Request for documents on Member State positions, industry lobbying, and draft scenarios related to the revision of the Tobacco Tax Directive
Dear Taxation and Customs Union,
Under the right of access to documents in the EU treaties, as developed in Regulation 1049/2001, I am requesting documents which contain the following information:
I request access to all documents (including correspondence, meeting minutes, internal notes, draft proposals, and impact assessments) from 1 January 2021 to the present, held by DG TAXUD, concerning:
– Contacts with Member States (especially Italy, Greece, and Romania) regarding the taxation of e-cigarettes, heated tobacco, or nicotine pouches, including references to their position papers or joint letters.
– Lobbying activities or communications from tobacco companies and their representatives regarding differentiated taxation of “smoke-free” or “harm reduction” products.
– Internal drafts, working papers, or scenario documents for the revision of the Tobacco Tax Directive (including the so-called “Enhanced Draft TTD”).
– Interservice consultations and comments regarding whether or not to include alternative nicotine products in the harmonised excise framework.
I would like the search to cover the period from 1 January 2021 to the present.
If parts of the requested documents are covered by exceptions under Regulation 1049/2001, I kindly ask for partial access to be granted to the remaining parts. I am also open to receiving the documents in electronic format.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Yours faithfully,
Irene van den Berg
Dear Madam,
Thank you for your request for access to documents.
Unfortunately, you have not indicated your postal address. This is
necessary for registering and handling your request in line with the
procedural requirements.
Please send us your full postal address at your earliest convenience.
Pending your reply, we reserve the right to refuse the registration of
your request.
Alternatively, we suggest to use directly the electronic form available on
the Europa website:
[1]https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/docume...
Please also note that you have lodged your application via a private
third-party website (AsktheEU.org), which has no link with any institution
of the European Union. Therefore, the European Commission cannot be held
accountable for any technical issues or problems linked to the use of this
system.
Please note that the private third party running the Ask the EU website is
responsible and accountable for the processing of your personal data via
that website, and not the Commission. For further information on your
rights, please refer to the third party’s privacy policy.
We understand that the third party running the AsktheEU.org website
usually publishes the content of applicants’ correspondence with the
Commission on that website. This includes the personal data that you may
have communicated to the Commission (e.g. your private postal address).
Similarly, the third party publishes on that website any reply that the
Commission will send to the e-mail address of the applicants generated by
the AsktheEU.org website.
If you do not wish that your correspondence with the Commission is
published on a private third-party website such as AsktheEU.org, you can
provide us with an alternative, private e-mail address for further
correspondence. In that case, the Commission will send all future
electronic correspondence addressed to you only to that private address,
and it will use only that private address to reply to your request. You
should still remain responsible to inform the private third-party website
about this change of how you wish to communicate with, and receive a reply
from, the Commission.
For information on how we process your personal data visit our page
[2]Privacy statement – access to documents.
Yours faithfully,
TAXUD Access to Documents Team
Dear [email address],
Please find below my postal address as requested:
Linker Rottekade 292, unit 1.7
3034 CV Rotterdam
Yours sincerely,
Irene van den Berg
Dear [email address],
Please find below my postal address as requested:
Linker Rottekade 292, unit 1.7
3034 CV Rotterdam
The Netherlands
Yours sincerely,
Irene van den Berg
Hzllo Virginie,
Wat betreft het tweede punt (lobbyist activities) kunne we haar verwijzen
naar onze tobacco lobbyist pagina op de Europa Website.
Best regards
Sven Vandevyvere
DG TAXUD UNIT E.2
J79 C – 3/240
tel 63397
From: TAXUD ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS <[DG TAXUD request email]>
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2025 10:35 AM
To: Irene van den Berg <[FOI #16372 email]>
Subject: New message - Access to documents request "van den Berg" (Tobacco
Tax Directive)
Dear Madam,
Thank you for your request for access to documents.
Unfortunately, you have not indicated your postal address. This is
necessary for registering and handling your request in line with the
procedural requirements.
Please send us your full postal address at your earliest convenience.
Pending your reply, we reserve the right to refuse the registration of
your request.
Alternatively, we suggest to use directly the electronic form available on
the Europa website:
[1]https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/docume...
Please also note that you have lodged your application via a private
third-party website (AsktheEU.org), which has no link with any institution
of the European Union. Therefore, the European Commission cannot be held
accountable for any technical issues or problems linked to the use of this
system.
