By Munyaradzi Blessing Doma
Several governments find themselves in a conundrum. On one hand, they depend on tobacco tax revenues to fund public programs and services, while on the other, they aim to reduce the health risks associated with tobacco consumption.
This dilemma is particularly evident in countries with significant tobacco industries. In Zimbabwe, for example, the country recorded an all-time high output of 355 million kilograms of tobacco this year, earning close to US$1.2 billion in revenue. The tobacco industry contributes significantly to Zimbabwe’s economy, accounting for about 10 percent of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) and 30 percent of all exports.
Such figures present authorities with a challenge: how to stabilise economies through these massive revenues while also preserving public health.
From November 17 to 22, 2025, world leaders will meet in Geneva, Switzerland, for the 11th Conference of the Parties (COP11) to the World Health Organisation Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC). The meeting will focus on strategies for implementing the global tobacco control treaty.
Among other issues, COP11 will emphasise the importance of tobacco taxation as a key tool for reducing tobacco consumption. According to the NCD Alliance, this year’s conference comes at a critical moment for public health, offering a platform to assess progress, strengthen accountability, and reinforce the FCTC’s role in reducing tobacco use, a leading cause of preventable noncommunicable diseases (NCDs).
The COP framework maintains that implementing tax policies is essential for reducing tobacco consumption and generating revenue. It encourages governments to use tax increases to discourage tobacco use, especially among youth and low-income populations, while also promoting international cooperation to combat smuggling and ensure that tax policies remain effective.
Countries such as Colombia, Oman, and Sri Lanka have successfully implemented tobacco tax policies that have both reduced smoking rates and boosted revenue. In 2016, Colombia’s tax reform led to a 34 percent drop in cigarette consumption and almost doubled excise tax revenues, with proceeds directed toward funding universal health coverage. Similarly, Oman’s introduction of an excise tax on tobacco products significantly raised prices, making them less affordable and reducing consumption.
However, according to Tomoko Iida, Director of Scientific Engagement for South and Southeast Asia, the Commonwealth of Independent States, and the Middle East at Philip Morris International (PMI), many countries attending COP are major tobacco producers and face inherent conflicts of interest.
There will be many of these countries there, but 18 of them actually have governments that own tobacco companies. The biggest one is China, which is the largest exporter and producer of cigarettes, surpassing all other companies combined. When countries like China or others that own cigarette companies attend WHO meetings to discuss tobacco control, it is absolutely hypocritical. It is a conflict of interest,” Iida said during an interview at the Technovation Summit in Dubai.
She added: “In my country, Japan, there is Japan Tobacco, one of the major tobacco companies, and one third of it is owned by our government. This creates a fundamental conflict of interest for a state to participate in a tobacco control conference while still owning part or all of a tobacco business. Beyond industry interests, governments themselves need to reconcile these contradictions between their public health commitments and their economic stakes.”
While tobacco taxation remains a proven strategy for reducing tobacco use, challenges such as illicit trade persist. Governments must strengthen efforts to combat smuggling and ensure that tax policies are implemented effectively.
Policymakers should also consider the potential impact on low-income populations and design measures to cushion vulnerable groups. Gradual tax increases can help governments strike a balance between revenue generation and public health objectives while minimising sudden disruptions to the industry and consumers.
Some experts also argue that allocating part of tobacco tax revenue to public health programs, such as smoking cessation initiatives and anti-smoking campaigns, can offset the health consequences of tobacco use. Combining taxation with other tobacco control measures, including bans on smoking in public places and restrictions on tobacco advertising, has been shown to further reduce smoking rates and healthcare costs.
Implementing differential taxation, where more harmful tobacco products are taxed at higher rates, can also encourage smokers to switch to less harmful alternatives while maintaining revenue streams.
To effectively balance public health and economic priorities, governments may need to explore adopting less harmful alternatives. At the recent Technovation Summit in Dubai, experts stressed the urgency of embracing reduced-risk products, noting that despite decades of anti-smoking campaigns and strict control measures, the global number of smokers remains stubbornly high.
