Plans to reduce raised cigarette prices: What is actually happening?

The Maldives is a unique country, and yet another unique development unfolded yesterday. Maldives may have been the only country where tobacco users received positive news on World No Tobacco Day with the announcement by Home Minister Ali Ihusaan, who revealed that discussions are underway on reducing the price of cigarettes—a price that had previously been raised by a significant amount by the current administration. Looking at the track record of President Dr. Mohamed Muizzu’s administration, reversing major policy decisions is not unprecedented. As such, there is a strong possibility that cigarette prices could indeed be lowered. This raises an important question: why is this being considered?

The government’s indication that it is discussing a reduction in cigarette prices did not come as a surprise. There had already been signs suggesting such a move was under consideration. For some time, various business figures have reportedly been advocating for such a change. Research analysts have also been engaging in discussions on the issue. However, despite the financial gains tobacco generates for a limited group, little support had been given to these calls due to the significant harm tobacco poses to society as a whole. Journalists raised the issue directly with the President during a press conference. Responding to those questions last month, the President stated that he had no intention of reducing the price of cigarettes following the recent increase.

However, remarks by Home Minister on Sunday have raised fresh questions about the government’s position. Speaking at a joint press conference attended by the Health Minister as well, Minister Ihusaan stated that discussions are underway to reduce the customs duty imposed on cigarettes to four Rufiyaa. He further noted that the proposal is being considered based on advice provided by the World Health Organization (WHO).

Following those comments, many questioned whether the WHO would in fact provide such advice, or whether the government had disclosed only part of the recommendations it received. As of now, no official statement from the WHO on the matter has been obtained. It is also uncommon for the organization to publicly respond to comments made by politicians.

Nevertheless, the revelation that the government is considering reducing duties on tobacco products has sparked a nationwide debate. While the increase in illicit tobacco products entering the Maldives through smuggling is undoubtedly a serious concern, lowering cigarette prices cannot be accepted as the solution. For many years, considerable efforts have been undertaken in the Maldives to reduce tobacco consumption. These efforts have included increasing taxes, strengthening regulations, expanding public awareness campaigns, and requiring health warnings highlighting the dangers of tobacco use. All of these measures are grounded in a well-established principle recognized by health experts worldwide: the higher the price of cigarettes, the lower the rate of consumption.

"I simply cannot believe that the WHO would give such advice. It is possible they are only revealing a part of the advice given. Or, it could be that they are using advice previously given by the WHO to reverse the government's earlier decision," said a highly experienced health sector professional, on condition of anonymity.

The roots of this issue can be traced back to the stringent tobacco-control measures introduced in the Maldives in recent years. Early in President Muizzu’s administration, the government implemented what were widely regarded as historic public health measures. On November 15, 2024, the import of vapes was banned, followed by a complete prohibition on their sale and use from December 15, 2024. In addition, the import duty on cigarettes was increased from MVR 3.50 to MVR 8.00 effective November 1, 2024. As a result, the retail price of a packet of cigarettes rose dramatically from approximately MVR 110 to MVR 240. The government also enacted a legislation prohibiting the sale of tobacco products to anyone born after January 1, 2007. The primary objective of these measures was to prevent a large-scale shift from vaping to cigarette smoking and to protect future generations from tobacco addiction.

"WHO will always advise that when increasing the price of items like cigarettes, it should be done by a specific percentage. However, this government made a sudden massive jump from MVR 3.5 to MVR 8, which was not a figure recommended by health experts or the Health Ministry. That was a government decision. It is highly likely they are now trying to reduce it because they made the figure too high. But doing so now will drive outcomes in the exact opposite direction of the original objective," another health expert stated, also on the condition of anonymity.

Following the government's decision to significantly riase cigarette prices, a large black market for tobacco products emerged in the Maldives. According to Customs statistics, the volume of smuggled cigarettes has far exceeded the amount imported legally through duty payments. Notable incidents include the smuggling of 13.6 million cigarettes through Hulhumalé Port and the seizure of 2.3 million cigarettes by Customs in May 2026 alone. As official imports declined, government revenue generated through cigarette duties reportedly fell by 95 percent.