Please note that the private third party running the Ask the EU website is
responsible and accountable for the processing of your personal data via
that website, and not the Commission. For further information on your
rights, please refer to the third party’s privacy policy.
We understand that the third party running the AsktheEU.org website
usually publishes the content of applicants’ correspondence with the
Commission on that website. This includes the personal data that you may
have communicated to the Commission (e.g. your private postal address).
Similarly, the third party publishes on that website any reply that the
Commission will send to the e-mail address of the applicants generated by
the AsktheEU.org website.
If you do not wish that your correspondence with the Commission is
published on a private third-party website such as AsktheEU.org, you can
provide us with an alternative, private e-mail address for further
correspondence. In that case, the Commission will send all future
electronic correspondence addressed to you only to that private address,
and it will use only that private address to reply to your request. You
should still remain responsible to inform the private third-party website
about this change of how you wish to communicate with, and receive a reply
from, the Commission.
For information on how we process your personal data visit our page
[2]Privacy statement – access to documents.
Yours faithfully,
TAXUD Access to Documents Team
VANDEVYVERE Sven (TAXUD) would like to recall the message, "New message - Access to documents request "van den Berg" (Tobacco Tax Directive)".
Dear VANDEVYVERE Sven,
I acknowledge receipt of your message. Please confirm whether my request remains registered under Regulation 1049/2001, or if any further action is required on my side.
Yours sincerely,
Irene van den Berg
Dear Ms Van Den Berg,
The message sent was not meant for you , please delete it.
As concerns your request for access to documents, please note that it remains valid If you have delivered your postal address . Furthermore, we would appreciate to receive from you a personal, private e-mail address which would facilitate further contacts when needed.
Best regards
DG TAXUD Access to documents - team
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #16372 email]
This message and all replies from Taxation and Customs Union will be published on the AsktheEU.org website. For more information see our dedicated page for EU public officials at https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www....
Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses will be delayed.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Sir or Madam,
We hereby acknowledge the receipt of your request for access to documents
sent on 26/09/2025 and registered on 26/09/2025 under the case number
2025/4916.
We will handle your request within 15 working days as of the date of
registration. The time-limit expires on 17/10/2025. We will let you know
if we need to extend this time limit for additional 15 working days.
To find more information on how we process your personal data, please see
[1]the privacy statement.
Yours faithfully,
Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union - Access to Documents
European Commission
References
Visible links
1. https://ec.europa.eu/info/principles-and...
Hello,
We are writing concerning your request for access to Commission documents
registered on 26/09/2025 under case number 2025/4916.
We are currently working on your request. However, we have not yet been
able to gather all the elements necessary to carry out a full analysis of
your request. We will not be able to send you the reply within the
prescribed time limit expiring on 17/10/2025.
An extended time limit for more in-depth investigations is needed in order
to complete our assessment on the possibility for the public disclosure of
the documents requested.
Therefore, in line with Article 7(3) of [1]Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001,
we need to extend this time limit by 15 additional working days. The new
time limit expires on 07/11/2025.
We apologise for any inconvenience this may cause.
Kind regards,
TAXUD Access to documents
References
Visible links
1. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/...
Hello,
We are writing concerning your request for access to Commission documents
registered on 26/09/2025 under case number 2025/4916.
We are currently working on your request. However, we have not yet been
able to gather all the elements necessary to carry out a full analysis of
your request. We will not be able to send you the reply within the
prescribed time limit expiring on 7/11/2025.
An extended time limit for more in-depth investigations is needed in order
to complete our assessment on the possibility for the public disclosure of
the documents requested.
Therefore, we need to extend this time limit by 15 additional working
days. The new time limit expires on 28/11/2025.
We sincerely apologise for any inconvenience this may cause.
Kind regards,
TAXUD Access to documents
Hello,
We are writing concerning your request for access to Commission documents
registered on 26/09/2025 under case number 2025/4916.
Unfortunately, we will not be able to send you the reply within the
prescribed time limit expiring on 28/11/2025. However, the reply is in the
pipeline for signature by the Director-general and you should receive it
next week.
We sincerely apologise for any inconvenience this may cause.
Kind regards,
TAXUD Access to documents
Hello,
Please find attached a message concerning your request for access to
Commission documents registered under the above case number 2025/4916.
Please acknowledge the receipt of this message by return email.
