ONE of the strongest arguments against raising tobacco taxes has always been political — governments often assume that increasing cigarette prices will provoke opposition from smokers, making tax reform difficult to pursue. 

However, a nationally representative survey by the Social and Economic Research Initiative (Seri) suggests that this assumption does not reflect reality. 

Around 66% of smokers supported the cigarette tax increase that took effect in November 2025. A majority of smokers indicated they would support a further increase in tobacco taxes. At first glance, this may seem counterintuitive. Why would smokers support paying more for cigarettes? 

The answer lies in two important findings. The 82% of smokers say they want to reduce or quit smoking altogether. Furthermore, support increases when the additional revenue is used to fund healthcare, smoking-cessation services, and programmes that help ease cost-of-living pressures. 

Far from being an obstacle to tobacco tax reform, many smokers see higher tobacco taxes as part of the solution. With 82% of smokers saying they want to reduce smoking or quit, the desire to change is already present. Unfortunately, much of the public debate portrays tobacco taxation as a policy imposed on smokers. In reality, higher tobacco taxes give them the financial incentive to act on that goal, while generating revenue to support programmes that help them. 

Tobacco taxation is recognised internationally as one of the most effective ways of reducing tobacco consumption by encouraging smokers to quit and discouraging young people from taking up smoking in the first place. Rather than punishing smokers, higher tobacco taxes can help many achieve an outcome they already want. 

Smoking is rarely a free personal choice. Smokers are caught in a system engineered to create and maintain addiction, as the addictive power of nicotine in tobacco products creates dependencies that may defy individual willpower. The dual function of higher tobacco taxes in reducing smoking and raising much-needed government revenue to fund health and social programmes helps build an ecosystem for smokers to break out of this addictive cycle. 

The survey also highlights an important lesson for policymakers. Support for higher tobacco taxes is not driven solely by health concerns, as what happens to the revenue raised is a highly decisive factor. 

When respondents are told that additional revenue would fund healthcare, smoking cessation programmes, social protection and measures to ease cost-of-living pressures, support for a further tobacco tax increase rises from 80% to 91%. A similar pattern is seen among smokers, with support increasing from 59% to 80% when tax revenues are linked to these public benefits. 

This demonstrates that Malaysians, including smokers, do not simply judge taxation by its immediate cost. They also consider whether the revenue delivers visible benefits that improve public well-being. 

For years, tobacco taxation has been viewed as politically contentious because of fears that smokers would oppose further increases. The evidence increasingly suggests otherwise. Based on SERI’s survey, the November 2025 tobacco tax increase was supported by 86% of Malaysians, with more than half believing the increase should have been even larger. Importantly, support extends across income, age, and regional groups, and even a majority of smokers support further increases. 

This reframes the entire dynamic. Tobacco taxation has been cast as the government versus smokers, which is a false dichotomy. The real divide is not between the government and smokers. It is between communities seeking to break free from addiction and an industry that depends on sustaining it. 

Budget 2026 ended a decade without tobacco tax increases. It was a welcome step, but isolated tax rises are insufficient to prevent cigarettes from becoming more affordable over time. 

The next logical step is to mandate an annual tobacco tax increase of at least 5%. Doing so would help reduce cigarette consumption, raise additional revenue for health and social programmes, and reflect what the evidence increasingly shows: higher tobacco taxes are not only good public health policy - they are also supported by many of the people they affect most. 

Daniel Kittu is a senior researcher at the Social and Economic Research Initiative (Seri).