Tag: Vapor Technology Association

Legislative Outlook for 2023: ‘Better Than 2022’

With Republicans in control of the U.S. House, some experts expect the vape industry to thrive.
By Timothy S. Donahue
The next two years should be better than the past two years. That was the overall outlook from vapor industry experts speaking during the Vapor Technology Association’s (VTA) 2022 Post-Election Round-Up webinar in late November. Tony Abboud, executive director of the VTA, told attendees that his organization has been working diligently with two Washington, D.C.-based firms, West Front Strategies, a lobbying group, and FORA Partners, a public affairs agency, to promote the interests of the vaping industry as Republicans take over the U.S. House of Representatives in 2023. “We have a very specific agenda, some of which we’ve discussed (as an overview of what) we are pursuing,” he said. “We’ve done an enormous amount of groundwork.”
Shimmy Stein
Shimmy Stein, a partner with West Front Strategies, said the change in leadership at the House could have a positive impact on the vaping industry until at least the next election cycle. “Anytime you can take over the gavels, take over the control of the messaging, take over control of the chairmanships and the legislation, that is an important piece of governing,” he explained. “And so, while it was not to the extent or to the size which Republicans were hoping for in terms of the majority in the House of Representatives, it’s still pretty significant and will change the manner in which Washington will function.”
Over the next two years, the vaping industry should feel “a little more comfortable, a little more secure” going into a divided Congress (the U.S. Senate leadership did not change), according to Craig Kalkut, a partner with West Front Strategies. However, the vaping industry has always faced threats from both Democrats and Republicans due to their concerns over teen vaping. “We still need to work with both parties. We still could face issues and threats of overregulation and poorly conceived legislation. But the bottom line is that we will have a more comfortable environment with Republicans controlling one house of Congress,” said Kalkut.
Craig Kalkut
Reconciliation, a way for Congress to enact legislation on taxes, spending and the debt limit with only a majority vote, is no longer a threat to the vapor industry, according to Kalkut. He said that’s just not something that can happen in a divided Congress. “What that means, ultimately, is that anything that passes will need to have bipartisan support,” said Kalkut. “And because of that, [legislation] will likely be more limited, more moderate, and hopefully, if there’s any legislation passed in our area, that will be something that allows us to thrive, which addresses the concerns that linger over teen vaping but does not overregulate and drive people away from vaping.”
Kalkut also confirmed that gridlock is a concern in a divided Congress; however, gridlock could also provide incentives for both parties to compromise. “They’re both seen as in charge, so they both sometimes want to get something done. And that will bring people to the table and often over issues that are not central to either party’s ideology,” he said. “It’s hard to come to a compromise on taxes, or it’s hard to come to a compromise on healthcare … but something like vaping, perhaps there will be opportunity for common sense provisions to prevail in an area where Democrats and Republicans can come together.”
Max Hamel
Max Hamel, founding partner of FORA, said when Congress is split, the White House typically relies heavily on its executive privilege. There is no known administration agenda on vaping, so a vaping-related rule is unlikely. With Republicans in control of the House, they also head committees. The House oversight committee and its subcommittees could present opportunity for the vaping industry, according to Hamel.
“We do have new personalities on both the majority and the minority side, so they’ll probably have some growing pains,” he said. “The big question is, how does this new authority, especially in the House, get wielded[?] … whether it’s one seat or 40 seats, the authority with the majority is the same, and it is substantial from [an] investigation and oversight standpoint; [that’s] probably not necessarily true from a legislative standpoint … the oversight subcommittee, we do have the opportunity to surface some things, but it’s really an opportunity for us now to not be on defense and [to] put forth an agenda and some messaging that really focuses on the things that are advantageous to us.”
Additionally, with Juul losing its stranglehold on the vaping market, Hamel said the vaping landscape is changing. Juul became the focus to save youth from vaping, and today, Juul isn’t the focus. The market is made up of a more diverse group of companies with different technologies dedicated to harm reduction. Hamel said this is the message that should be projected. “I think our priority will be focusing on the messages that really emphasize the harm reduction aspects,” he said.
Kalkut then added that the vaping industry has an opportunity now to change the conversation, particularly with Democrats but also Republican critics and skeptics of vaping through the ever-expanding body of science that shows the relative safety and incredible potential for harm reduction that next-generation tobacco products have. “That has become more and more clear as time has gone on over the last couple of years,” he said. “I think once we show that, once we demonstrate our commitment as an association in the industry to addressing teen vaping, we have a real chance of changing the narrative.”
Ashley Davis
Ashley Davis, a founding partner at West Front Strategies, told attendees that, looking back on industry challenges, there has been success. However, her concerns going into the last Congress (2020–2022) were that she didn’t really know in what direction or how forcefully Biden would lean on the vapor industry. She says the industry “dodged a bullet.” The industry could have suffered more than it did those first two years in a Biden administration. She also said the issue of youth use will remain at the forefront of any discussion concerning electronic nicotine-delivery system products.
“We do have to still deal with the youth issue. And I think we all realize that any negative press that comes up is around the youth issue … Everyone loves a microphone. It’s a member of Congress. If there’s an issue to discuss, that’s what they’re going to discuss,” explained Davis. “[We are] trying to make sure that any bad legislation is not passed—it’s much more unlikely in this Congress than it was before.”
Taking a question from the audience, Abboud closed the session speculating on the impact of the Reagan-Udall Foundation’s external review of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Tobacco Products, the results of which are expected in mid-December.
Abboud said that numerous comments from staffers of the FDA for the Reagan-Udall assessment suggest the regulatory agency is in a state of disarray and is being influenced by outside forces not scientific research. He said he hopes the foundation will advise the FDA that premarket tobacco product application (PMTA) decisions should be free from any external pressures, especially political pressure.
“[The review should recommend to the FDA that PMTA] decisions must be made based upon the science that is submitted as well as making sure that the agency does, in fact, review all of the science that has been submitted as part of any applications as well as [reviewing] all of the applications that have [been] submitted,” said Abboud. “Because that was another big failing of the current process where applications have been rejected [without a full review].”