"What actually happened with this change is that cigarette consumption did not decrease. People are even rolling [cigarettes] on their own to smoke. That objective was not achieved. However, state revenue dropped drastically due to illegal cigarettes. That is why they have been considering changing the cigarette duty rate for a while now," a senior Finance Ministry official confirmed to Sun.

WHO has consistently advocated for higher taxes on tobacco products. The organization considers taxation one of the most effective tools available to governments to reduce tobacco consumption. The organization recommends that tobacco taxes account for at least 70 percent of the retail price of cigarettes. This recommendation is supported not only by theory but by evidence gathered from countries around the world. For instance, in Colombia, tripling tobacco taxes between 2016 and 2018 contributed to a 34 percent reduction in cigarette consumption, while government revenue from tobacco taxes nearly doubled. This demonstrates that increasing tobacco taxes can simultaneously improve public health outcomes and strengthen government revenues.

According to studies conducted by WHO and The Tobacco Atlas, a 10 percent increase in tobacco prices results in a four percent decline in consumption in high-income countries and a five percent decline in middle-income countries. Young people are particularly sensitive to changes in price. This is one of the key reasons why most countries continue to increase tobacco taxes rather than reduce them. Governments recognize that higher prices are among the most effective deterrents against youth smoking. This raises a critical question: if higher prices reduce tobacco consumption, what happens when prices are lowered? The answer is straightforward. Cigarettes become more affordable. More people are able to purchase them. More young people are likely to experiment with smoking. Consequently, nicotine addiction rates are likely to increase.

Supporters of reducing tobacco taxes argue that high prices have encouraged smuggling and the expansion of the illicit tobacco trade. This concern is not without merit. The millions of cigarettes recently seized by Maldivian Customs serve as clear evidence of the problem. However, smuggling is fundamentally a law enforcement issue arising from weaknesses in enforcement mechanisms. From a public health perspective, it cannot justify reducing cigarette prices. If smugglers are operating successfully, the appropriate response is to strengthen border security, enhance Customs enforcement, impose tougher penalties, and improve intelligence operations. Lowering tobacco taxes risks rewarding the very networks authorities are attempting to dismantle.

The Maldives already faces a substantial burden from non-communicable diseases, including cardiovascular illnesses, cancer, and respiratory conditions. Smoking is a direct contributor to many of these health problems. Every individual who begins smoking today may become a patient requiring costly medical treatment in the future. Discussions surrounding tobacco taxes often focus on government revenue and retail prices. However, the true cost of smoking is borne in hospitals, healthcare expenses, lost productivity, and lives cut short prematurely.

Another important issue is policy consistency. For years, authorities have repeatedly informed the public that tobacco use is harmful and that smoking can lead to death. Public awareness campaigns have encouraged citizens to avoid tobacco, while health warnings have become increasingly stringent. If cigarettes are now made cheaper and more accessible, what message does that send to the public? Public health policies must move in a single, consistent direction. Telling citizens that smoking is dangerous while simultaneously making cigarettes easier to purchase is a contradiction that defies common sense.

The government must undoubtedly address the growing problem of tobacco smuggling and illicit trade in the Maldives. However, this should be done without weakening one of the most effective tools available to reduce tobacco consumption. The decision facing policymakers today extends beyond taxation. It is fundamentally a question about the kind of future the country wishes to build. If cigarettes are recognized as a threat to public health, lowering their price cannot be the answer. State institutions must demonstrate their ability to secure borders and enforce the law without sacrificing public health in response to black market activity.

There is little doubt that lowering cigarette prices would increase the number of smokers. As demand rises, profits will flow to importers and tobacco traders. Particularly in the aftermath of the vape ban, reducing cigarette prices would almost certainly lead to an increase in cigarette smoking. No extensive research is needed to understand that outcome. Consequently, the government’s latest signal represents a significant concern. It is an outcome that should not be allowed to materialize.