Tag: vaping

Sullum: U.S. Congress Misguided on E-Cigarette Rules
Buried in the enormous spending/COVID-19 relief package that Congress approved this week is a bill that imposes new restrictions on the distribution of all vaping equipment, parts, and supplies, including a ban on mailing them. The provision illustrates not only how utterly irrelevant legislation can be slipped into unread, must-pass bills but also how Congress warps reality through legal fictions and uses save-the-children rhetoric to justify restricting adults’ choices, writes Jason Sullum in an opinion piece for Reason, a libertarian think tank.
Jacob Sullum / Credit: Reason
Title VI of the 2021 Consolidated Appropriations Act, which appears on page 5,136 of the 5,593-page bill, is called the Preventing Online Sales of E-Cigarettes to Children Act. The bill was introduced last April by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D–Calif.), joined by seven original cosponsors: six Democrats plus Sen. John Cornyn (R–Texas). It includes two changes aimed at complicating and obstructing online sales of vapes and e-liquid.
Feinstein’s bill amends the Jenkins Act of 1949, which requires that vendors who sell cigarettes to customers in other states register with the tax administrators in those states and notify them of all such sales so they can collect the taxes that the buyers are officially obligated to pay. In 2002, the General Accounting Office (now the Government Accountability Office) found that online cigarette sellers routinely flouted the Jenkins Act and that the federal government had done virtually nothing to enforce it. Nine years later, Congress amended the law, beefing up its reporting requirements and extending it to cover roll-your-own tobacco.
The Feinstein bill further expands the Jenkins Act, redefining cigarette to include “electronic nicotine delivery systems,” which are not cigarettes. It also counterintuitively defines electronic nicotine delivery system to include products that do not deliver nicotine: “any electronic device that, through an aerosolized solution, delivers nicotine, flavor, or any other substance to the user inhaling from the device” (emphasis added). That category includes e-cigarettes, e-hookahs, e-cigars, electronic pipes, vape pens, and refillable vaporizers, plus “any component, liquid, part, or accessory” used with those devices, whether shipped together with them or sold separately.
In other words, every product related to vaping, whether of nicotine, THC, CBD, lavender, or anything else, will now be subject to the Jenkins Act’s burdensome requirements. According to Feinstein, a bottle of e-liquid is a cigarette; so is a bottle of herbal essential oil if you plan to vape it. A coil or pod cartridge for a nicotine vaporizer is now also a cigarette; so is a vaporizer designed for THC or CBD oil.
Feinstein’s bill also requires the U.S. Postal Service to “clarify” that the ban on mailing cigarettes covers all of those products, which are not actually cigarettes and may not even have anything to do with nicotine. The new ban, disingenuously presented as a clarification of the existing ban, will take effect within 120 days of the law’s passage.
These reality-defying redefinitions ostensibly are aimed at preventing the sale of e-cigarettes to anyone younger than 21, the minimum age set by federal law. “Buying e-cigarettes online is one of the easiest ways for children and teens to get their hands on these harmful products,” Feinstein said when she introduced the bill. But the new burdens and restrictions go far beyond what is necessary to enforce the minimum purchase age. Requiring robust age verification for orders or an adult signature for deliveries, for example, would prevent sales to consumers younger than 21 without the expensive disruptions this law will cause.
“While there is no shortage of talk in Congress about the importance of small businesses and social distancing, the decision to shove this ban in the middle of a pandemic relief package reveals how hollow that rhetoric is,” says Gregory Conley, president of the American Vaping Association, an advocacy group that supports vaping as a harm-reducing alternative to smoking. “Many Americans at risk of COVID-19 complications have been staying home and ordering their supplies online, but Congress just decided they should either pay much more for shipping or go to a retail store that may not stock the product they use to stay off deadly cigarettes.”
