CONFERENCE PROCEEDING
Tax disparities between e-cigarette types: Lessons from the Israeli market
More details
Hide details
1
Smoke Free Israel, Ramat Gan, Israel
Publication date: 2025-06-23
Tob. Induc. Dis. 2025;23(Suppl 1):A455
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND IMPLEMENTATION CHALLENGES: The WHO recommends taxation of e-cigarettes1, without distinguishing between disposable e-cigarettes, closed-system refillable e-cigarettes (pods), and open-system refillable e-cigarettes (e-liquid). Governments and the e-cigarette industry on the other hand often treat each type separately. In 2021, Israel’s Ministry of Finance introduced its first e-cigarettes tax ordinance, creating disparities in tax rates among these types. Over the subsequent three years, eight tax amendments were enacted, all maintaining an unequal tax structure that favored e-liquid. For example, the fourth amendment (15 June 2022) imposed a €39 tax on two disposable e-cigarettes (10ml equivalent), while the same volume of e-liquid was taxed at only €26.
INTERVENTION OR RESPONSE: The differentiated tax structure aligned with the industry’s strategy of marketing e-cigarette types as distinct types. Distributors capitalized on these tax disparities, expecting consumers to switch easily between types. In early 2022, importers delayed the release of disposable e-cigarettes at ports to avoid the new tax, shifting instead to importing e-liquids. Due to the resulting shortage of disposables, retailers encouraged consumers to transition to open system refillable e-cigarettes, promoting them as premium alternatives.
RESULTS AND IMPACT: E-cigarette users demonstrated high mobility between e-cigarette types, desiring to vape regardless of the device type. Following the 2022 tax implementation, most age groups under 24 showed decreased use of disposable e-cigarettes but significantly increased adoption of refillables. Most notably, among 12-14-year-olds, refillable e-cigarette use surged from 0.4% in 2022 to 6.0% in 2023. Similarly, usage among 20-21-year-olds increased from 9.1% to 14.9%.
CONCLUSIONS: A uniform tax on all e-cigarettes sends a clear message that harm knows no difference between e-cigarette types. It also shuts down industry tactics to shift consumers between e-cigarette types for profit, putting public health first.
REFERENCES (1)