TobaccoReporter logo

Category: Around the Industry

  • South Korea Scrutinizing ‘Nicotine-Free’ Vape Claims

    South Korea Scrutinizing ‘Nicotine-Free’ Vape Claims

    South Korea is increasing oversight of “nicotine-free” and nicotine analogue vaping products after government tests found some contained nicotine or 6-methyl nicotine despite their labeling. The Korea Times says the market has grown rapidly since April, when synthetic nicotine products became subject to tobacco regulations and higher taxes, driving demand for products marketed as regulatory alternatives. Imports of nicotine-free vapes climbed to 164 tons in 2025 from 95 tons in 2022, with most sourced from China.

    The Ministry of Food and Drug Safety said testing of 105 products found nicotine in 13 and 6-methyl nicotine in 12. The government is now conducting toxicity assessments, investigating unlicensed businesses, and preparing broader regulatory measures expected later this year. Industry representatives say the products exploit a legal loophole by avoiding tobacco regulations while being marketed as nicotine-free.

  • BAT Faces Expanded Class-Action Claims over Natural American Spirit

    BAT Faces Expanded Class-Action Claims over Natural American Spirit

    A divided federal appeals court revived class-action claims against British American Tobacco, Reynolds American, R.J. Reynolds, and Santa Fe Natural Tobacco over allegations that labels on Natural American Spirit cigarettes misled consumers into believing the products were safer than other cigarettes and contained no additives. Yesterday (July 29), the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a lower court’s refusal to certify the 12-state “safer cigarette” class while upholding certification of a separate eight-state class alleging that menthol constituted an additive.

    The case covers consumers in California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, and Washington. The appeals court said the lower court prematurely addressed whether the products’ disclaimer — stating that the absence of additives “does NOT mean a safer cigarette” — was effective. A dissenting judge argued neither class should have been certified and warned that the decision could allow consumers who never read the labels to seek damages. The case returns to the lower court for further proceedings.

  • Experts Call for Stronger Tobacco Control Across Africa

    Experts Call for Stronger Tobacco Control Across Africa

    Public health experts, policymakers, researchers, and civil society advocates from 12 African countries are meeting in Lagos, Nigeria, for a five-day Tobacco Industry Monitoring course focused on “countering tobacco industry interference” in public health policy. The program, organized by the Africa Center for Tobacco Industry Monitoring and Policy Research, is training participants to monitor industry activity, conduct research, and support implementation of Article 5.3 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.

    The course covers tobacco taxation, industry document research, political mapping, social media investigations, legal accountability, and the tobacco industry’s evolving harm reduction agenda. ATIM Director Olalekan Ayo Yusuf said multinational tobacco companies increasingly view Africa as a growth market and urged governments to strengthen policies before tobacco use rises. Participants from Kenya, Nigeria, Benin, Botswana, South Africa, Sierra Leone, Côte d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Uganda, Zambia, Senegal and Zimbabwe are taking part.

  • Decision Nears in Brazil’s Tobacco Health-Cost Lawsuit

    Decision Nears in Brazil’s Tobacco Health-Cost Lawsuit

    A landmark lawsuit filed by Brazil’s Office of the Attorney General in 2019 seeking to recover public healthcare costs linked to smoking has reached the decision stage. All legal submissions have been completed, including an opinion from the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office supporting the government’s claims. The Federal Court in Porto Alegre will now decide whether the country’s largest cigarette manufacturers are liable for health damages associated with the marketing and sale of their products.

    The case targets BAT Brazil and Philip Morris Brazil, and their parent companies, British American Tobacco and Philip Morris International, seeking compensation for tobacco-related healthcare expenditures. The lawsuit estimates that smoking causes about 177,000 deaths annually in Brazil and R$75 billion ($15 billion) in healthcare costs.

  • Amicus Briefs Back Altria, Juul in Antitrust Appeal

    Amicus Briefs Back Altria, Juul in Antitrust Appeal

    The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, 14 states, and several legal groups are backing Altria and Juul’s appeal of a lower-court decision allowing antitrust claims against the companies to proceed as a class action. The briefs argue that the trial court improperly relied on California law to cover alleged conduct and purchases occurring in other states, where different antitrust laws and standards apply. The Chamber and other amici contend that applying California’s Cartwright Act across multiple jurisdictions creates significant legal and manageability problems for the litigation.