Conley notes that shipping vaping products to minors is already illegal, and “the Food and Drug Administration has repeatedly enforced this law against bad actors in the industry.” While law-abiding vendors for years have been using the postal service’s ID-at-delivery option to comply with the age limit, “this will no longer be permitted.”
In short, a bill presented as a commonsensical effort to enforce the minimum purchase age is actually an assault on the vaping industry and its adult customers. “If the increase in shipping costs wasn’t enough, the bill also imposes huge paperwork burdens on small retailers, and backs it up with threats of imprisonment for even innocent mistakes,” Conley notes. “This is not a law designed to regulate the mail-order sale of vaping products to adults; it’s an attempt to eliminate it.”
Thanks to Feinstein’s sweeping and arbitrary definition of electronic nicotine delivery systems, the impact extends far beyond nicotine vaping. On its face, the law requires companies that sell cannabis vaping devices to comply with the Jenkins Act. It also prohibits them from mailing their products to customers. Although that is already arguably prohibited by federal law, the issue hinges on whether vaping equipment sold without any reference to cannabis nevertheless qualifies as “drug paraphernalia.” As written, the Feinstein bill also imposes these burdens on federally legal products such as CBD oil and herbal extracts used for aromatherapy.
“This could have a significant effect on cannabis vaping products, even if the intent is clearly to curb nicotine products,” Aaron Smith, CEO of the National Cannabis Industry Association, told Marijuana Moment. “We’re making sure that Congress and the incoming administration understand that it would be a misguided waste of resources to apply this to the already heavily regulated cannabis industry. In the long run, it’s important that cannabis is descheduled so it can be appropriately regulated at the federal level, clearing up ambiguities like this.”
Jacob Sullum is a senior editor at Reason.
December 26, 2020
Change of the Guard

What might the new U.S. President’s administration have in store for the vapor industry?
By Patricia Kovacevic
At the time of writing, the results of the U.S. elections are still contested by the presidential incumbent, a Republican, via various vote recount requests and litigation; however, it is a virtual certainty that the U.S. will have a new president, representing the Democratic Party, as of Jan. 20, 2021.
The heads of departments, including the head of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), are appointed by the president, subject to confirmation by the Senate, and typically change with the administration. In turn, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which is the agency within the HHS with primary jurisdiction over tobacco products (including electronic nicotine-delivery systems, or ENDS) as well as drugs, foods and other products, will be led in the new administration by a new commissioner.
Given the Covid-19 crisis, the new president will be under immense pressure to appoint a new FDA commissioner immediately. Interestingly and somewhat surprisingly, a former FDA commissioner, David Kessler, was recently named co-chair of the new administration’s Covid-19 task force, although Kessler resigned his commissioner role in November 1996 amid controversy for overbilling his travel expenses during his tenure.
Also during Kessler’s tenure, the FDA attempted to regulate tobacco products as “delivery devices for the drug nicotine” to bring tobacco products under FDA jurisdiction. Tobacco companies challenged the rules all the way to the Supreme Court and won (FDA v. Brown and Williamson Tobacco Corp.). The Supreme Court ruled that “Congress has clearly precluded the FDA from asserting jurisdiction to regulate tobacco products. Such authority is inconsistent with the intent that Congress has expressed in the FDCA’s [Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act] overall regulatory scheme and in the tobacco-specific legislation that it has enacted subsequent to the FDCA. In light of this clear intent, the FDA’s assertion of jurisdiction is impermissible.”
Kessler’s wish to see tobacco regulated by the FDA was eventually granted by Congress in June 2009 through the bipartisan passage of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. While some speculate that Kessler may be on the short list for HHS commissioner, it is likely that the administration will bring forward new faces. Still, Kessler’s life-long anti-tobacco stance and past working relationship with the current head of the Center for Tobacco Products might give an indication of the increased scrutiny of the tobacco sector in the years to come.
