Nicotine prohibition rarely removes demand from a market. More often, it changes who controls the supply. That is the warning now being raised by the Coalition of Asia Pacific Tobacco Harm Reduction Advocates (CAPHRA), which points to Australia and Thailand as two examples of what can happen when adult consumers are pushed outside legal channels.
CAPHRA’s argument is not that rules should disappear. The group says age limits, product standards, and action against illegal sellers are necessary. Its concern is that outright bans leave regulators with less visibility and give unlicensed suppliers more room to operate.
Australia shows the enforcement problem
In Australia, authorities have seized more than 20 million illegal vapes since January 2024. CAPHRA says that figure underlines a larger problem: demand has continued, while supply has shifted into a market that is harder to monitor and easier for criminal networks to exploit.
Recent reporting has also linked the country’s illegal nicotine trade to organized crime, with enforcement agencies struggling to keep pace. For CAPHRA and its regional partners, that is evidence that prohibition can weaken the very consumer protections it is supposed to create.
“Australia’s vaping prohibition has become a textbook example of what happens when ideology overrides evidence,” said Alan Gorley of ALIVE Advocacy Australia. “It has not eliminated demand. It has expanded the illicit market, enriched criminal networks, and left consumers with fewer protections than before.”
Thailand offers a longer warning
Thailand’s vape ban has been in place for 11 years, and CAPHRA says the result has followed a similar pattern. Instead of ending use, the policy has pushed many consumers toward underground sellers, where product contents and sales practices are more difficult to control.
Nancy Loucas, Executive Coordinator of CAPHRA, said the lesson matters beyond any one country. “Prohibition does not end nicotine use,” Loucas said. “It hands the market to criminal operators, weakens consumer protections, and leaves adults with fewer legal options to move away from smoking.”
Thai advocate Asa Saligupta of ENDs Cigarette Smoke Thailand said the country’s experience shows why bans can backfire. “Thailand’s ban did not make vaping disappear,” Saligupta said. “It made products unregulated, impossible to control the substance contained, easier for illegal sellers to exploit, and harder for people who smoke to switch.”
A call for regulated legal access
CAPHRA says governments should focus on practical controls rather than blanket prohibition. That means strict age restrictions, enforceable product standards, accurate public risk communication, and proportionate penalties for illegal sellers.
Gorley also argued that the damage is not only commercial or criminal. “The greatest harm may be the loss of trust when authorities refuse to acknowledge the consequences of their own policies,” he said. “Australians can see the gap between what they are told is happening and what is plainly happening around them.”
For CAPHRA, the regional message is clear: when adult nicotine demand is real, a legal and regulated framework gives authorities more tools than a ban that pushes the market out of sight.
Media Contact:
N.E. Loucas
Executive Coordinator, CAPHRA (Coalition of Asia Pacific Tobacco Harm Reduction Advocates)
Mobile: +64272348643
Email: [email protected]
Web: https://caphraorg.net/