Kind regards,
TAXUD Access to Documents
Dear Taxation and Customs Union,
Please pass this on to the person who reviews confirmatory applications.
I am filing the following confirmatory application with regards to my access to documents request 'Request for documents on Member State positions, industry lobbying, and draft scenarios related to the revision of the Tobacco Tax Directive'.
I hereby submit a confirmatory application under Article 7(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 requesting a review of DG TAXUD’s decision of 26 November 2025 refusing access to 30 documents identified as falling within the scope of my request.
DG TAXUD’s decision relies on Article 4(1)(a), Article 4(3) first and second subparagraphs, and an interpretation of Article 5.3 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). For the reasons set out below, the refusal is not compliant with Regulation 1049/2001 or the relevant case law of the Court of Justice.
1. DG TAXUD has not demonstrated the concrete and foreseeable harm required under Article 4(1)(a)
DG TAXUD claims that releasing the documents would undermine the Union’s financial and economic interests due to the revenue importance of tobacco taxation. However:
The documents listed in the annex (letters to ministers, briefings, minutes, interservice consultation notes) concern legislative preparation, not budgetary projections nor fiscal operations.
The exception in Article 4(1)(a) requires a specific, precise and non-hypothetical showing of harm, as consistently required by the Court (e.g., Sweden v Commission, C-64/05 P; API v Commission, C-280/11 P).
DG TAXUD provides no document-specific reasoning, nor an explanation why disclosure of factual or procedural information would undermine economic policy.
It is also contradictory to suggest that transparency regarding tobacco excise policy could harm financial interests, while EU tobacco taxation is expressly designed to reduce consumption for public health reasons—something that inherently reduces revenue. No attempt is made to reconcile this logic.
2. The invocation of WHO FCTC Article 5.3 is legally flawed
DG TAXUD cites Article 5.3 FCTC to justify withholding documents by arguing that transparency could expose policymakers to pressure. This reverses the meaning of the provision.
Article 5.3 and its implementation guidelines require enhanced transparency in relation to tobacco-related decision-making. They do not authorise secrecy from the public; they prohibit privileged access for the tobacco industry.
Using Article 5.3 to restrict public access contradicts its object and purpose and disregards the obligation to conduct policymaking “in a transparent manner” (Guideline 1.2).
3. Blanket reliance on Article 4(3) is incompatible with the strict interpretation required by the Court
DG TAXUD invokes both subparagraphs of Article 4(3), claiming disclosure would undermine ongoing decision-making and relates to internal opinions. However: Regulation 1049/2001 requires a specific assessment for each document (Cases Technische Glaswerke, C-139/07 P; LPN, C-514/11 P). Even where internal opinions are protected, factual information must be disclosed (Case T-14/98 Hautala). The exception for ongoing decision-making cannot justify withholding entire categories of documents (Access Info Europe, C-280/11 P). DG TAXUD does not explain why every line of all 30 documents - many of which are external letters -would be covered.
4. No meaningful assessment of partial access
DG TAXUD asserts that all documents are “entirely covered” by exceptions, yet the annex includes documents that - by their nature - contain: procedural information, factual background, summaries of stakeholder or Member State input, neutral descriptions of the legislative context. Under Article 4(6) of Regulation 1049/2001, institutions must grant access to any non-sensitive parts. The Court has repeatedly emphasised this obligation (e.g., Hautala, T-14/98; Commission v Éditions Odile Jacob, C-404/10 P). DG TAXUD’s decision contains no analysis of whether partial access is possible, even though it plainly is.
5. Protection of “unity of policy” or Member State positions cannot justify full refusal
DG TAXUD suggests that disclosure might reveal national positions.
If that is the concern: such passages can be redacted to avoid identifying Member States, factual and analytical content can still be released, the Commission cannot withhold all documents simply because Member States disagree (Case T-233/09 Access Info Europe). Nothing in Regulation 1049/2001 supports a refusal of entire documents on the basis that they include Member State views.
6. Overriding public interest in transparency
Even if exceptions applied, there is a strong overriding public interest in disclosure:
- Tobacco taxation is a core public health instrument.
- The revision of Directive 2011/64/EU is of major societal importance.
- Transparency is essential to protect policymaking from undue influence by a historically powerful and disruptive industry.
- The Commission’s interpretation of FCTC obligations further justifies greater transparency, not less.
DG TAXUD did not assess this public interest in any substantive way.
