A new tax on e-liquids in the 2026 budget

The French government plans to tax liquids for electronic cigarettes, a measure that has caused an outcry among many vapers. In its finance bill for 2026, the executive has proposed introducing an unprecedented tax on the e-liquids used in electronic cigarettes. The new levy, of between 30 and 50 euro cents per 10-millilitre bottle, would depend on the nicotine content of the product. Announced as a public health and revenue-raising measure, the idea is already drawing strong reactions: it worries consumers who use the electronic cigarette and has prompted a heated debate within the medical profession.

A new tax on e-liquids from 2026

It would be the first time that vaping liquids were subject to a specific tax in France. Until now, no particular excise duty applied to these nicotine bottles, generally sold at around 5 to 7 € for 10 ml in the shops. The government plan aims to fill that gap: each 10 ml refill would be taxed at 0.30 € if it contains less than 15 mg of nicotine, and 0.50 € above that. Proportionally, that represents an increase of about 5 to 10% in the price of a bottle for users. France has close to 3 million regular vapers who could be affected by the measure.

If Parliament adopts the provision, it would come into force in the second half of 2026, possibly as early as July 2026. The government argues that the aim is to bring the taxation of vaping into line with that of tobacco. Alternative nicotine products are indeed increasingly viewed in the same light as conventional cigarettes. Heated tobacco, another technology marketed by cigarette manufacturers to compete with the e-cigarette, should also see its taxation rise slightly in the 2026 budget. In time, according to estimates, the vaping tax could bring in around 100 million euros a year to the State. But these financial and tax fairness arguments are far from convincing everyone.

Anger among vapers and fear of a “bad signal”

Among users, the announcement has gone down badly. Many smokers who have switched to the electronic cigarette express anger and incomprehension at what they see as an inconsistency. “It annoys me. We are urged to stop smoking. We stop smoking with the electronic cigarette, and now they are taxing the nicotine in the electronic cigarette. It is a bit much,” says Fanny, a vaper interviewed by RMC. For many of them, vaping is a way of coming off tobacco; taxing it would amount to penalising a step the health authorities themselves encourage.

Kaïs, 25, a former “heavy smoker” who moved to the e-cigarette, is also angry about the measure. “It is a huge mistake; out of all the things that could be taxed in this country, why tax the only serious substitute for the cigarette? In a country where [smoking] is a major cause of death?” he fumes (source: Boursorama). In his own case the extra cost would be only about 1.50 € a month, but it is the symbolism that irritates him most. He fears that making vaping more expensive sends a bad signal to smokers who want to give up tobacco. “When you increase the price of e-liquids, people give up the product they were using to keep away from tobacco,” adds Jean Moiroud on RMC, president of the French vaping industry body. Kaïs even envisages unofficial alternatives if the tax comes in: “I will go and buy my electronic cigarettes at the Clignancourt flea market,” he says, raising the possibility of turning to a parallel market to get around the law.

Specialist retailers also fear a negative impact. “You can imagine that a small bottle going from 5.90 € to 7 € means we may well lose customers,” says Yannick Matignon on RMC, who runs an electronic cigarette shop and is worried about seeing some customers hold back. Several shops fear a fall in footfall and a return to tobacco among former smokers put off by the price rise. “We are afraid of a misunderstanding, that people will stop coming into the shop because they think the electronic cigarette is more expensive than tobacco,” explains Romain Raby, who runs a shop in Nice selling e-cigarettes. In his view, of all the anti-vaping measures raised in recent years, this one is perhaps “the most sensible”, especially compared with the idea (eventually dropped) of banning all e-liquid flavours. Even so, this fairly measured retailer fears the public will be misinformed: if the price of vaping goes up, some smokers could wrongly imagine that vaping now costs more than smoking, and give up the idea of switching to the electronic cigarette, which would, paradoxically, run counter to the public health objective being sought.

The vaping industry on alert

Manufacturers and other players in vaping are also speaking up to defend their sector. The inter-trade federation for vaping (Fivape), the main body bringing together hundreds of independent retailers and small businesses in the sector, points out that “vaping has become the most popular aid for stopping smoking and coming off nicotine”. Treating e-liquids as a taxable tobacco product therefore seems to it counter-productive. “Vaping is not smoking, which is why the risk is also greatly reduced compared with tobacco,” insists Jean Moiroud on RMC, president of Fivape, arguing that vaping is of value as a less harmful alternative. He regrets that the government announcements have “a very broad reach” for the sector, sending an alarming message to users. On his estimates, the tax could indeed generate around 100 million euros in revenue, but at the cost of a fall in the number of vapers: 5% of them could give up the e-cigarette and return to tobacco, which would in time create 200 million euros of additional health spending linked to smoking.