    The underlying lawsuit alleges that Altria’s 2018 investment in Juul, together with its decision to withdraw from the U.S. e-cigarette market, harmed competition and contributed to higher prices, which Altria and Juul dispute.

  • Canadian Court Certifies Class Action Against Juul, Altria

    Canadian Court Certifies Class Action Against Juul, Altria

    The Supreme Court of British Columbia certified a nationwide class action against Juul Labs and Altria Group, allowing claims to proceed on behalf of individuals in Canada who purchased or used Juul products for personal use between August 2018 and July 15, 2026. The lawsuit alleges the companies marketed e-cigarettes as a safer alternative to cigarettes while contributing to nicotine addiction among a new generation of consumers. The ruling is procedural and does not determine liability.

    The court rejected several arguments raised by Juul and Altria regarding certification, allowing the case to move forward. The action is one of two legal proceedings against Juul in Canada, alongside a separate lawsuit by the government of British Columbia seeking recovery of healthcare costs associated with the company’s products. Juul and Altria may appeal the certification decision.

  • Retail Groups Urge Processors to Revise Vape Enforcement Policies

    Retail Groups Urge Processors to Revise Vape Enforcement Policies

    The National Association of Convenience Stores and several retail and tobacco trade associations urged Global Payments and Mastercard to revise policies that penalize retailers for selling certain electronic nicotine delivery system products, according to CSP. In letters to the companies, the groups argued the payment processors’ enforcement standards do not reflect the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s updated enforcement priorities, which allow enforcement discretion for certain products with pending premarket tobacco product applications.

    The letters, also signed by the National Association of Tobacco Outlets, Energy Marketers of America, and the Convenience Distribution Association, expressed support for removing illicit vaping products from the market but said responsible retailers should not face penalties that exceed current FDA policy. The request follows updated FDA guidance issued in May and comes after a coalition of state attorneys general urged major payment networks to take action against merchants selling unauthorized vaping products.

  • EU-ASEAN Business Council Calls for Regional Action Against Illicits

    EU-ASEAN Business Council Calls for Regional Action Against Illicits

    The EU-ASEAN Business Council urged ASEAN members to strengthen regional cooperation to combat illicit trade, describing it as a growing threat to economic growth, government revenues, and supply chain resilience. In a report released ahead of the Philippines’ 2026 ASEAN chairship, the council called for greater intelligence sharing, harmonized regulatory frameworks, expanded use of digital customs tools, stronger public-private collaboration, and closer engagement with dialogue partners, including India.

    The report identified illicit tobacco trade as a longstanding challenge and highlighted the need for coordinated enforcement and supply chain oversight. Philip Morris India Managing Director Navaneel Kar said illicit tobacco trade undermines revenue collection, market transparency, and the rule of law, adding that the company supports efforts including market intelligence, research, and voluntary track-and-trace initiatives to strengthen lawful trade.

  • Thai Tobacco Trade Backs Single-Rate Reform

    Thai Tobacco Trade Backs Single-Rate Reform

    The Thai Tobacco Trade Association (TTTA) endorsed government plans to replace Thailand’s two-tier cigarette excise system with a single-rate tax, arguing the current structure has distorted the market, squeezed retailer margins, and encouraged consumers to switch to cheaper products and illicit cigarettes. The association said a balanced flat-rate tax, combined with stronger enforcement against illegal tobacco, would help stabilize government revenue, improve market competition, and support the country’s tobacco supply chain, while the Excise Department continues its review of the proposed reforms.

  • Don Abram Harris Cigars Files $8B Lawsuit Against PM USA

    Don Abram Harris Cigars Files $8B Lawsuit Against PM USA

    Don Abram Harris Cigars filed an $8 billion lawsuit against Philip Morris USA, an Altria subsidiary, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland over its use of the “Marlboro Man” trademark for a premium cigar. Founder Abram Harris alleges Philip Morris improperly interfered with the company’s trademark application and business operations, claiming the dispute led to the loss of a proposed $50 million investment. Philip Morris has argued the mark could be confused with its Marlboro cigarette trademarks, while Harris is seeking damages, a jury trial, and a court declaration supporting his trademark application.