Patricia Kovacevic
The ENDS industry status quo, from a legislation point of view, while far from ideal, is by now familiar to the ENDS industry. The recent premarket tobacco product application (PMTA) filing deadline has come and gone, and, as expected, we have not seen a flurry of warning letters post-September 2020 ordering certain vapor manufacturers to stop selling their products because they did not submit a PMTA.
The FDA is, however, expected to start enforcing this legislation sooner or later. For any dramatic change to occur, the governing legislation, the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, would have to be amended, which is not likely to be top of the list for the upcoming Congress given the priorities the new administration announced during the election campaign. Still, the House of Representatives, one of the chambers of the U.S. legislature, remains dominated by the Democrats, the same party whose representatives initiated several tobacco-related bills and called for confrontational hearings on vapor products. The most recent one, in February 2020, was relatively tame compared with the tone of the July 2019 Juul hearing and even with the June 2014 Senate hearing.
Senate races in Georgia will require runoff elections on Jan. 5, 2021. If Democrats gain both Senate seats in Georgia in January, there would be a 50-50 tie in the Senate, and the vice president would have the tie-breaking vote in case the Senate is deadlocked on a piece of legislation. When the House, Senate and White House are controlled by the same party, the chances of the current administration to pass laws in support of its agenda are greatly increased, though divisions exist within each party, and surprises always happen. Furthermore, 34 out of the 100 Senate seats are up for regular election in two years as well as all 435 House seats; these will be a trying two years for Americans in an economic crisis, and the public sentiment can swing in the other direction. Thus, the new president may have only two years, if even that long, to pass a flurry of laws, and there may be more urgent matters than revisiting the Tobacco Control Act, which, for better or for worse, has worked so far.
The FDA already has broad powers to expand requirements and restrictions involving ENDS products, including the authority to impose product standards through notice-and-comment rulemaking. Ingredient caps and bans are among the standards the FDA has the authority to promulgate via regulation.
The latest unified agenda of regulatory and deregulatory actions
As of spring 2020, active regulatory actions include four potential future regulatory actions by the FDA, rolled over from previous agendas, with no clear deadline for publication of a proposed rule:
Requirements for Tobacco Product Manufacturing Practice (colloquially referred to as “Good Manufacturing Practices”)
Tobacco Product Standard for Characterizing Flavors in Cigars (follow-up to the 2018 Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking); this is unlikely to move into the final rule stage on account of recent courtroom successes by the cigar industry.
Modified-risk tobacco product applications; this future proposed rule would establish content and format requirements to ensure that modified-risk tobacco product applications contain sufficient information for the FDA to determine whether it should permit the marketing of a modified-risk tobacco product. Additionally, the proposed rule would set forth the basic procedures for modified-risk tobacco product application review and require applicants receiving authorization to market a modified-risk tobacco product to establish and maintain records, conduct post-market surveillance and studies, and submit annual reports to the FDA.
Premarket tobacco product applications and recordkeeping requirements, a 2019 proposed rule, which would have as a next step at some point in the future, likely in 2020, a final rule.
Notably, ingredient bans and nicotine caps are not on the regulatory agenda. A first step toward an ingredient ban would likely be an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM), although the FDA can in theory skip this step and move directly to a proposed rule, open a docket for comment, collect comments and consider whether it has sufficient information to finalize the rule. Given the complexity of the issue and the current research focusing on flavor ingredients in ENDS, if the FDA determines that an exploration of a flavor ban is desirable, the FDA will probably go through the ANPRM step.
One would have to wonder, though, why engage in rulemaking when the FDA already reviews all relevant information about every ENDS product on the U.S. market, present and future, through the PMTA process—thus allowing the agency to make a case-by-case determination—and the FDA will no doubt pay considerable attention to certain flavored products. In the author’s personal opinion, the PMTA process is the FDA’s preferred avenue to make decisions on individual products rather than issuing rules on product categories, which can also be challenged—and the current Supreme Court might entertain challenges to the FDA’s behavior if it came to it down the road.
