Nearly three-quarters of Dutch submissions to a European Union consultation on stricter tobacco rules were fully written by artificial intelligence and submitted as apparent individual responses. Most were traced to an AI tool linked to tobacco company Philip Morris International, according to an investigation by NOS and Pointer. Nine in 10 Dutch-language responses appear to originate from the company’s system.

The European Commission is reviewing two major tobacco laws covering tobacco products and tobacco advertising. It opened a public consultation before drafting new proposals. More than 80,000 responses were submitted in one month. By comparison, 97 percent of similar consultations receive fewer than 1,000 responses.

Researchers analyzed more than 65,000 responses across 15 EU countries. They used the AI detector Pangram along with additional statistical models. They found that 35 percent were highly likely fully AI-generated. The Netherlands ranked second after Portugal and just above France.

In the Netherlands, 786 responses were examined. Of those, 71 percent were assessed as almost certainly fully written by AI. Researchers attributed most of these to a Philip Morris International campaign tool called “Your Voice Your Choice.” The tool has since been taken offline.

The campaign used yellow posters in tobacco shops and QR codes on the IQOS website. These directed users to a system that generated consultation responses. Participants answered questions about smoking status, product use, and policy preferences. The system then produced a first-person response ready for submission to the European Commission.

Researchers said the tool was not a general chatbot. It functioned as a guided response generator. Eleven of 12 selectable “important aspects” produced arguments against stricter regulation. All optional “further concerns” were also negative toward regulation.

Of the 370 responses linked with high confidence to the PMI tool, only six supported tighter regulation. The rest opposed it. In automated testing, researchers found that generated texts often included arguments not explicitly selected by users. These included claims that stricter rules could backfire and that alternative nicotine products are less harmful.

Rik Joosen, a Leiden University expert on EU lobbying, said, “An AI tool has been effective here in getting citizens to participate, but not with their fully own, genuine, and unsteered voice.”

The European Commission said it is “very concerned” about industry-led influence efforts. It stated, “We are, therefore, very concerned about reports about industry-backed campaigns to influence the results of the consultation and condemn the alleged attempts by the tobacco industry to steer responses to the call for evidence. It is crucial that citizens’ views are not manipulated or misrepresented. This is especially important given recent developments in AI and other new technologies.”

Philip Morris said the tool used standard AI features to improve clarity rather than to influence opinion. The company said participation was voluntary and that users could edit responses before submission. It called the criticism misleading and said participation in public consultations is legitimate.

The campaign has already triggered political and regulatory reactions in the Netherlands. Doctors filed a complaint with the Advertising Code Commission.

Lawmakers from six parties urged the government to oppose the campaign. Minister of Health, Welfare and Sport Sophie Hermans did not object to the motion. She left enforcement decisions to Parliament and the Netherlands Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority.