A plea to spare vapers from sin tax hikes

On Wednesday, you will be presenting your budget outlining the country’s spending plans for the year. 

In an era of high public debt and dwindling revenue, there is strong competition between government programmes for each fiscal rand. There is pressure to increase social spending and to possibly fund a basic income grant. 

There have been discussions in the cabinet and within the National Treasury on the best ways of increasing revenue, and a push among policymakers to raise excise duties. 

In 2022 you announced a flat excise duty rate of R2.90/ml on nicotine and nicotine-substitute solutions in vaping products. This tax has since been increased to R3.03/ml.

There is a mistaken belief among policymakers that higher excise duties lead to a reduction in consumption. 

Sir, here are some tips on why excise duty on vaping products is not just a blunt tool, but is a major obstacle to harm reduction. 

While the intention behind taxing vaping products often stems from a desire to curb underage usage and promote public health, the consequences can be counterproductive. 

Taxing vaping products undermines efforts aimed at reducing smoking rates. Vaping is a less harmful alternative to smoking tobacco, and that has been proven by existing research. According to Public Health England, switching from smoking to vaping can lead to a 95% reduction in health risks associated with nicotine consumption. By making vaping more expensive through taxation, smokers may be deterred from making the switch.

A study among adults in the UK by academics at University College London, published in The Lancet in October last year, found there was a high probability that people who had never smoked before would have taken up the habit had they not resorted to less harmful vaping.

“If these individuals would otherwise have smoked, vaping will have a harm-reduction effect by diverting them towards a less harmful nicotine product,” the study said.

“The greater rise in vaping prevalence among never-regular smokers who drink more heavily suggests vaping uptake might be more common among people with a propensity for risk-taking behaviour, who might have taken up smoking had they not started vaping instead. With e-cigarettes offering an attractive, less harmful alternative to combustible tobacco products, it is likely that more people will start vaping without ever smoking.”

Sir, since implementing tobacco control regulations in the 1990s, South Africa went for decades without properly addressing tobacco consumption. The department of health has reintroduced the highly flawed Tobacco Products & Electronic Delivery Systems Control Bill in parliament. 

It seeks to regulate the sale and advertising of tobacco products, including new-generation ones such as vapes and e-cigarettes. It aims to regulate the packaging and appearance of tobacco products and electronic delivery systems, and to make provision for the standardisation of packaging; to provide for the regulation of standards in respect to the manufacturing and export of tobacco products and electronic systems.

Reams of copy have been written about why this bill goes too far, especially when it comes to the regulation of vapes and e-cigarettes, and why it is the greatest obstacle to harm reduction. 

The challenge in South Africa is that the state either relies on heavy excise taxes or heavy-handed regulations to decrease consumption, which is a policy failure. We need to start having serious conversations about harm reduction and cessation support.

When the government effected a sales ban on tobacco and alcohol at the height of Covid, it led to an explosion in the illicit market, which is currently estimated at about 60% of all cigarettes consumed. You can get a pack of 20 for as little as R12.50c on the black market. 

Regulations that are not well intended and high excise duties can never be a substitute for effective harm reduction efforts. 

Excessive taxation pushes consumers toward unregulated markets where safety standards and age restrictions are not enforced. This poses serious risks not only for individuals but also for public health at large.

Credible research has proven that many adults use vaping as a means to quit smoking. If excise taxes increase the cost of vaping products significantly, many smokers may find themselves unable or unwilling to afford these alternatives, leading them back to more harmful smoking habits.

Instead of relying on punitive tax measures, policymakers should focus on promoting education about safer alternatives such as vaping for adult smokers looking for ways to quit combustible tobacco altogether.

Policy towards tobacco and non-tobacco products needs to be based on the risk profile of the products. It must be consumer-centric and pragmatic and must meet people where they are at, rather than bashing them with more regulations and more excise. We have a track record that has completely failed. 

Please bear that in mind when you present your budget. 

Yeo is a former smoker who, after switching to vaping, co-founded the consumer advocacy group Vaping Saved My Life