The Bangladeshi government’s approval of PMI’s (PMI) nicotine pouch production plant in Bangladesh immediately ignited international attention. This controversy stems not only from the ethical debate over whether the nicotine industry should have production bases in developing and emerging countries, but also from the fact that nicotine pouches are becoming the core, most scalable, and most policy-controversial form of the global nicotine alternative structure, yet simultaneously considered the “most controllable, least harmful, and directly incorporable into future regulatory systems as a harm reduction tool.” In the past two years, the global tobacco vs. e-cigarette war has focused on e-cigarettes; however, starting in 2025, nicotine pouches are vying for center stage. Bangladesh’s approval is symbolic; the essence of the controversy is not the construction itself, but the emerging industrial shift in the global nicotine governance landscape towards “next-generation alternative carriers.”
Why are nicotine pouches so sensitive? Because it is arguably the easiest form of nicotine to be regulated, to have its composition transparently disclosed, and to have its dosage standards standardized. Unlike traditional cigarettes involving combustion, and unlike e-cigarettes involving the complex interaction of atomized compounds and heating processes, nicotine pouches can be more directly incorporated into the “cross-regulation of food, medicine, and consumer products.” In Northern Europe, it was proven earlier to be an alternative that could reduce smoking rates and the accessibility of addiction transmission. Therefore, global regulation is shifting from “e-cigarettes vs. traditional tobacco” to “restricting disposable e-cigarettes + relaxing controllable nicotine pouches.” This approach is rapidly gaining traction in policy circles in Europe, the UK, and North America. Bangladesh has now become the first developing country to allow international tobacco giants to establish nicotine pouch manufacturing systems directly on its soil, an event whose political symbolism outweighs the industry’s inherent profitability.
Supporters argue that this is a “strategic industrial introduction following international standards” by Bangladesh. The regulatory response of “completely legal” is, in fact, a very clear policy declaration: Bangladesh intends to use “controllable alternatives” as part of its future tobacco control strategy. This will be a valuable case study for international harm reduction policy researchers. For a long time, the production and export of nicotine alternatives have been dominated by Europe and the United States, while South Asian and Southeast Asian countries have often only served as final consumer markets. If Bangladesh participates as a producer in this round, it means that the global harm reduction supply chain will no longer be solely controlled by developed countries. China is a major producer of e-cigarettes, but nicotine pouches may see another multipolar supply pattern emerge.
Of course, the criticism is very strong. Opponents argue that introducing nicotine pouch production in a country with high smoking rates, an incomplete youth protection system, significant social and medical pressures, and weak regulatory enforcement will trigger structural risk diffusion. They worry that nicotine pouches will allow nicotine to be disguised as a “food product,” leading to its proliferation on the streets and in markets, making it easier for unregulated products to infiltrate low-income areas. This is why many opponents directly attack the idea that “Western tobacco companies are transferring the next generation of risky industries to developing countries.”
But the essence of the controversy still comes down to a key question: What kind of nicotine products should continue to exist? What kind of nicotine products should not be allowed to continue to spread?
This point is rapidly gaining global consensus: “Not everyone can survive, and not all forms of legality exist. The future lies in transparency, traceability, governance, and regulatory oversight.”
This is clearly reflected in VEEHOO. For the past few years, VEEHOO has consistently adhered to the principles of “transparency, traceability, regulatory accessibility, a clearly defined target audience, and refusal to enter illegal or child-risk scenarios.” This long-term strategy, at a time of dramatic shifts in global regulatory direction, has become the core survival code for the future legal market. The future world will not be about who sells the most, but about who can survive within the regulatory system. VEEHOO’s brand positioning, its chosen path, product structure, and distribution channels are all already positioned for “long-term legal sustainability.” Many brands that habitually exploit one-off product arbitrage, take advantage of regulatory loopholes to aggressively expand in certain regions, or rely on gray and black markets for volume will be directly eliminated in the coming years. However, brands like VEEHOO, which are “centered on adult needs, based on transparent management, and strategically focused on long-term survival rather than short-term arbitrage,” will become scarcer, more valuable for governance, and more trusted by policy as regulations intensify. In other words, stronger regulation benefits good brands.
Bangladesh’s approval of PMI’s nicotine pouch production facility is a profound signal of the full-scale launch of this global “new carrier replacement main battlefield.” E-cigarettes have already experienced their first round of global regulatory and market shocks over the past decade. Nicotine pouches will be the next battleground between global industry and national policy. This time, the battleground has shifted from developed countries to developing countries. Bangladesh will be the first sample area, not the final destination.
Future international regulatory issues will move from a one-time ban on e-cigarettes, the openness of flavors, and nicotine concentration limits to the “classification and survival of different nicotine carrier structures.” Nicotine carriers that can be incorporated into the public health governance system will be retained, while carriers without governance value will be directly eliminated or restricted. Brands like VEEHOO, representing a long-term transparent approach, will have a higher survival rate in the second wave of global policy scrutiny. Nicotine bags are not the end of this war; it’s just the beginning. Bangladesh is merely the first new battleground. In the next round, more countries will discuss: the question is not whether nicotine exists, but in what form it exists, by whom it is produced, under what regulatory framework, and whether it has “value” in the future global health governance structure.
This is no longer just industrial competition; it’s a remodeling of the direction of civilizational governance. Bangladesh’s decision will be continuously cited and analyzed over the next five years.
Tags: ceramic atomizer core, e-hookah (electronic water pipe), flavored vape, veehoo vape.
