confiscate or seize vapes and e-cigarettes that had already been imported .
The writ petition was filed by 41 traders, including managing director of Vapor Cloud Ltd. Their lawyer, Barrister HM Sanzid Siddiqui, argued that the provision was discriminatory, banning vapes—described as a harm-reduction alternative—while permitting traditional cigarettes, allegedly violating the equality clause under Article 27 of the Constitution.
In June 2026, a separate High Court bench comprising Justice Fatema Najib and AFM Saifur Karim issued another rule, this time responding to a public interest litigation filed by several tobacco control advocates.
These two parallel judicial paths reveal a deep institutional contradiction: the court is simultaneously questioning the constitutionality of the ban and questioning the government’s failure to enforce it.
The Core Contradiction: Regulation or Legitimisation?
The fundamental question running through all these developments is whether bringing novel nicotine products into the tax framework constitutes regulation or legitimisation.
The budget’s taxation of nicotine pouches, nicotine granules and heated tobacco products effectively “granted legal recognition” to these products. Every tobacco control advocates warned that such measures could “facilitate market expansion and increase the risk of nicotine addiction, especially among young people and adolescents.
The concern is not merely theoretical. Bangladesh’s experience with tobacco industry interference is well-documented. The Global Tobacco Industry Interference Index 2025 placed Bangladesh among the countries with the highest levels (Rank 66 out of 100) of industry interference globally, and the worst performer in Asia. During the amendment process, local and multinational tobacco companies engaged in intensive lobbying, disseminated industry-backed research, and mobilised front groups and business associations to oppose key provisions.
The BMJ Tobacco Control blog documented how industry-aligned groups held “harm reduction” events in Dhaka, including the Bangladesh Tobacco Harm Reduction Summit 2023, attended by senior officials from key ministries including Finance, Industries, Commerce, Home Affairs, and the Bangladesh Investment Development Authority.
Against this backdrop, the decision to tax—and simultaneously approve domestic manufacturing of—nicotine pouches raises troubling questions. Economic investment cannot contribute to the nation’s development if it is not people-friendly. This factory approval as “a new deceptive strategy of the tobacco companies to expand tobacco”.
What Lies Ahead
For Bangladesh, the stakes could not be higher. With nearly 200,000 deaths annually and economic losses exceeding Tk 87,000 crore—more than double the revenue generated—the country cannot afford policy contradictions that undermine its tobacco control efforts. The introduction of novel nicotine products into the tax framework—coupled with the approval of domestic manufacturing—threatens to reverse these gains.
The question facing policymakers is not whether to regulate novel nicotine products, but whether the current approach—taxing them while approving their manufacture—constitutes regulation or surrender. The answer will determine whether Bangladesh continues its trajectory as a regional leader in tobacco control, or becomes another cautionary tale of industry influence prevailing over public health.
writer: Ishrat Zahan Aishi, Research Associate, Bureau of Economic Research, University of Dhaka
