Tobacco taxation as a response to industry pressure in Kenya and Uganda

Over the past two years, UICC has worked with its member Cancer Research UK (CRUK) to support civil society partners in Kenya and Uganda on a targeted effort to strengthen tobacco taxation, and ensure sustainable implementation through budget processes and legislation.

CRUK has focused its tobacco control efforts specifically on taxation and price measures, following guidelines by the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), as the most cost‑effective measure to reduce tobacco consumption and thereby improve public health, notably by reducing the incidence of cancer. 

“Because it is so effective, taxation is also heavily contested by the tobacco industry,” said Habiba Adan, who leads tobacco control programmes within CRUK’s International Cancer Prevention team. “And you can trust the industry in that regard: whatever measure they oppose is most certainly an excellent measure to support! But the industry has extensive resources at its disposal to influence policy.”

The advantage on focusing on taxation is also because, according to Adan, “it moves tobacco control into fiscal and political decision‑making, where governments are weighing prices, revenue, and enforcement rather than health alone.”

“Furthermore, when governments introduce taxation measures, they receive revenue,” Adan said. “That can support health services or cessation, so it becomes a prevention measure as well.”

In Kenya and Uganda, however, the challenge was not convincing policymakers that tobacco taxation mattered, but sustaining progress in the face of industry pressure, political volatility, and technical complexity. The initiative therefore worked through national coalitions, , to strengthen advocacy capacity and maintain focus over time.

Weak enforcement compounded the problem, according to Gitali. “Despite comprehensive tobacco control legislation, implementation was inconsistent, particularly outside major cities.” 

Rather than building new structures, the project strengthened coordination within the existing Alliance, allowing organisations to agree on priorities, divide roles and engage government more consistently. This included sustained engagement around finance bills and budget processes, rather than reacting only when tax proposals appeared.

That approach helped deliver a major policy win in December 2024, when Kenya scrapped the tiered cigarette tax system and moved to a unified rate. The path to successful adoption of the legislation was not straightforward, however. 

“Kenya’s tax debate was temporarily derailed by nationwide protests against a broad package of cost‑of‑living tax increases, with tobacco taxation caught up in a wider backlash,” said Adan. 

The Coalition organisations adapted by shifting their focus away from government lobbying alone and towards public engagement, notably youth. “It wasn’t the government that had the power in that moment, it was young people,” Adan said. 

Gitali added: “Advocacy efforts were refocused on explaining why tobacco taxes were different from taxes on essential goods, and how revenue from tobacco could support public services. Youth engagement, already a strength of the Kenyan coalition, became central to keeping the issue alive.”

For Gitali, involving young people directly in advocacy has been a practical choice rather than a symbolic one. “I normally tell them, I’m a fossil. I have a past, you have a future,” he said. “You have the energy, you are innovative, you must guide your tomorrow.”

Evidence-based advocacy leads to policy wins and puts tobacco taxation back on the agenda

Uganda’s experience reflects similar challenges, but from a different starting point. There had been no tobacco tax increase for seven consecutive years. Cigarette excise taxes accounted for around 30% of the retail price, far below international recommendations of 75%, and tobacco taxation had largely dropped out of policy debate.

“When the Uganda Tobacco Taxation Coalition (UTTC) was formed, there was no unified civil society voice on tobacco taxation,” said Habiba Adan. “The immediate goal was to help bring organisations together, rebuild the evidence base and get tobacco taxation back into policy discussions. 

“There was also limited engagement of young people and very little data to support tax advocacy,” added Robinah Kaitiritimba, Executive Director of the Uganda National Health Consumers Organisation (UNHCO) and lead of UTTC. “For years, attention had focused on other tobacco control measures, while taxation was largely missing from the conversation. Bringing it back required evidence, coordination, and a broader group of voices.”

The coalition brought together seven organisations spanning research, cancer control, communications, and youth mobilisation. Each brought its specific competencies to advocate for a tobacco taxation policy aligned with the FCTC, and a core pillar of Uganda’s tobacco control strategy.

“We put a lot of effort into building the evidence,” said Robinah Kaitiritimba. “We produced two key pieces of work – a ten‑year review of Uganda’s tobacco tax policy and excise tax simulations – and used them to show both the health impact and the revenue gains of stronger taxation. That evidence became the basis of our joint proposal to the Ministry of Finance and Parliament.”

The result was Uganda’s first tobacco tax increase in seven years, reflected in the 2025 Excise Duty Amendment Act, with raised taxes on both locally produced and imported cigarettes.

“In a context where tobacco taxation had been off the agenda for years, the priority was to get movement again,” said Adan. “Once the policy process is active, it becomes much easier for civil society to push for stronger measures and better tax design over time.”

The tax increase indeed is just the beginning, having exposed the limits of Uganda’s current tax structure and the extent of continued industry influence. “A price survey we conducted after the increase showed that the industry absorbed the tax on the most popular economy brand, keeping it affordable,” said Robinah Kaitiritimba. “That defeats the health objective of taxation. It’s why we are now pushing for a single‑tier tax structure, which would close these loopholes and make future increases more effective.”

Across both countries, tobacco industry interference remained a constant obstacle. Adan noted that arguments linking tax increases to illicit trade surfaced repeatedly in Kenya and Uganda. “That’s a big thing in both countries,” she said. “They are definitely struggling with those arguments.”

As the current phase of the project comes to a close, the focus for both coalitions is sustainability for the next phase. In Uganda, that includes strengthening engagement with a newly elected Parliament and building support for tobacco control within national budgets. In Kenya, priorities include further tax increases, stronger enforcement, and addressing the rapid spread of new nicotine products.

While nothing has been formalised, CRUK is keen to support these objectives. “Creating sustainable, locally-led programmes is one of our biggest objectives,” Adan emphasized, “and we want to ensure we don’t lose the good progress and momentum of the projects in Kenya and Uganda.”