Study Shows Potential Loss of Tax Revenue from E-Cigarette Trade

Sep.29.2024
Study Shows Potential Loss of Tax Revenue from E-Cigarette Trade
A study from ESEM at the University of São Paulo shows that Brazil could lose $1.4 billion in tax revenue by 2025 due to illegal e-cigarette trade.

According to a report from Oparana on September 28th, a study conducted by the International Relations Institute (IRI) of the University of São Paulo's Institute of Multidimensional Security (ESEM) shows that Brazil could lose 7.7 billion reais (1.4 billion US dollars) in state and federal taxes by 2025 due to illegal e-cigarette trading.


A study maintaining a conservative outlook on market growth and monthly consumption predicts that if e-cigarette devices (DEFs) are taxed properly, Brazil could see tax revenues reaching 10.3 billion Brazilian reais (1.9 billion USD) by 2028. The study is based on research conducted by the Minas Gerais Industry Federation (FIEMG), which identified a potential market of 3.3 million e-cigarette users in Brazil.


Professor Leandro Piquet of the School of Multidimensional Security at the University of São Paulo explained that...


The illegal trade of e-cigarettes relies on four main pillars: bans, smuggling, corruption of public institutions, and digital sales.


One particular feature of this market is that the majority of its retail is done through the internet, making it easy to purchase even banned products through digital channels.


Researchers have stated that even in illegal circumstances, consumption levels continue to rise, leading to public doubts about the effectiveness of current policies. They believe that appropriate regulations and taxes may be a more feasible solution, which can both combat the illegal market and address related public safety issues.


We welcome news tips, article submissions, interview requests, or comments on this piece.

Please contact us at info@2firsts.com, or reach out to Alan Zhao, CEO of 2Firsts, on LinkedIn


Notice

1.  This article is intended solely for professional research purposes related to industry, technology, and policy. Any references to brands or products are made purely for objective description and do not constitute any form of endorsement, recommendation, or promotion by 2Firsts.

2.  The use of nicotine-containing products — including, but not limited to, cigarettes, e-cigarettes, nicotine pouchand heated tobacco products — carries significant health risks. Users are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions.

3.  This article is not intended to serve as the basis for any investment decisions or financial advice. 2Firsts assumes no direct or indirect liability for any inaccuracies or errors in the content.

4.  Access to this article is strictly prohibited for individuals below the legal age in their jurisdiction.

 

Copyright

 

This article is either an original work created by 2Firsts or a reproduction from third-party sources with proper attribution. All copyrights and usage rights belong to 2Firsts or the original content provider. Unauthorized reproduction, distribution, or any other form of unauthorized use by any individual or organization is strictly prohibited. Violators will be held legally accountable.

For copyright-related inquiries, please contact: info@2firsts.com

 

AI Assistance Disclaimer

 

This article may have been enhanced using AI tools to improve translation and editorial efficiency. However, due to technical limitations, inaccuracies may occur. Readers are encouraged to refer to the cited sources for the most accurate information.

We welcome any corrections or feedback. Please contact us at: info@2firsts.com

U.S. Fifth Circuit Vacates NicQuid Vape MDO, Says FDA Comparative-Efficacy Standard Violated APA Procedures
U.S. Fifth Circuit Vacates NicQuid Vape MDO, Says FDA Comparative-Efficacy Standard Violated APA Procedures
According to VitalLaw on August 27, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated an FDA marketing denial order (MDO) against NicQuid LLC, ruling that the agency’s comparative-efficacy standard for electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) applications had become a substantive rule requiring notice-and-comment rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The court did not reject FDA’s authority to compare the public health benefits and risks of flavored vapes, but held that the agency could not establish a broadly binding standard through informal adjudications. The case was remanded to FDA for further proceedings.
Aug.28
2Firsts On-Site | PMI Brings IQOS, ZYN, VEEV and Marlboro Together at Its “Boulevard” at InterTabac 2026
2Firsts On-Site | PMI Brings IQOS, ZYN, VEEV and Marlboro Together at Its “Boulevard” at InterTabac 2026
At InterTabac 2026 in Dortmund, PMI is presenting multiple brands and products along “The PMI Boulevard,” including IQOS, ZYN, VEEV and Marlboro. On-site images captured by 2Firsts show dedicated spaces including the IQOS Boutique, ZYN Café, PMI Gallery and Marlboro Office
Market
Sep.16 by 2Firsts Perspectives
Reynolds Seeks to Join Altria Lawsuit Challenging FDA PMTA Rule and Calculation of 180-Day Deadline
Reynolds Seeks to Join Altria Lawsuit Challenging FDA PMTA Rule and Calculation of 180-Day Deadline
Three R.J. Reynolds companies are seeking to intervene in a lawsuit filed by Altria subsidiaries Helix Innovations and NJOY challenging the FDA's 2021 PMTA final rule. The companies dispute how the agency uses Acceptance and Filing reviews and completeness determinations to establish when the Tobacco Control Act's 180-day decision period begins. Reynolds has also linked prolonged PMTA reviews to competition from unauthorized vaping products. The FDA, meanwhile, has been accelerating reviews and reducing its backlog.
Sep.14
Russia Adds Vapes to “Strategic Goods” List, Illegal Cross-Border Trade Faces Up to Five Years in Prison
Russia Adds Vapes to “Strategic Goods” List, Illegal Cross-Border Trade Faces Up to Five Years in Prison
Russia will place e-cigarettes and related nicotine products under its “strategic goods” framework from August 20, 2026. According to TVP World’s report published on August 19, the newly listed items include e-cigarettes, electronic smoking devices, vape liquids and nicotine salts. Individuals who illegally move these products across Russia’s customs border or its state border with other Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) members could face up to five years in prison if shipment values exceed 100,000 rubles (about €1,000), provided all elements of a criminal offence are established.
Aug.20
Imperial Brands Acquires Helwit Owner Yoik Group for SEK 515 Million, More Than Doubling Swedish Nicotine Pouch Share
Imperial Brands Acquires Helwit Owner Yoik Group for SEK 515 Million, More Than Doubling Swedish Nicotine Pouch Share
Imperial Brands has agreed to acquire 100% of Swedish modern oral nicotine company Yoik Group AB for an initial SEK515 million, equivalent to about US$53.9 million, plus a deferred payment linked to performance over the next two years. Yoik owns nicotine pouch brand Helwit, which held about 3.4% of Sweden’s modern oral nicotine market over the past 12 months. Imperial says the acquisition will more than double its existing share of the Swedish market. Helwit is also sold elsewhere in the Nordics, through European online channels and in selected UK retail outlets.
Sep.08
Major U.S.  Vape Distributor Demand Vape Pays at Least $300,000 for White House Lobbying Amid Enforcement Pressure
Major U.S. Vape Distributor Demand Vape Pays at Least $300,000 for White House Lobbying Amid Enforcement Pressure
New York vape distributor Ecto World, which operates as Demand Vape, hired political consultant Roger Stone to lobby the Executive Office of the President on regulation of vaping and related products while facing state enforcement and multiple lawsuits. Public lobbying disclosures show that Ecto World paid at least $300,000 for the work through June 30, 2026. Separately, New York State announced in March that more than 28,500 pounds of vaping products tied to the company had been seized, while New York City and the state have pursued legal or enforcement actions. Public records do not show that the lobbying directly changed any specific regulatory or enforcement outcome.
Sep.08