Meanwhile, the majority of states by number still lean conservative, which likely means fewer developments in taxation, some scrutiny of ENDS but not necessary priority placed on shrinking the lawful ENDS market as there is no immediately quantifiable health benefit from doing so, and many potential harms. Of note are the California litigation and the potential referendum in California to overturn SB 793 (the flavor ban legislation). By the time this you read this article, we should know whether the bill opponents succeeded at collecting the necessary signatures to place the referendum on the November 2022 California elections ballot and suspend the application of the California flavor ban until then and pending the referendum’s outcome.
The question we must also ask, given the political, public health and economic crisis context is whether ENDS are a threat to anyone and why any administration would, at this juncture, prioritize overregulating a harm reduction asset over the important, systemic changes Americans expect from the administration and drastically mitigating the Covid impact. The industry is likely to consolidate and survive.
A global legal and compliance nicotine industry expert, Patricia I. Kovacevic has experience that includes general counsel and chief compliance officer roles at Nicopure Labs as well as leading senior legal and regulatory positions at Philip Morris International and Lorillard. Kovacevic served on the board of directors of the Vapor Technology Association and on the advisory board of the Global Tobacco & Nicotine Forum. She is the founder of RegulationStrategy, a global legal and compliance FDA-regulated industry consultancy.
December 23, 2020
China: Vapor Market Booming Despite Online Sales Ban

Photo: Timothy Donahue
China’s vapor market has mushroomed offline after the country banned online sales of e-cigarettes about a year ago, reports Bloomberg. Not even the coronavirus has stopped the expansion.
RELX Technology, the country’s largest player, opened more than 1,000 stores in the first half of 2020, and said in January it planned to add 10,000 outlets within the next three years. Its rival, Yooz, has also boosted the number of stores.
Shares in Smoore International Holdings, the world’s largest maker of vaping devices and components for brands, have more than quadrupled in value since the company’s July debut, making it one of Hong Kong’s best-performing initial public offerings of the year. RELX and Yooz are both clients of Smoore.
Smoore founder Chen Zhiping’s net worth has surged to $14.2 billion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index.
While the coronavirus outbreak affected Smoore’s production and operations in the first quarter of the year, it still managed to post a 19 percent increase in revenue to CNY3.9 billion ($592 million) for the first six months, with more than half of its sales coming from mainland China and Hong Kong.
Smoore held one-sixth of the global market share for vaping products by revenue last year, and that pie is poised to grow further, according to Frost & Sullivan data it cited in its prospectus. The $36.7 billion global e-cigarette market will reach $111.5 billion by 2024, increasing at an annual compound rate of 25 percent, projections show.
Mounting restrictions on vapor products globally, including a ban on certain e-cigarette flavor in the world’s largest vapor market, the United States, haven’t scared off investors. Stocks linked to China’s consumer sector have been particularly popular this year as the nation has been among the first to emerge from the pandemic.
December 22, 2020
U.S. Congress Bans USPS From Mailing ENDS Products
The U.S. Congress has banned all electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) products from being mailed by the United States Postal Service (USPS). The rule change was lumped into the Covid-19/ omnibus budget bill passed yesterday. The proposal, collectively called the Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2021, now awaits a signature from President Trump to become law. Trump is expected to sign the bill later today.
Credit: Motion Studios
The updated provision redefines the word “cigarette” under the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking Act (PACT Act), which is part of the federal Jenkins Act, to include ENDS products.
By including ENDS products within the PACT Act, manufacturers and retailers will be banned from shipping vaping products to consumers using the USPS within the next 120 days. All orders of vaping products will be required to ship using an alternate (and considerably more expensive) service that verifies the recipient of a package is at least 21 years old.
Beginning 90 days after enactment, all online retailers also will be required to file monthly reports with native, state and local governments disclosing the identity, address and product received for all customers, as well as remit any excise taxes owed.
Many vaping industry advocates are angered by the text of the proposal because legislators used an expansive definition of what qualifies as an “electronic nicotine delivery system” that seems to include products that may not contain nicotine. The term “means any electronic device that, through an aerosolized solution, delivers nicotine, flavor, or any other substance to the user inhaling from the device,” the legislation states.
Greg Conley, president of the American Vaping Association, said that despite the inclusion of the word “nicotine,” the definition used in the bill is so broad that it appears to capture vaping liquids containing CBD and standalone devices intended for vaping THC or other substances.
“The sponsors of this legislation repeatedly refused to consider common sense amendments that would have protected youth, while also not needlessly shutting down small businesses. Thanks to their intransigence, the language included in the omnibus is so sloppily drafted that it will also ban the USPS from shipping CBD liquids intended to be vaporized, as well as devices intended for use with THC or other non-nicotine substances,” said Conley. “There are still 36 million American adults smoking combustible cigarettes and over 400,000 will die from smoking-related illnesses this year alone. The American people should start questioning why their government is so intent on making it harder for adults to quit smoking.”
According to its website, UPS prohibits the shipment of all cigarettes and little cigars to consumers, regardless of destination state. Other tobacco product shipments must be made using the “UPS Delivery Confirmation Adult Signature Required service, requiring the signature of an adult 21 years of age or older upon delivery.”
Trump has the authority to use a line item veto on the provision and still pass the larger bill, though that is not expected.
December 22, 2020
Australia Tightens Rules for Nicotine E-Liquid Imports

Photo: Taco Tuinstra
Australians importing liquid nicotine for e-cigarettes will need to have a prescription from Oct. 1, reports The Sydney Morning Herald, citing the country’s medical watchdog.
The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) said its decision balanced consumer demand for the product as a smoking cessation aid and the potential for nicotine e-cigarettes to lead to addiction.
“A patient’s doctor is uniquely placed to give the support required for long-lasting smoking cessation,” the agency said, adding that it had not yet approved any vapor product as a smoking-cessation aid.
In response to the TGA’s decision, the government will scrap contentious customs regulations, which included a fine of up to $200,000 for those illegally importing nicotine. The regulation was opposed by a large group of backbenchers, and due to kick in from the start of next year.
The possession of nicotine-containing e-cigarettes is illegal without a prescription in every state and territory, besides South Australia.
Health Minister Greg Hunt said it was important to note that any doctor could prescribe nicotine-based e-cigarettes.
“This is not widely understood, and it is an important matter of public information that over 30,000 GPs may currently, and in the future, prescribe nicotine-based e-cigarettes for smoking cessation,” he said.
Critics say Australia’s prescription-only policy is hampered by the reluctance of many general practitioners to prescribe liquid nicotine and by a requirement to seek a special exemption for each patient.
December 21, 2020
Bangkok Authorities Seize $335,000 in Illegal E-Cigarettes
Four people have been arrested and 10 million baht worth of e-cigarettes and related items seized in Bangkok following an investigation into illegal online sales of the banned products.
Credit Jim Moylan

The arrests followed a raid by police from the Central Investigation Bureau (CIB) of a warehouse in Kheha Rom Klao Soi 27 in the Rat Phattana area of Saphan Sung district on Friday, according to the Bangkok Post.
The officers seized 50,000 bottles of refill liquid for e-cigarettes, 10,000 refill pods, 1,500 e-cigarettes and 80 boxes of related products worth a total of at least 10 million baht ($335,814), CIB commissioner Police Lt. Gen. Torsak Sukwimol said during a briefing on Saturday.
One woman and three men were arrested. All were charged with colluding in the sale of banned products in violation of the Consumer Protection Act.
Torsak said the CIB had received complaints that e-cigarettes and refill products of various brands were being sold via Facebook. Administrators of the page claimed that their products were made from dried fruits and posed no harm to users.
CIB investigators found that the Facebook page had been active for three years. Female presenters or “pretties” were hired to promote the products, which drew many purchase orders, said Torsak.
The investigators then sought a warrant from the Criminal Court to search the warehouse that led to the seizure of the products, which were imported from China.
Authorities said they would also call the product presenters in for questioning.
The government passed a law banning the sale of e-cigarettes in 2014. Authorities have said import and use is banned for health reasons and because electronic cigarettes lure young people into becoming smokers.
December 20, 2020
Health Canada Wants Lower Nicotine Limits for E-Cigarettes
Health Canada wants to lower the nicotine limits for e-cigarettes to 20 mg/ml. The current limit is 66 mg/ml.
Minister of Health Patty Hajdu announced a public consultation on Dec. 18, inviting Canadians to share their thoughts on the proposal by March. 4
According to the government, the proposed changes build on existing measures to address the rise in youth vaping, including extensive public education campaigns and banning the advertising of vaping products in public spaces if the ads can be seen or heard by youth.
Health Canada is also considering to further restrict flavors in vaping products. It wants to require the vapor industry to provide more information about its products, including on sales, ingredients and research and development activities.
“Our work to protect Canadians from the harms of vaping products continues. These changes will help reduce the appeal of vaping products to youth,” said Hajdu in a statement.
The Canadian Cancer Society (CCS) welcomed the plans. “The proposed regulations requiring a maximum nicotine concentration for vaping products of 20 mg/mL are essential to reduce youth vaping and deserve strong support,” said CCS Senior Policy Analyst Rob Cunningham.
The Canadian Vaping Association (CVA) urged the government to balance youth protection with adult harm reduction. “It is without question that Canada must act to restrict nicotine concentrations to protect youth, but it should not be an all-or-nothing approach,” the association wrote in a press note.
“Ontario has restricted high nicotine products to age-restricted environments, effectively eliminating all retail access points for youth. This policy has proven effective in mitigating youth use while balancing the needs of adult smokers. The CVA encourages the government of Canada to adopt this policy federally,” said Darryl Tempest, executive director of the CVA.
December 20, 2020
Studies Show Vaping Reduces Smoking Related Illnesses
By Tim Sandle
Three recent studies demonstrate the potential for improved health effects that can come from the use of e-cigarettes, when such vaping products are used on a permanent basis and the use of all tobacco products is halted.
Credit: TTI
The arguments used to promote the use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) and other vaping products is with a reduction in the risk of cardiovascular disease or cancer, and as a strategy to decrease the addiction to conventional cigarettes.
Other smoking related diseases include risk of lung disease, including lung cancer and emphysema. The research areas that support this have been provided by trade site Vapor Solo. In relation to the research, a review commissioned by Public Health England concluded that e-cigarettes were 95 percent less harmful than tobacco.
The first set of research is from the University of Dundee, U.K., drawing on an extensive clinical trial into the cardiovascular effect
CARDIOVASCULAR HEALTH
The second area of research relates to a trial that found that patients (114 in total) who switched from smoking to vaping experience a 1.5 percentage point improvement with their blood vessel function, as demonstrated across a four week period. This improvement was as measured against conventional cigarette users. Heart health was assessed using a Fibromuscular Dysplasia (FMD) test, to assess how far a blood vessel opens.
Further studies from the research team are underway to measure the effects over a longer time period across which the broader effects of cardiovascular health can be assessed, including the risk of heart attacks. The results are supported by a second study from the Vanderbilt University Medical Center, U.S.
This research strand showed that heavy cigarette smokers with at least a 20 pack-year smoking history can reduce their risk of cardiovascular disease by 39 percent within five years if they switch to e-cigarettes or quit altogether. In a follow-up letter to The Lancet, the researchers “estimate that e-cigarettes are 95% less harmful to users than smoking. Or, as we prefer, smoking is estimated to be twenty times more harmful to users than vaping e-cigarettes.”