December 29, 2022
Vape Group Files Amicus Brief Over Flavor Ban

Photo: David
The Vapor Technology Association (VTA) has filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in support of a petition for writ of certiorari in a case against L.A. County’s ordinance banning flavored tobacco products.
Citing the substantial impact on America’s economy created by the sale of tobacco products, the trade group says Supreme Court review of the flavor ban is critical.
According to an economic impact report prepared by John Dunham and Associates, the independent vapor industry comprises more than 10,000 companies across the United States and is responsible for generating more than 130,000 jobs and more than $22 billion in economic activity for the U.S. economy.
In its amicus brief, the VTA argues that this industry would be devastated by unrestricted flavor bans given its unique and substantial reliance on the sale of flavored vapor products to adult consumers.
The trade group also notes that since the passage of the L.A. County Ordinance, leading tobacco control scientists have challenged the notion of banning e-cigarette flavors and have warned that decreasing availability of flavored vaping products harms the ability of adult smokers to quit smoking cigarettes.
Instead of blanket bans, these tobacco control scientists endorse alternative time, place and manner restrictions for the sale of flavored vaping products, the VTA notes in its amicus brief.
Permitting local and state governments to implement unscientific bans that directly interfere with the fundamental purpose of the Tobacco Control Act and would overrule the Food and Drug Administration’s decision-making for products deemed appropriate for the protection of public health is not only unlawful but is dangerous from a public health perspective, the VTA wrote.
Tobacco and vape flavor bans have gained momentum in the U.S. On Nov. 8, Californians voted to uphold a state law ending the sale of most flavored tobacco products.
November 17, 2022
VTA Skeptical of FDA’s Latest Youth Vaping Analysis

After the U.S. Food and Drug Administration released its latest National Youth Tobacco Survey, Vapor Technology Association (VTA) Executive Director Tony Abboud said the FDA’s reporting of the data is misleading.
“Yesterday, the FDA, in coordination with the [U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ], released new data from the 2022 National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS) on e-cigarette use among U.S. youth,” Abboud stated. “The FDA represents the NYTS data to show that youth vaping ‘remains high,’ yet a deeper dive into the data show only a small uptick in experimental or infrequent use while regular use remains flat or is slightly down.
Abboud notes that since 2019, according to the CDC, the number of high school students who have tried vaping (1 time in the last 30 days) has dropped by 50 percent, and the number of middle school students has plummeted by 70 percent. During that same time period, the number of high-school students who ‘frequently’ vape dropped by 37 percent and the number of middle school students dropped by 65 percent.
” FDA’s near single-minded focus on youth who experiment with vaping versus those who are frequent users ignores what clearly is a consistent trend of youth away from vaping products. Rather than focusing on removing products from the market in an attempt to impact youth vaping, the FDA should instead support common-sense regulatory reforms that would better restrict access to products instead,” Abboud stated. “Simply removing products from the market is not the answer when those products are also proven to help adult smokers quit.”
Abboud explained that it is well documented that flavored vapor products help adult smokers to switch to less harmful vaping and “study after study after study” has confirmed the data. Since 2010, when e-cigarettes became widely available in the U.S., smoking rates have declined by more than half, he stated.
“Tobacco use is down. Youth vaping is down. These are both good things and are not in dispute. Unfortunately, there are still 40 million Americans addicted to cigarettes,” Abboud stated. “Every year, 500,000 die from smoking-related diseases and yet less than three percent of our kids are using vapes on a regular basis. The FDA’s failure to acknowledge this reality ignores the role vaping plays in harm reduction and smoking cessation, and puts more lives at risk.”
October 9, 2022
VTA Files Amicus Brief in Triton PMTA Lawsuit

