TobaccoReporter logo

Tag: vape ban

  • Fight Over Foreign-Sourced Vape Ban Continues in Texas Appeals Court

    Fight Over Foreign-Sourced Vape Ban Continues in Texas Appeals Court

    Texas officials are asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to dismiss a lawsuit challenging a state law that restricts the sale of e-cigarette products containing liquids sourced from China and other designated foreign adversaries. According to court filings, the acting Texas comptroller argues the office is protected by sovereign immunity and should not be subject to the lawsuit brought by vape companies and the Vapor Technology Association.

    According to Law 360, the dispute centers on a recently enacted Texas law targeting vape products tied to countries identified as foreign adversaries, adding another layer to the increasingly complex regulatory environment facing the U.S. vaping sector. Texas officials have also argued in earlier filings that the plaintiffs lack standing and that claims about business harm remain speculative.

  • Vape Companies Challenge Pa. E-Cigarette Law in Federal Court

    Vape Companies Challenge Pa. E-Cigarette Law in Federal Court

    Several vape manufacturers and retailers have filed a federal lawsuit challenging a new Pennsylvania law they say would effectively remove most e-cigarette products from the market by limiting sales to products authorized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The plaintiffs, including Puffbar Inc., Mi-One Brands LLC, American Vapor Manufacturers Association, and Pennsylvania-based vape retailers and distributors, argue the statute is unconstitutional, conflicts with federal authority over tobacco regulation, and could force businesses to absorb roughly $2 million in unsellable inventory.

    According to Law 360, the lawsuit contends that the Pennsylvania law improperly intrudes into areas governed by the FDA’s premarket tobacco application process and unfairly targets products that some federal officials and public health researchers have described as potentially useful for adult smoking cessation. Industry groups also argue the measure could disproportionately affect independent vape retailers and smaller manufacturers already facing mounting regulatory pressure across the U.S. market.

  • Scientist reveals nail salons are worse than “second-hand vaping”

    Scientist reveals nail salons are worse than “second-hand vaping”

    Public confusion should not drive vape policy, says Dr Marina Murphy

    As the UK government considers extending smoke-free legislation to create new vape-free areas in England, experts are warning that vaping policy must be based on evidence—not public misunderstanding.

    Proposals to restrict vaping in areas such as playgrounds, school grounds and outside hospitals are intended to protect the public from second-hand exposure. However, the scientific evidence does not support treating vaping like smoking.

    Here, Dr. Marina Murphy, Director of Scientific Affairs at Northerner, sets out the current scientific understanding of “second-hand vaping” and highlights the need for policy to be based on evidence.

    Is there such a thing as second-hand vapour?

    While often described as “second-hand vapour,” passive exposure to vape aerosol is not comparable to second-hand smoke. Vapes do not contain tobacco, involve no combustion, and produce no side-stream smoke, which is the smoke produced when a cigarette is not being actively smoked, the primary source of harmful passive smoking exposure. 

    UK health authorities, including the NHS and Cancer Research UK, state there is no good evidence that passive vaping is harmful to bystanders.

    What do the public think about second-hand vaping?

    New research commissioned by Northerner highlights widespread public misunderstanding about vaping and health risks. The survey found that 43% of respondents believe exposure to vape aerosol is as harmful as exposure to cigarette smoke, despite this not being supported by the evidence. Only 32% correctly identified the statement as false, while 25% were unsure.

    Almost half (46%) also incorrectly believe vaping involves exposure to more chemicals than smoking. These findings suggest public perceptions are increasingly out of step with the evidence.

    Is secondhand vaping harmful?

    When we talk about public exposure, it’s important to keep the science in perspective. Exhaled vape aerosol generally raises PM₂.₅ levels only slightly above background levels, often in the 1–10 µg/m³ range, and contains no carbon monoxide because there is no combustion. To put this into perspective, many everyday environments generate far higher air-quality impacts:

    • Frying or gas cooking can produce particulate matter₂.₅ peaks above 500 µg/m³
    • Nail salons and beauty products can push particulate levels above 200 µg/m³
    • Urban roadside pollution often ranges 10–50 µg/m³

    Does vaping expose users to more chemicals than smoking?

    No. Cigarette smoke contains around 7,000 chemicals, many of them toxic or carcinogenic. Vape aerosol contains significantly fewer harmful substances and is widely recognised as substantially less harmful than smoking. Claims that vaping exposes users to more chemicals than cigarettes are simply false.

    Should vaping be banned outdoors?