CANCER DEVELOPMENT
A similar investigation, this time into the risk of developing cancers, was conducted between the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Roswell Park Cancer Institute, U.S., and the University College London., U.K. This study was slightly larger, taking in 181 smokers in order to assess the long-term effects of vaping.
The smoker group included users of electronic cigarettes and conventional tobacco products. To determine the health variance, those involved in the study volunteered to provide saliva, breath, and urine samples. Qualitative questionnaires were also completed.
The data indicated that levels of carcinogens (including tobacco specific nitrosamines, which are one of the most important carcinogens in tobacco formed from nicotine) taken from former smokers who had switched to e-cigarettes were significantly lower compared with regular users of smoking tobacco products.
People who used both types of products, so-termed ‘combination smokers’ did not experience any significant health improvements. The third study was published in the peer-reviewed journal: Annals of Internal Medicine, titled “Nicotine, Carcinogen, and Toxin Exposure in Long-Term E-Cigarette and Nicotine Replacement Therapy Users: A Cross-sectional Study.”
This article first appeared on Newshour.com.
December 18, 2020
Estonia Exempts E-liquids From Vapor Tax Until 2022
On Wednesday, the Riigikogu, the unicameral parliament of Estonia, passed an amendment that exempts e-liquids from its excise duty until the end of 2022. By suspending the collection of excise duty, entrepreneurs will be given the opportunity to reduce the price of e-liquid and thus create an incentive for users to purchase products from Estonian sales outlets, not from border trade or the black market, according to Estonian officials.
Credit: Crew2139
The amendments will take effect on April 1, 2021. According to the amendments, excise duty on e-cigarette liquids will be suspended until the end of 2022. Also, the Alcohol, Tobacco, Fuel and Electricity Excise Duty Act will not apply to e-cigarette liquids during that time. During the period when e-liquids are not subject to excise duty, e-cigarette tax stamps do not give rise to an obligation to pay excise duty.
Tarmo Kruusimäe, chairman of the Riigikogu’s smoke-free Estonia support group, said the amendment will help better the health of the Estonian people.
“From June 1, 2018, an extremely high excise duty on e-cigarette liquids came into force in Estonia, as a result of which the black market and cross-border trade flourished. By suspending the collection of excise duties for two years, we are giving traders the opportunity to lower the prices of e-liquid products,” Kruusimäe said, according to an article in the err.ee.
The break in excise duty payment provides an opportunity to change the habits of consumers by redirecting them back to legal, laboratory-tested products, according to Kruusimäe. He also said that Estonia’s tobacco policy so far has been only based on scolding, without the realization that it is not easy for people to overcome an addiction.
“Estonia ranks third in Europe in tobacco deaths. Proven and less harmful alternative tobacco products are helping people quit cigarettes. By offering alternatives, we help maintain the health of the Estonian people,” he said.
Altogether 53 MPs on Wednesday voted in favor of the bill of amendment to the Alcohol, Tobacco, Fuel and Electricity Excise Duty Act initiated by Isamaa, the Estonian Conservative People’s Party (EKRE) and the Center Party.
December 17, 2020
China: Government May Boost Oversight of Vapor Market

Photo: Taco Tuinstra
The Chinese government may tighten its grip on e-cigarettes, according to a new report from eCigIntelligence.
Legally, the China National Tobacco Co. (CTNC) has a monopoly over both combustible and vapor products, but the organization has not exercised its authority to date. According to the report, that could change in the future.
There are three possible scenarios, according to the market intelligence provider: “One possible scenario is that the government may allow private companies to continue operations but under close observation to ensure their products do not target non-smokers or minors.
“The government could also decide to crack down on the e-cig market, which as the report explains would have a significant negative impact on the growth in sales of tobacco-alternative products in the country. A third scenario would involve the China National Tobacco Company extending its existing control over traditional cigarettes to vaping products.”
December 17, 2020