Malaysia already has a black market in vape, and part of it is product laced with drugs. A written reply from the Home Minister, Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail, to Datuk Mas Ermieyati Samsudin (Masjid Tanah) in the Dewan Rakyat, reported by Bernama and the New Straits Times on 9 July 2026, said 718.43 kg of vape products suspected of containing prohibited substances were seized from 2023 to May 2026, in 400 cases with 585 arrests. The ministry said these products are marketed through online platforms, social media and courier services. Malaysia has not passed a national ban on vape. It regulates vape under Act 852. No ban bill had been tabled as at 3 October 2026, and none was among the bills listed for the first week of the sitting that opened on 5 October (The Star, 3 October 2026). No ban bill has been read in the Dewan Rakyat since then, according to the Hansard for the sitting days published up to 21 October 2026.
What would happen to that market under a ban? Where other countries have banned or tightly restricted a nicotine product, the record shows supply moving into illegal channels rather than ending. The same record also shows some effects in the other direction, and none of it predicts a Malaysian outcome. Each case below is set out with what it does and does not establish.
The position described here is as at 23 October 2026.
What the Malaysian record already shows
The Home Ministry’s year-by-year figures come from police records (Bernama and New Straits Times, 9 July 2026):
- 2023: 471.50 kg seized, 32 cases, 66 arrests
- 2024: 62.68 kg, 92 cases, 114 arrests
- 2025: 115.22 kg, 108 cases, 138 arrests
- January to May 2026: 69.03 kg, 168 cases, 267 arrests
Cases and arrests rose every year from 2023, while the weight seized fell after 2023. That is consistent with more and smaller seizures, or with more enforcement. Seizures measure enforcement as much as supply, so these figures do not show how large the market is or who sold the products.
The Health Minister has cited 402 cases recorded by police up to April 2026 involving vape devices and liquids mixed with synthetic drugs (Bernama, 20 June 2026). That is a separate count with no stated start date, so it should not be added to the figures above. The National Poison Centre at Universiti Sains Malaysia received 76 referrals of poisoning linked to vapes suspected of containing prohibited substances from 2020 to 2024 (Bernama, 4 June 2025). These are referrals to an information service, not a national count of harm.
Kelantan’s state exco said in June 2025 that no licence for vape sale had been issued at any premises since 2013 (Bernama, 18 June 2025). Johor’s exco confirmed that local authorities have issued none since its prohibition on sale took effect on 1 January 2016 (Bernama, 24 November 2024). In Johor Baru alone, enforcement action was taken at 47 premises in 2024, and 14,866 devices were seized (The Star, 30 March 2026). A decade on, Johor is still seizing stock, although that does not tell us how many people vape in the state (see state restrictions).
The Health Minister has said the 402 cases strengthen the case for a ban (Bernama, 20 June 2026). We take the concern seriously and respectfully see it differently. Our fuller response is on the case against us.
Australia: pharmacy-only sales and an illegal market
Australia has not banned vapes. According to its Therapeutic Goods Administration, the sale of disposable and non-therapeutic vapes has been banned since 1 July 2024, while therapeutic vapes remain available from pharmacies. The regulator says the reforms do not ban all vapes (TGA, “Changes to the regulation of vapes”).
Australia’s Illicit Tobacco and E-cigarette Commissioner estimated that about 95.7% of all e-cigarette products sold in Australia in 2024-25 were illegal, with a market value of about A$1.6 billion (ABC News, 19 March 2026). The same report said the Assistant Minister for Customs, Julian Hill, would announce plans to give investigators stronger powers against the organised crime networks behind the illicit tobacco and vape trade.
Vaping among 14 to 17 year olds fell from 18% in early 2023 to 15% in 2025, according to the Generation Vape study led by Cancer Council with the University of Sydney (Cancer Council Australia, 16 July 2025). The Cancer Council reads the fall, together with enforcement figures, as an encouraging sign that vaping laws are protecting young people.
The 95.7% is an estimated share of products sold, not a measure of how many people vape. Neither figure measures what the pharmacy model itself has caused.
Singapore: prohibition and enforcement
From 1 April to 30 June 2026, Singapore caught and penalised 2,428 people for possession and use of vaporisers, an average of 809 a month. That is about 30% lower than the 1,219 a month caught from June to August 2025, before stricter measures took effect on 1 September 2025. In the same quarter, more than 3,900 vaporisers and related components were seized at checkpoints, and 14 people were convicted of selling etomidate vaporiser pods (Ministry of Health and Health Sciences Authority, 11 August 2026).
A count of people caught each month measures enforcement output, not how many people vape, and Singapore’s ministry does not claim any change in prevalence. The figures show that supply continues under prohibition, not how large it is.
South Africa, India and Bhutan
South Africa banned the sale of all tobacco and vaping products from 27 March to 17 August 2020 as a COVID-19 measure (Filby et al., Tobacco Control, 20 January 2021). The research that followed measured cigarettes, not vapes.
In an online survey of more than 16,000 people by the University of Cape Town’s Research Unit on the Economics of Excisable Products, more than 90% of smokers said they bought cigarettes during the ban, and the share bought from formal retailers fell from 56% to 3% (UCT, 15 May 2020). The same survey found that about 41% tried to quit, and 39% of those succeeded. It was a convenience sample, not a representative one. A peer-reviewed analysis found prices rose by over 240% during the ban and that sales continued, “further entrenching an already large illicit market” (van der Zee et al., Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 2023).
A broadly nationally representative survey found that 7.8% of cigarette smokers quit during the ban, but 55% of those quitters relapsed after it was lifted (van Walbeek et al., Tobacco Induced Diseases, 7 August 2023). The evidence concerns a temporary ban and says nothing about a permanent one.
India prohibited e-cigarettes in 2019. A research brief from the Johns Hopkins Institute for Global Tobacco Control says e-cigarettes “remain available and accessible to consumers in the Indian market” (November 2023). In its 16 interviews, the people it spoke to named physical stores, online sales, social media and apps, and illicit networks as the common ways to buy. It shows availability, not how many people use e-cigarettes or how that has changed.
Bhutan banned the sale of tobacco in 2010, and a black market in cigarettes smuggled from India grew up around the ban (Al Jazeera, 29 August 2020). When the border closed in 2020, under-the-counter prices rose fourfold, and the government lifted the ban to temper demand for smuggled cigarettes and lessen the risk of cross-border contagion. It concerns tobacco, not vapes.
What none of this establishes
- It does not establish that a figure from another country transfers to Malaysia.
- It does not establish that seizures or arrests measure the size of a market.
- It does not establish that restriction has no effect on anything. Youth vaping fell in Australia, and some South African smokers quit during the ban.
- It does not establish that regulation comes without costs. In Operasi Vape 1.0 in April 2026, 1,670 premises were inspected and 728 were found in breach of regulations (Malaysia Gazette, 9 July 2026). Known premises can be found and inspected, and the same figures show that a large share of them were in breach.
Our position is that “a ban removes the ability to control what is in the product. It does not remove the product.” Both sides here are making a prediction. Ours is that prohibition displaces supply rather than ending it. The record above is why we hold that view, and its limits are why we call it a prediction. See also why not a ban, our answer on drug-laced vapes and the figures used against us.
The research we have commissioned
We have commissioned and paid for research on this question in Malaysia by an independent expert. The report, “Malaysia’s Vape Ban: At the crossroads of public health and the black market”, covers public health, product regulation and the illicit market, drawing on interviews and first-hand accounts. It is expected later in 2026, and a summary will appear on our research page when it is published. Until then, nothing in it can be cited, including by us.