Nicotine gate: How flavour choices sparked a political scandal

Mervi Hara & Tea Kalska, ASH Finland
Published 20 Nov 2024 in PopNAD

In October 2024, Finland’s parliament approved an amendment to the Tobacco Act regarding nicotine pouches. However, massive media coverage erupted over the government’s selection of pouch flavours, resulting in the law being halted before it could be finalized. The government now plans to submit a revised bill as soon as possible. In this article, Mervi Hara and Tea Kalska, ASH Finland, break down what happened.

In April 2023, the Finnish Medicines Agency (Fimea) revised its stance on nicotine pouches,  no longer categorizing them as medicinal products under the Medicines Act. Since then, these pouches could be sold without special permits. The products were subjects to less stringent regulations compared to other tobacco and nicotine products.

Then, in the summer of 2023, Prime Minister Petteri Orpo’s government program confirmed that the sale of nicotine pouches would be allowed. Consequently, the government introduced a proposal to amend the Tobacco Act. This original proposal limited flavours to tobacco, menthol, and mint. However, in last-minute negotiations, the governing parties added tea, ginger, rosemary and wood flavours to the list.

Controversy over flavour choices

Several authorities and health advocates, including ASH Finland, criticized this amendment, arguing that the law contradicted the government’s objective to limit nicotine pouch use among young people.  The inclusion of what were referred to as “adult flavours” was controversial. This classification is vague and arguably undefinable. These concerns, however, went unaddressed in the final proposal.

Connections come to light

The government proposal was approved by parliament in October 2024. Shortly afterwards, media revealed connections between a nicotine pouch company in Pietarsaari/Jakobstad, and the then-leader of the Swedish People’s Party (RKP/SFP), Minister of Education Anna-Maja Henriksson.

Intense media coverage began when a nicotine pouch company claimed that the legislation favoured a specific factory in Pietarsaari/Jakobstad because of its flavour selection, sparking widespread discussion also on social media.

Multiple media sources reported that RKP/SFP had initiated the addition of wood, tea, rosemary, and ginger flavours to the final proposal. The only company producing these particular flavours is based in Pietarsaari/Jakobstad – Anna-Maja Henriksson’s hometown. Moreover, this company’s statement—listing the flavours included in the final bill—was submitted to the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health about six months after the official consultation period ended.

The National Supervisory Authority for Welfare and Health (Valvira) noted during parliamentary proceedings that “the proposal closely resembles the flavour selection listed in a statement from one nicotine pouch company.” ASH Finland echoed this in a press release, but the concerns were ignored.

A new bill in the works

As the scandal surrounding nicotine pouches escalated, the responsible minister, Sanni Grahn-Laasonen (National Coalition Party), announced that the law would not be submitted for presidential approval. The government would instead submit a revised bill based on her original proposal, limiting flavours to only mint and menthol.

The new bill is expected to be submitted soon, although there is no specific timeline or detailed information about its content.

How was this possible?

With Finland’s national debt rising, the government has prioritized increased tax revenue and cost-cutting measures . Consequently, nicotine pouches were framed primarily as an economic concern rather than a health policy issue. To secure tax revenue, the government aims to keep nicotine pouch sales within Finland, avoiding revenue losses to Sweden and curbing illegal trade, though the Ministry of Finance considers it to be under control. The potential for new business, coupled with rhetoric around “reduced health risks” added to the  appeal.

Article 5.3 of the World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, along with its guidelines, mandates the protection of health policy from tobacco industry influence. However, this obligation is not widely recognized within the Finnish government outside the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health.

A criminal investigation has been launched, and complaints filed with the Chancellor of Justice regarding related connections and procedures, which means the matter is not yet concluded.