    There is no clear evidence-based justification for broad outdoor vaping bans. Vaping is widely recognised as a lower-risk alternative to smoking and remains one of the most effective tools available to help adults quit cigarettes. Treating vaping like smoking risks sending the wrong message to smokers. If policymakers blur the distinction between the two, they risk reinforcing misinformation, discouraging switching, and undermining tobacco harm reduction. The evidence is clear: vaping is not smoking, and regulating it as though it were is neither scientific nor proportionate.

  • Researchers: Flavored-Vape Debate Needs to Follow Science, Not Politics

    Researchers: Flavored-Vape Debate Needs to Follow Science, Not Politics

    The resignation of FDA Commissioner Marty Makary on May 12 over reported tensions with President Donald Trump regarding the agency’s approval of two fruit-flavored nicotine vapes brought the flavored-vape battle front and center in American politics. The decision marked a shift from the FDA’s previous authorization of only tobacco and menthol flavors and reignited debate over flavored vaping products.

    Three public health researchers warned the debate over fruit-flavored nicotine vapes should be guided by evidence, not politics. Dr. Jamie Hartmann-Boyce from the University of Massachusetts Amherst, Dr. Holly Jarman from the University of Michigan School of Public Health, and Dr. Claire L. Ma from the University of Michigan, who study scientific evidence, health policy, and regulation, respectively, acknowledged both sides of the debate, where studies show that sweet and fruity flavors can attract youth and non-smokers, but also that vaping is significantly less harmful than smoking and may help adult smokers quit. The authors urged lawmakers and regulators to follow scientific findings when shaping vape policy, as researchers continue to discover the benefits and risks of vape use.

  • MALAYSIA VAPE INDUSTRY WARNS OF $150 MILLION ANNUAL TAX REVENUE LOSS IF 15ML PRODUCTS ARE HASTILY BANNED

    MALAYSIA VAPE INDUSTRY WARNS OF $150 MILLION ANNUAL TAX REVENUE LOSS IF 15ML PRODUCTS ARE HASTILY BANNED

    Malaysia’s local vape industry has warned that any abrupt move to ban 15ml vape products under the Control of Smoking Products for Public Health Act 2024 (Act 852) could cost the country more than RM600 million ($150 million) in annual tax revenue, while putting thousands of Malaysian jobs at risk.

    Local vape companies have collectively invested tens of millions of ringgit since Act 852 was introduced, including product registration with the Ministry of Health Malaysia (MOH), SIRIM certification, excise duty payments, establishment of local manufacturing facilities, laboratory testing, and compliance with safety and labelling standards.

    Mohamad Nizam Talib, President of the Malaysian E-Vaporizers and Tobacco Alternatives Association (MEVTA), stressed that the industry had taken significant steps to comply with every regulatory requirement since Act 852 came into force.

    “We have followed the law and made substantial investments to ensure our products meet government standards. Now, out of nowhere, there are proposals to eliminate the 15ml product category, without any reasonable transition period. This does not just affect the industry. It affects national revenue and the livelihoods of Malaysians,” he said.

    Based on current estimates, there are approximately 1.5 million vape users in Malaysia, with around 70% using liquid-based vape systems. Average consumption is estimated at roughly eight bottles per month.

    At a tax rate of RM6 per 15ml bottle, the government is estimated to collect approximately RM50 million ($12.5 million) in tax revenue each month or more than RM600 million annually from this product category alone.

    A hasty ban on 15ml products would not only risk crippling the legitimate local industry, but could also fuel a surge in smuggling, accelerate black market growth, undermine regulatory control, and open the door to untaxed and unregulated products flooding the market.

    “Consumer demand does not simply disappear when legal products are taken off the shelf. Users will turn to the black market for unregulated and untaxed alternatives that fall entirely outside the government’s oversight,” Nizam added.

    The industry also raised concerns about the patchy enforcement of Act 852, noting that online sales remain rampant, unregistered products are still readily available, and the misuse of vape products containing prohibited substances, including synthetic drugs, is on the rise.

    The real driver of vape misuse, the industry argued, is the illegal market and underground products that sit completely outside any regulatory framework, not the legitimate, registered products currently being targeted.

    At the same time, the industry highlighted what it described as a glaring policy inconsistency: open system devices remain permitted, taxes continue to be collected, and SIRIM certifications are still being approved, yet the legally manufactured vape liquids designed for use with these very devices are now being proposed for elimination.

    “If the devices are still legal, why are legitimate vape liquids being singled out for a ban? This sends deeply mixed signals to investors and the industry,particularly given the significant investments that have been made to meet all government requirements,” Nizam said.

    Malaysia’s local vape industry is estimated to employ more than 8,000 workers in manufacturing and over 15,000 in retail, with thousands more supporting jobs throughout the broader supply chain.

    A significant portion of industry players are young entrepreneurs and Bumiputera business owners who have built their businesses through legal channels over the past few years.

