MARCH 14 — The government’s decision to implement a tobacco retail display ban may be well-intentioned, but it poses serious economic risks for small retailers. While reducing smoking rates is a commendable goal, the policy appears to overlook its financial impact on businesses that rely on tobacco sales for survival.
Before enforcing such a measure, it is worth asking whether a proper system is in place to mitigate its commercial impact — otherwise, this is a case of putting the cart before the horse.
The government assumes that restricting the visibility of tobacco products will reduce smoking rates, particularly among young people. However, similar bans in other countries have yielded mixed results. Where such policies have been enacted, smokers continue purchasing tobacco, but small retailers bear the brunt, losing a key source of foot traffic and struggling with reduced sales.
This is a serious concern, as many sundry shops, convenience stores, and independent retailers depend on tobacco sales to supplement their income — especially as operating costs continue to rise.
A major issue is the absence of a clear mechanism to offset the financial losses retailers will inevitably face. Unlike large supermarket chains and hypermarkets, which can absorb revenue shifts and adjust with alternative sales strategies, small shop owners often operate on thin profit margins. Many have no alternative revenue streams substantial enough to replace tobacco sales. Without a transition plan or compensation framework, this policy feels more like an economic blindside than a well-balanced public health initiative.
The Federation of Sundry Goods Merchants Associations of Malaysia has raised deep concerns over the financial burden this ban imposes on small retailers. According to their estimates, each store may need to invest up to RM6,000 to modify their premises to comply with the new regulations, amounting to a cumulative cost of nearly RM300 million nationwide.
Moreover, the argument that a display ban will significantly deter new smokers is debatable. Unlike sugary snacks or impulse buys at the cashier, tobacco is already a regulated product not sold to minors. Most smokers make purchasing decisions based on habit, brand loyalty, and price — not the presence of a display.
The assumption that visibility leads to youth smoking also overlooks the role of social and familial influences. Research indicates that key factors contributing to youth smoking include peer pressure, parental smoking habits, and exposure through media or social settings. While a display ban may reduce the physical presence of tobacco in retail environments, it does little to address these deeper-rooted influences.
A file photograph shows a cancerous lung displayed as a health warning on a box of cigarettes. — Farhan Najib
If the goal is truly to prevent young people from taking up smoking, efforts should focus on stricter age verification, enhanced public education campaigns, and more accessible cessation programs rather than merely restricting visibility in retail spaces.
Policymakers must reconsider the broader commercial ramifications of this ban. A well-rounded approach would involve consulting stakeholders — including retailers, trade associations, and economic analysts — to ensure the policy does not disproportionately harm small businesses. If the government insists on implementing the ban, it must also introduce concrete measures to support affected retailers, ensuring they are not left bearing the economic burden alone.
For this policy to be fair and effective, it must be paired with an economic support plan that acknowledges and addresses the financial realities of thousands of retailers across the country. Public health initiatives should not come at the expense of small business survival.
*This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