Request
For the reasons above, I respectfully ask the Secretariat-General to:
- Annul the refusal issued by DG TAXUD in case 2025/4895.
- Conduct a document-by-document assessment of the 30 identified documents.
- Order disclosure of the documents in full, or, at minimum, require DG TAXUD to grant partial access in accordance with Article 4(6).
- Correct the misinterpretation of WHO FCTC Article 5.3.
- Ensure that any remaining redactions are justified with specific, concrete reasoning.
I remain available to provide further information if necessary.
A full history of my request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.asktheeu.org/request/request...
Yours faithfully,
Irene van den Berg
Dear Madam,
We have given your e-mail our full attention.
Firstly, as noted in our reply, although not legally linked to the
proposal for the revision of Directive 2011/64/EU, the Proposal for
Council Decision on the system of own resources (COM/2025/574 final)
foresees a new Tobacco Excise Duty Own Resource calling a share of the
minimum rate for tobacco and tobacco related products. Since the proposal
for the revision of Directive 2011/64/EU envisages an increase in the
excise duty rates on traditional tobacco products and the taxation of new
tobacco-related products, it undoubtedly concerns the financial and
economic policy of the Union and of the Member States by its impact on the
revenues of the Member States.
Secondly, the purpose of Article 5.3 of the Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control (FCTC) is to protect the Parties’ public health policies
from the commercial and other vested interests of the tobacco industry. To
ensure the proper application of this provision, the WHO Guidelines for
its implementation establish that ‘Parties should interact with the
tobacco industry only when and to the extent strictly necessary’’. DG
TAXUD implements these provisions by limiting meetings with the tobacco
industry and its representatives to those which are strictly necessary and
publishes minutes of meetings with the tobacco industry. In light of this,
we would also note that once the specified documents are made public, they
become accessible to everyone. Considering that the discussions and
exchanges take place in a specific context and the proposal is politically
sensitive, disclosure of the documents could increase the risk of exposing
the decision-making process to external pressure from actors representing
various - potentially conflicting - interests which could seriously
undermine the process.
Finally, as mentioned in our reply, we have considered whether partial
access could be granted. In any case, for that part of the documents
requested, partial access would be meaningless in our view, and hence of
no use to you.
For your information, as regards this point relating the partial access,
the following has been stated in a court case:
Judgment of the Court of first Instance of 12 July 2001 in case T-204/99,
Mattila v Council and Commission
69. (...) whilst, in accordance with Hautala v Council, the Council and
the Commission are required to consider whether access ought to be granted
to information not covered by the exceptions, the principle of sound
administration requires that the duty to grant partial access should not
result in an administrative burden which is disproportionate to the
applicant's interest in obtaining that information. In light of this, it
is clear that the Council and the Commission are in any event entitled to
refuse partial access in cases where examination of the documents in
question shows that partial access would be meaningless because the parts
of the documents that could be disclosed would be of no use to the
applicant.
Note as well that you can find a lot of information already on the
Commission’s website:
[1]https://taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/ta...
and Tobacco taxation – excise duties for manufactured tobacco products
(updated rules)
Your sincerely,
DG TAXUD Access to documents - team
TAXUD ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS would like to recall the message, "Feedback TAXUD - Internal review of AtD request - Request for docs on MS positions, industry lobbying and draft scenarios - Revision Tobacco Tax Directive".
Dear Madam,
Apologies , by mistake we have replied to the e-mail below.
The reply below is a reply on your mail of 3^rd December 2026, that you
should have received by now.
The mail below is your request for a confirmatory , that crossed our
e-mail response, hence the confusion.
Your sincerely,
DG TAXUD Access to documents - team
From: TAXUD ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2025 4:10 PM
To: Irene van den Berg <[FOI #16372 email]>
Subject: Feedback TAXUD - Internal review of AtD request - Request for
docs on MS positions, industry lobbying and draft scenarios - Revision
Tobacco Tax Directive
Dear Madam,
We have given your e-mail our full attention.
Firstly, as noted in our reply, although not legally linked to the
proposal for the revision of Directive 2011/64/EU, the Proposal for
Council Decision on the system of own resources (COM/2025/574 final)
foresees a new Tobacco Excise Duty Own Resource calling a share of the
minimum rate for tobacco and tobacco related products. Since the proposal
for the revision of Directive 2011/64/EU envisages an increase in the
excise duty rates on traditional tobacco products and the taxation of new
tobacco-related products, it undoubtedly concerns the financial and
economic policy of the Union and of the Member States by its impact on the
revenues of the Member States.