    Against a backdrop of economic uncertainty and rising retrenchment cases across multiple sectors, any drastic action against the vape industry would further strain employment opportunities for Malaysians.

    The industry also claimed that no meaningful consultation had been conducted with the relevant economic ministries and agencies, including the Ministry of Finance, the Royal Malaysian Customs Department, the Ministry of Domestic Trade and Cost of Living (KPDN), and the Ministry of Investment, Trade and Industry (MITI), before the proposal to eliminate 15ml products was tabled.

    In light of this, the industry is calling on the Prime Minister to intervene directly to ensure that any policy changes properly account for the economic implications, national revenue, investment stability, and the risk of a growing black market that will become increasingly difficult to rein in.

  • Philippines’ Health Renews Total Vape Ban Push

    Philippines’ Health Renews Total Vape Ban Push

    The Philippine Department of Health renewed its call for a total ban on vaping products, citing public health risks and positioning prohibition as the most straightforward and cost-effective solution. While a full ban is not yet in place, the agency is urging stricter enforcement of existing regulations under the Vape Regulation Act, particularly provisions restricting flavored products that may appeal to minors.

    The DOH pointed to regional precedents, noting that several neighboring Asian countries have already implemented comprehensive vape bans. In the interim, officials are prioritizing the removal of flavored vape products from the market, emphasizing that flavor descriptors linked to fruits, candy, desserts, or cartoon imagery are considered to disproportionately attract youth.

  • Indonesia Stepping Up Vape Surveillance

    Indonesia Stepping Up Vape Surveillance

    Indonesia’s National Food and Drug Monitoring Agency (BPOM) is set to gain oversight of vape distribution nationwide, working alongside the National Narcotics Agency (BNN) following reports of drug-laced e-liquids in the market. BPOM said it will develop technical regulations under the country’s recent health laws to determine which vape products are permitted and which will face sanctions, with decisions guided by scientific assessment.

    While BNN has proposed a total ban on e-cigarettes to combat narcotics risks, BPOM signaled a more targeted approach, focusing on stricter control of illegal products lacking excise stamps rather than blanket prohibition. Authorities noted that illicit vapes are the primary source of drug contamination.

  • Vapes Thriving in Hong Kong Despite Ban

    Vapes Thriving in Hong Kong Despite Ban

    An investigation by Sing Tao Daily found that illicit online sales of e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products continue in Hong Kong despite a strengthened public-use ban that took effect last week. Reporters were able to purchase disposable vapes through social media channels, with sellers offering home delivery or convenience store pickup and showing little concern about enforcement. Prices for disposable devices were quoted at around HK$120 ($15.60), with digital payment options and delivery within days.

    Authorities said enforcement efforts have been stepped up through intelligence-led operations and increased patrols, but the report highlights the persistence of a well-established black market that has adapted to restrictions introduced in 2022. Analysts and policy observers noted that the latest ban may push usage further underground, complicating monitoring and enforcement as illegal supply channels remain widely accessible online.

  • Argentina Lifts Alternative Product Ban, Imposes New Regs

    Argentina Lifts Alternative Product Ban, Imposes New Regs

    Argentina introduced a comprehensive regulatory framework for nicotine products under Resolution 549/2026, establishing legal pathways for vapes, heated tobacco, and nicotine pouches while imposing strict requirements on registration, traceability, and product standards. The new rules replace a previously prohibitive regime and aim to bring a largely informal market under formal oversight, with mandatory ingredient disclosure, limits on nicotine content, and enforcement mechanisms targeting unregistered products.

    The framework also includes a ban on vape flavorings and is intended to strengthen inspection and taxation while addressing youth use and unregulated sales. Officials said the move seeks to formalize a market currently dominated by illicit trade, improve regulatory control, and integrate nicotine products into the legal and tax system, while maintaining public health safeguards.

  • Belgium to Ban Flavored Vapes from 2028

    Belgium to Ban Flavored Vapes from 2028

    Belgium announced it will ban flavored e-cigarettes starting September 1, 2028, allowing only tobacco and neutral flavors under a measure approved by the federal government on April 30. The policy, proposed by Health Minister Frank Vandenbroucke, is aimed at reducing youth vaping by removing flavors, which officials say increase product appeal among teenagers. Government data cited in the decision shows more than one in three individuals aged 15 to 20 have tried e-cigarettes.

    The measure follows recommendations from the Superior Health Council and aligns with similar restrictions implemented in the Netherlands. Authorities said the delayed implementation allows time for EU procedures and for retailers to clear existing inventory. Retail groups, including Perstablo, have opposed the move, warning it could expand the illicit market and negatively impact businesses.