Colombia's Vape Tax Battle: The Powerful Lobby Blocking New Laws

In Colombia, a persistent legislative battle is being waged over the taxation of tobacco and vaping products, a struggle that pits public health imperatives and the need for state revenue against the powerful, often behind-the-scenes, influence of the tobacco and nicotine industries. Representative Carolina Giraldo Botero has repeatedly tried to get Congress to approve her proposal to increase taxes on traditional tobacco – which haven’t been updated since 2016 – and to create a new excise tax for vapes and e-cigarettes, which currently pay no specific consumption tax. Each attempt has been shelved or rejected, often without reaching a substantive debate.

The latest effort failed on June 19th in the Senate’s Third Committee. A visibly frustrated Giraldo made a final plea: “This is a project for public health. Our estimates indicate that one million people would quit smoking if this law were approved. This would save many lives.” She added a pragmatic argument for her colleagues focused on fiscal matters: the law would contribute an additional $1 trillion pesos to the state’s finances. But her plea fell on deaf ears. “Apparently, there is no quorum in the Committee,” she lamented at the time. Undeterred, she has vowed to try again in the new legislative session, this time focusing solely on creating a tax for vapers, acknowledging the even greater political and economic resistance to raising taxes on traditional tobacco.

Giraldo admits that taking on the tobacco lobby is no easy feat. “Sometimes they—the industry representatives—knew before I did which way the debate in the Committee was moving,” she recalls, recounting an instance where she received private messages from the industry about proposed modifications to her bill that she herself had not yet seen.

This sentiment is echoed, albeit more cautiously, by other lawmakers. Representative Armando Antonio Zabaraín D’Arce, a member of the influential Conservative Party, described the issue as highly controversial. “There must be interests involved, as always in these cases. For me, it’s a good project, but well…” he trailed off, admitting he doesn’t want to continue investing his energy in the fight. While few congress members will openly admit to being directly pressured, off-the-record stories of insistent calls from industry advisors, invitations to “informative” meetings, and veiled warnings about the economic impact on their regions are common.

“Quiet Interference”: The Tactics of Industry Lobbying

Clearly identifying industry interference in legislative debates is challenging. “We realized that in the broad catalog of interference tactics, the illegal ones are very few. The vast majority operate in that gray area of what is not prohibited,” explains Diana Guarnizo, a researcher at Dejusticia and co-author of a recent study on industry influence strategies. “And because it’s allowed, they do it their way: without transparency, behind closed doors, and without sharing information.”

Guarnizo and her colleagues classify these tactics as direct and indirect. Some are blatant, such as in March 2024, when Philip Morris International invited twelve members of Congress on a trip to Switzerland, right in the middle of the debate over what would become Law 2354 of 2024 (which regulates the use, sale, and advertising of e-cigarettes). The trip, which included flights, accommodation, and tours of the tobacco giant’s R&D center, was presented as a strictly academic agenda. “We consider it legitimate to be able to educate decision-makers, without any kind of expectation,” the company defended at the time. After the trip became public, most of the invited congress members backed out.

A more subtle, indirect form of influence has been observed through the National Federation of Departments (FND). The FND is a private law association that represents Colombia’s 32 regional departments. Its role is crucial because, in Colombia, tobacco taxes are not directed to the central government but to the departments, primarily funding public hospitals and regional health programs. This gives governors a direct stake in the matter.

One might assume governors would favor higher taxes for more revenue. However, the FND has consistently advocated against significant tax increases. While agreeing on the need to regulate and tax new products like vapes, the FND has opposed the proposed rates. For traditional cigarettes, they have recommended no tax increase at all. Their main argument is that a sharp rise in taxes will fuel smuggling and the illicit market, citing a study they commissioned from the pollster Invamer, which concluded that cigarette smuggling is on the rise in Colombia. This argument often aligns closely with the position of the tobacco industry.

What is rarely mentioned in the FND’s public statements is a 2009 Investment and Cooperation Agreement between Colombia’s 32 departments and major tobacco companies, including Philip Morris International’s Colombian subsidiary, Coltabaco. Under this 20-year agreement, the tobacco company committed to investing $155 million in departmental projects. The FND’s own financial statements show it received $75 million in 2024 and another $58 million in 2023 from this agreement. The stated purpose of these funds includes improving tobacco seed quality, guaranteeing a market for locally grown tobacco, and creating a tobacco laboratory. For public health advocates, this presents an unavoidable conflict of interest: how can an entity promote public health policies aimed at reducing tobacco consumption while simultaneously being contractually obligated to improve and guarantee the tobacco market?

Coltabaco defends the agreement, stating it is for the “exclusively technical” purpose of fighting illicit trade and does not involve influencing legislative debates. The FND did not respond to requests for comment on this potential conflict of interest. However, according to several members of Congress, the FND’s presence is felt directly during legislative debates, with representatives walking the floor and speaking with lawmakers.

Political Whispers and a Lack of Transparency

In Colombia, lobbying is not illegal, but it is subject to very few controls and almost no transparency obligations. A 2011 resolution to create a single registry for lobbyists has had little practical effect due to a lack of specific sanctions for non-compliance. This opacity allows for a political environment where influence can be exerted without public scrutiny.

Senator Norma Hurtado has publicly denounced this, stating during the “anti-vaping” law debate, “The country needs to know that there is a lobby from the big industries… There is an interest in ensuring that these regulation projects do not proceed in Congress.” Multiple sources confirmed that during those months, industry lobbyists were a constant presence in the halls of Congress, holding closed-door meetings with various lawmakers.

Jaime Arcila of Corporate Accountability, an organization that advocates for public policies free from interference, recalls the long history of this influence. He notes that it took nearly 19 years and 22 failed projects to pass Colombia’s first major anti-tobacco law in 2009. Those were the days when Colombia’s professional soccer league was named after a cigarette brand. “More than ten years ago… industry directors would go and sit in the plenary sessions, and the congressional teams would talk to them without any reservation,” Arcila remembers.

Conclusion: A Hard-Fought Battle for Public Health

Colombia has made significant strides in tobacco control, moving from a country where cigarette brands were emblazoned on every stadium to one with comprehensive advertising bans and public smoking restrictions. The current debate over taxing new products like vapes is the latest chapter in this ongoing battle. While public health advocates and some lawmakers continue to push for measures to reduce consumption and protect youth, they face a sophisticated and well-resourced lobby that operates in the often-gray areas of political influence. The fate of new tobacco and vape taxes in Colombia will depend not only on the strength of public health arguments but also on the ability of the legislative process to withstand these powerful, often unseen, pressures.

News source: El lobby para que el Congreso no apruebe impuestos a cigarrillos y vapeadores

Author
Recent Posts

Matthew Ma

Marketing at Ecigator

With over a decade of experience in the e-cigarette industry, Matthew Ma is a seasoned expert in both the manufacturing and usage aspects of vaping products. His extensive background has provided him with a deep understanding of the intricacies and evolving dynamics of e-cigarettes.