A call from distributors, manufacturers and retailers in the e-cigarette sector
28 is 28
The coolant ban (01/01/2027) and the flavour ban (01/09/2028) hit exactly the same products. So align the dates: simply turn 01/01/2027 into 01/09/2028. The same products, one coherent deadline.
Our sector is not asking to be exempted from regulation. We support proportionate rules and the protection of public health. We oppose just one thing: an abrupt, duplicate deadline imposed by informal means. On 18/06/2026 the sector received a service letter from FPS Public Health (ref. 20260608/L534/RQX, signed on 03/06/2026 by department head Carl Berthot). It states that all activators of the TRPM8 thermoreceptor - menthol and its analogues, eucalyptol, geraniol, linalool, L-carvone, isopulegol and synthetic coolants such as WS-3, WS-23 and icilin - will henceforth count as 'additives that facilitate the inhalation or absorption of nicotine' under art. 4 §4 of the Royal Decree of 28/10/2016. From 01/01/2027 the notification comment, until then non-blocking, becomes blocking: the products concerned - all e-liquids, with or without nicotine - end up on the negative list, may no longer be placed on the market and can be seized, with regular laboratory analyses. It affects an estimated half of all products on the positive list - and these are precisely the bestsellers.
- of products on the positive list
- ~52%
- of market revenue — the best-sellers (estimate)
- ~85%
- months before the flavour ban, same products
- 20
A duplicate of the 2028 flavour ban
The coolant list and the flavour ban target the same menthol, mint and cooling products. The flavour ban, approved by the Council of Ministers on 30/04/2026, restricts e-liquids (with and without nicotine) to tobacco flavour or no flavour via a positive list and goes even further than the coolant list. It only enters into force on 01/09/2028. A coolant ban twenty months earlier therefore prohibits nothing that would not already be banned a year and a half later anyway - it yields no additional health benefit, only legal uncertainty. One date is enough.
About half of the products - but by far the largest share of revenue
A public analysis of the EUCEG data (around 7,361 authorised products) shows that the coolant list affects roughly half of all products on the positive list. A mere product count, however, severely underestimates the commercial impact, because these are precisely the bestsellers. According to a sector estimate (revenue is not in the public data, hence expressly an estimate) it concerns an estimated 85% or so of total market revenue; for most manufacturers the ban covers around 80% of their range.
FPS Public Health already knows the exact impact
Through the mandatory EUCEG notification, FPS Public Health holds the full composition of every product on the Belgian market. Through the mandatory annual sales reporting, it holds the sales figures per product. The authorities can therefore calculate exactly what share of the market and of revenue is affected. Ignorance cannot be invoked - and 'the sector should have seen this coming' is untenable coming from the one party that can measure the damage down to the euro, and that itself expressly kept the comment non-blocking for thirteen months.
An abrupt ban feeds the illegal market
A fast-growing illegal and cross-border online vape market already exists. A study by the Fraunhofer Institute IIS (commissioned by SKR AG, March 2026) estimates the European irregular vape market at around EUR 6.6 billion in 2026, with roughly 48% being irregular, and expects growth to around EUR 10.8 billion by 2030. In Belgium, FPS Public Health seized 140,019 illegal disposable vapes in 2025 alone. Scrapping about half of today's legal bestsellers overnight, with no transition, pushes consumers towards unregulated products - counterproductive for public health and unfair to those who did notify correctly.
What we are asking
Three reasonable, constructive corrections. None of them asks for less protection of public health - they ask for coherence, predictability and proper due process for a measure that FPS Public Health itself treated as non-blocking for thirteen months.
- 01 Align the enforcement date of the coolant ban with that of the flavour ban: 01/09/2028 instead of 01/01/2027. The same products, one coherent deadline.
- 02 Provide a matching transition and sell-off arrangement for stock that has already been legally notified and accepted as compliant.
- 03 Provide clarity on the legal instrument: a binding market ban with seizure should proceed via a formal, EU-notified decree, as with the flavour ban and in member states such as the Netherlands and Austria, not via a service letter from a department head.
Together we add up
Fair rules, fair timelines
We are not asking for an exception, but for equal treatment. One and the same set of products deserves one date, one transition arrangement and one proper legal instrument. This is not an attack on the policy - it makes the policy coherent and sustainable. Align the date: 28 is 28.
Sign the call