Other voices involved in reducing smoking also express reservations. Alice Denoize, a former tobacco industry professional who now works in cessation support, acknowledges the need for better regulation of the vaping market, particularly given the rise of disposable puffs with high nicotine levels, which have worried the authorities. She doubts, however, that taxation is the right answer: in her view, “it will penalise the poorest vapers and above all the small manufacturers who are doing a good job”. In other words, it is users on limited means and independent manufacturers (rather than the tobacco giants) who would suffer most from such a measure, when the sector remains a potential ally in the fight against smoking if it is properly regulated.

Health professionals divided

The medical community appears divided on whether taxing vaping makes sense. Many smoking and addiction specialists are alarmed at the signal sent to smokers in transition. “This new levy runs counter to the fight against tobacco,” and applying the tax would be to “aim at the wrong target”, says Dr Christophe Cutarella, an addiction psychiatrist interviewed by 20 Minutes. He argues that, from a toxicological point of view, the electronic cigarette is markedly less harmful than the conventional cigarette: the absence of combustion, he says, significantly reduces exposure to carcinogenic toxins and the effects on the respiratory and cardiovascular systems. As part of a cessation attempt, vaping nicotine avoids the tar and the thousands of toxic substances in cigarette smoke, in his view. A scientific review published in 2024 concluded that nicotine e-cigarettes can help smokers to stop, “probably more effectively” than substitutes without nicotine. For part of the medical profession, then, taxing these risk-reduction products amounts to penalising smokers who want to give up tobacco, with the risk of discouraging them from remaining non-smokers. The well-known lung specialist Bertrand Dautzenberg also regrets the initiative: in his view, taxing to raise money is understandable, but it would be better to target the conventional cigarette squarely, for example by taking a pack of tobacco to 25 €, rather than aiming at a nicotine cessation tool.

Other health professionals, by contrast, are in favour of a stricter framework for vaping. Yves Martinet, professor of pulmonology and president of the national committee against smoking, is unequivocal: “I am in favour of taxing vaping products containing nicotine.” He points to the intrinsic dangerousness of nicotine, “a hard drug, more addictive than heroin”, he says, and observes that most users of electronic cigarettes are no longer smokers in the process of quitting, but often young non-smokers for whom vaping can serve as a way into tobacco. The e-cigarette can help some smokers to stop, Professor Martinet accepts, but that group remains a minority among vapers as a whole. He therefore considers it legitimate to apply to vaping the precautionary principle already in force for tobacco: by raising the cost and limiting the appeal of nicotine products, the accessibility of an addictive substance is reduced for the population as a whole. “The fact that you have to take insulin when you have diabetes does not mean everyone should take it,” he concludes by way of analogy, considering that vaping’s status as a medical aid for some does not justify a general exemption. The scientific debate therefore remains open: the effectiveness of vaping as an aid to stopping smoking is still the subject of studies and controversy, and decision-makers are navigating between the bet on risk reduction and that of protection against new addictions.

Towards a European tax on vaping?

France is far from alone in wanting to tax vaping products. Brussels is in fact preparing a tax tightening on an altogether different scale. In July, the European Commission proposed a revision of the excise duty directive aimed at introducing, by 2028, a common minimum tax on e-liquids in the EU, of between 1.20 € and 3.60 € per 10 ml bottle. If it came about, that European plan would considerably increase the bill for French vapers, well beyond the 30 to 50 cents currently under discussion. It is part of a general trend towards tighter regulation of the electronic cigarette, against a background of concern about its growing success among young people.

In France, it is worth recalling that e-liquids narrowly escaped a tax in 2024. The subject is therefore not new, but it is resurfacing in a tight budgetary context in which every source of revenue is closely examined. The minister for public accounts, Sébastien Lecornu, has acknowledged that this part of the budget remained open to political negotiation and parliamentary adjustment. The “vaping tax” will be debated in the National Assembly in the coming weeks. Its fate will depend on the political balance of power and on the outcome of the discussions: between public health arguments, financial considerations and public reaction, members will have to decide on this controversial measure of the 2026 budget. One thing is certain: the debate around vaping, seen sometimes as an ally in the fight against tobacco, sometimes as an addictive product to be controlled, is set to continue, in France as in Europe, in the months and years ahead.

Sources: RMC/BFMTV; Les News Eco; Le Figaro (via Boursorama).