Amidst National Cancer Awareness Month, a controversial bill has sparked outrage among health advocacy groups. The bill aims to lower tobacco excise taxes. House Bill 11360, approved on its second reading Tuesday, faces strong opposition for jeopardizing public health.
HealthJustice Philippines vehemently criticizes the bill, calling it the “Sin Tax Sabotage Bill.” They argue that lowering taxes will increase tobacco accessibility. This change will lead to higher smoking rates, particularly among youth. It will also cause a surge in cancer cases. Former Health Secretary and HealthJustice Board Member, Dr. Jaime Galvez Tan, stated, “We refuse measures that will sabotage our hard-won strides. These strides prevent a surge in cancer. They also prevent death from smoking.”
The Sin Tax Coalition projects a 400,000 increase in smokers. They also anticipate over ₱27 billion in lost revenue over five years if the bill passes. The Cancer Coalition Philippines (CCP) echoes these concerns, highlighting the devastating impact on cancer prevention and treatment.
CCP Vice President Carmen Auste-Sarmiento stressed the connection between smoking and lung cancer. Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths in the Philippines. She stated, “Passing H.B. 11360 will cancel out these gains and put more lives…at risk. It will also jeopardize…essential life-saving health programs.” She emphasized the bill’s potential to reverse progress made under the Sin Tax Law. This law has successfully reduced smoking rates.
Alyannah Lagasca is the Lead Convenor of the Healthy Philippines Alliance (HPA) Youth Network. She added, “There is zero evidence that higher tax rates increase illicit tobacco trade.” She emphasized the lack of evidence for such claims. She urged lawmakers to prioritize youth health and wellbeing.
The bill has three co-sponsors. They are Representatives Kristine Singson-Meehan (Ilocos Sur), Mikaela Angela Suansing (Nueva Ecija), and Rufus Rodriguez (Cagayan de Oro). It proposes a staggered tax increase starting in 2026. However, health groups strongly urge its rejection, emphasizing the devastating consequences for public health and the fight against cancer. The debate highlights the clash between economic concerns and the urgent need for stronger public health measures.
