Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi, in a written answer to a parliamentary question from MEP Pietro Fiocchi (ECR) on 28 July 2026, defended the European Commission's handling of compliance checks for the Tobacco Products Directive (2014/40/EU) and their integration into the 2026 evaluation. The answer signals the Commission's commitment to its Better Regulation framework while acknowledging that the conformity assessment is still incomplete, leaving some Member States' transposition status unresolved.
The question, submitted by Fiocchi, challenged the Commission over the absence of a summary of conformity check results in the evaluation of the Tobacco Products Directive and the Tobacco Advertising Directive, published on 2 April 2026. Fiocchi pointed to the Commission's own Better Regulation Tool 39, which requires compliance assessments to feed into evaluations. He asked whether the conformity check had been completed for all 27 Member States, what the findings were, and why they were not included in the evaluation.
In his reply, Várhelyi stated that the compliance assessment comprised several stages, including complete transposition and conformity checks, and that the Commission has engaged in bilateral exchanges with a number of Member States on specific aspects of transposition. He confirmed that the internal assessment is ongoing, implying that not all Member States have been fully assessed. He did not specify which Member States remain unassessed or provide a timeline for completion. On the findings, Várhelyi said the results informed the evidence base for the evaluation and contributed to describing how the directive was implemented, but he did not disclose the number or types of non-conformities identified across the six priority areas. He did not directly address why the results were not summarised in the evaluation, instead asserting that the evaluation report describes the implementation.
The answer is largely procedural and avoids concrete commitments or new data. It does not announce new deadlines, numerical targets, or structural changes to the compliance process. The policy orientation is defensive: the Commission maintains that its processes are adequate and that the evaluation was properly informed, despite the lack of a published compliance summary. The response may disappoint stakeholders seeking greater transparency, such as public health NGOs and MEPs who have pressed for clearer accountability. For the tobacco industry and Member States, the ongoing bilateral exchanges signal continued scrutiny but no immediate enforcement action.
Institutional follow-up is uncertain. The Commission has not committed to publishing a separate compliance report or to completing the checks by a specific date. The European Parliament may pursue further questions or a resolution to push for more detailed reporting. The answer suggests that the Commission prioritises flexibility in its bilateral dialogues over rigid public reporting, a stance that may fuel tensions between transparency advocates and those favouring administrative discretion.