The Mexican government, under President Claudia Sheinbaum, is considering constitutionalizing a ban on e-cigarettes and vaporizers by the end of the year. While the move is motivated by public health concerns, it raises concerns about its potential impact on the already booming black market, which is controlled by powerful criminal groups such as the Sinaloa Cartel and the Jalisco New Generation Cartel.
A definitive ban in the Mexican Constitution
Currently, e-cigarettes are in a grey area in Mexico, where previous bans on their importation and sale have been challenged in court. By including this ban in the Constitution, the government would guarantee a definitive legal framework for the entire territory. With broad popular support in the June elections, the ruling Morena party has a qualified majority that allows it to amend the Constitution according to its political priorities.
With approximately 1,7 million Mexican vape users, demand is growing steadily. The ban appears to have had little effect on reducing this consumption, which is divided into two distinct markets: that of legally imported vape products, sold at higher prices in formal points of sale, and that of cheap vapes, sold informally, often by street vendors.
A lucrative black market controlled by cartels
According to journalist Óscar Balderas, about 90% of the vape products sold in Mexico come from the black market, a sector largely dominated by organized crime. These cheap vapes are imported from countries like China, India and Bangladesh, often via Central America, where bribes facilitate their passage to the Mexican capital, before being distributed throughout the rest of the country.
The black market is estimated to be worth around 5 billion pesos a year (around £200 million or $260 million), a financial boon for the cartels, who use it to finance weapons and maintain their power. In addition, this informal industry is accompanied by increased violence, with criminal groups not hesitating to punish those who try to sell products without their permission.
In the absence of any regulation, the composition of these contraband products is often uncertain and dangerous. Analyses have revealed the presence of toxic substances, such as mercury, in cheap vapes sold on the street, exposing consumers to major health risks. And since these groups do not pay taxes, it is the public health system that must bear the costs of associated diseases.
A ban that risks making problems worse
The plan to ban vaporizers in the Constitution could actually strengthen cartel control over the entire vaping market in Mexico, squeezing out what remains of the legal supply. The danger is that this ban would permanently transfer the monopoly on distribution to criminal groups, thus fueling networks of corruption and violence that are already well-rooted in the country. “This black market finances wars, like the one we are currently seeing in Sinaloa,” says Balderas.
While the government’s motivations are based on legitimate health concerns, some experts, such as academic Angélica Ospina, point out that the ban risks backfiring on its original objective. Vapes are often marketed with designs and flavors that appeal to young people, a marketing strategy that worries authorities. But for Ospina, “banning something doesn’t make it safer, it just makes it invisible.”
Regulation as an alternative?
Faced with these concerns, some experts suggest that regulation might be a better response. By regulating the vaping industry in the same way as alcohol and tobacco, through taxes and age restrictions, the government could better control the quality of the products and thus reduce the risks to public health. In addition, taxes could be allocated directly to the health care system, helping to offset the costs of vaping-related illnesses.
For Balderas, the challenge is also to bring the vaping market back under official control, because once a sector is absorbed by organized crime, it becomes extremely difficult to recover. As Ospina notes, the issue of the vaping market in Mexico is complex, falling into a “gray zone” between legal and illegal, where a harm-reduction approach could prove more beneficial to society.