Secondly, the purpose of Article 5.3 of the Framework Convention on
Tobacco Control (FCTC) is to protect the Parties’ public health policies
from the commercial and other vested interests of the tobacco industry. To
ensure the proper application of this provision, the WHO Guidelines for
its implementation establish that ‘Parties should interact with the
tobacco industry only when and to the extent strictly necessary’’. DG
TAXUD implements these provisions by limiting meetings with the tobacco
industry and its representatives to those which are strictly necessary and
publishes minutes of meetings with the tobacco industry. In light of this,
we would also note that once the specified documents are made public, they
become accessible to everyone. Considering that the discussions and
exchanges take place in a specific context and the proposal is politically
sensitive, disclosure of the documents could increase the risk of exposing
the decision-making process to external pressure from actors representing
various - potentially conflicting - interests which could seriously
undermine the process.
Finally, as mentioned in our reply, we have considered whether partial
access could be granted. In any case, for that part of the documents
requested, partial access would be meaningless in our view, and hence of
no use to you.
For your information, as regards this point relating the partial access,
the following has been stated in a court case:
Judgment of the Court of first Instance of 12 July 2001 in case T-204/99,
Mattila v Council and Commission
69. (...) whilst, in accordance with Hautala v Council, the Council and
the Commission are required to consider whether access ought to be granted
to information not covered by the exceptions, the principle of sound
administration requires that the duty to grant partial access should not
result in an administrative burden which is disproportionate to the
applicant's interest in obtaining that information. In light of this, it
is clear that the Council and the Commission are in any event entitled to
refuse partial access in cases where examination of the documents in
question shows that partial access would be meaningless because the parts
of the documents that could be disclosed would be of no use to the
applicant.
Note as well that you can find a lot of information already on the
Commission’s website:
[1]https://taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/ta...
and Tobacco taxation – excise duties for manufactured tobacco products
(updated rules)
Your sincerely,
DG TAXUD Access to documents - team
Dear [email address],
Thank you for your reply and for the further explanations provided. We have read your message carefully and in full.
We acknowledge the administrative burden involved in handling our request. In order to facilitate the process at this stage, we are therefore willing to narrow down the scope of our request and focus on a limited number of documents.
In particular, we would like to concentrate on documents 5, 6, 28 and 29, as listed in the annex to your decision.
Applicability of the cited exceptions
For these documents, we consider that the arguments invoked in your reply do not apply, for the following reasons.
Article 4(1)(a) – financial and economic policy
The titles and descriptions of documents 5, 6, 28 and 29 suggest that they do not deal exclusively, or even primarily, with sensitive fiscal data or budgetary projections. Rather, they appear to concern policy communication, explanatory exchanges and correspondence.
It is therefore not plausible that these documents consist solely of information whose disclosure would undermine the Union’s or Member States’ financial or economic policy. In the absence of a demonstration of specific and foreseeable harm, partial disclosure should be possible.
Article 4(3), first subparagraph – ongoing decision-making
The documents concerned do not constitute negotiation texts as such, nor are they limited to internal negotiating positions. They communicate positions, explanations or responses, including towards external actors. Partial disclosure of such material would not, in our view, seriously undermine the decision-making process.
Article 4(3), second subparagraph – internal deliberations
In particular, document 6, which is a reply addressed to tobacco retailers, is by definition an externally communicated document. As such, it cannot be considered an internal deliberation, nor would its disclosure undermine the public interest by exposing internal decision-making.
Article 5.3 FCTC
We take note of your explanation regarding Article 5.3 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. At the same time, we would recall that transparency of policy-related documents also serves the objectives of Article 5.3, by enabling public scrutiny of how tobacco-related policies are shaped and how interactions with stakeholders are managed.
Partial access and public interest
We respectfully disagree with the assessment that partial access would be “meaningless” in this case. Even partial disclosure of factual elements, contextual explanations or externally communicated positions would be of clear value.
Finally, we wish to reiterate the strong public interest in disclosure of these documents. The revision of tobacco taxation directly affects public health outcomes, the affordability of harmful products, and the implementation of EU and international health commitments. Transparency in this area is essential.
We therefore kindly ask you to reconsider the possibility of granting full or partial access to documents 5, 6, 28 and 29.
Yours sincerely,
Irene van den Berg