Credit: William A. Morgan
The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals granted the Vapor Technology Association’s (VTA) unopposed motion to file an amicus brief in support of Petitioners’ Petition for a Rehearing En Banc in the case Wages & White Lion Investments, a/k/a/ Triton Distribution v. FDA.
Recently, a panel of 5th Circuit judges denied Triton Distribution’s appeal of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s marketing denial order for its flavored e-liquid products in a 2-1 decision. Thereafter, Triton filed a petition for en banc review, asking the entire 5th Circuit to reconsider the ruling.
The VTA’s amicus brief supports Triton’s request by explaining that it involves issues of “exceptional importance” necessitating review by the entire 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.
The VTA’s amicus brief highlights three key points: economist John Dunham and Associates’ evaluation of the adverse economic impact that the ruling would have if it led to the removal of all flavored open system vaping products from the states comprising the 5th Circuit (Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas); the leading tobacco control scientists who have warned that removing flavors will deter adult smokers from quitting and have recommended limiting the sale of flavored vaping products to adult-only stores; and the results of the VTA’s analysis of the FDA’s compliance data between Jan. 1, 2020, and June 30, 2022, which reveal that the rate of illegal youth sales of cigarettes and cigars are twice the rate of vaping products.
September 12, 2022
VTA: Give Menthol Smokers Alternatives

Photo: Andrey Popov
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s proposal to a menthol flavored cigarettes will improve public health only if there are viable menthol and flavored vapor products on the market, according to the Vapor Technology Association (VTA).
In April, the FDA announced a plan to ban the sale mentholated cigarettes, which account for about one-third of the U.S. market. The public was invited to share its thoughts on the measures and the official comment period ended Aug. 2.
In its official comment submission to the agency’s proposed product standards, the VTA urges the FDA to continue to build an “offramp” to menthol and flavored vaping products for smokers to access effective smoking alternatives.
“The menthol cigarette rule “has the potential to dramatically reducing cigarette smoking—the leading cause of death and disease of Americans—but only if the agency heeds the warning of scientists that menthol smokers must have access to less harmful vaping and other alternative nicotine products,” the VTA wrote in a statement.
“These limitations threaten to take what should be a public health victory and turn it into a half measure that, in the absence of other decisive action from the FDA, will fall far short of the benefits the agency claims.”
“FDA’s own proffered scientific experts acknowledge that at least 50 percent, and in some cases a larger percentage, of smokers will continue to smoke cigarettes or other combustible products after the menthol cigarette rule is put into effect unless provided access to effective alternatives.
“To fulfill its own harm reduction mission, the agency must use its PMTA process to ensure a rational, regulated legal marketplace with suitable less harmful non-combustible alternatives,” the VTA wrote.
August 6, 2022
Abboud: Congress Intended for FDA to Use Discretion

Credit: Sagittarius Pro
By Tony Abboud
Under the new law governing synthetic nicotine products signed on March 15, 2022, Congress imposed a short 60-day deadline for companies to file premarket tobacco product applications (PMTAs) and declared that if such applications were not approved within 120 days (the Act) they would be “in violation of” the Federal Food Drug & Cosmetic Act’s (FDCA) PMTA requirement.
Since no authorizations have been granted as of today, the question is will FDA use its enforcement discretion to continue reviewing PMTAs, or will it precipitously declare that all synthetic nicotine products must be removed from the market after July 13, 2022?
There is no question that the FDA should use its enforcement discretion. In a series of direct engagements with FDA since the Act’s passage, the Vapor Technology Association (VTA) has provided a complete set of scientific and policy justifications for synthetic nicotine products, and specific recommendations on how FDA should use its enforcement discretion – just as it has in the past – to allow synthetic nicotine products to remain on the market during the PMTA review process.
However, some have suggested that Congress mandated all products be removed from the market this week if they are not approved by FDA. But a close review of the Act reveals that the opposite is true: Congress did not require synthetic nicotine products with pending PMTAs to be removed from the market after July 13.
In interpreting laws, a court will first look to the plain language of the Act and, only if there is an ambiguity, will it look to Congressional intent to resolve such a question. Here, both support the FDA’s continued use of enforcement discretion for pending PMTAs.
The Plain Language Supports Enforcement Discretion
There are four relevant sections of the Act. First, under Section (d)(2)(A), Congress expressly stated that “as a condition to market” all manufacturers wishing to continue selling their products must file a PMTA no later than May 14, 2022.
Tony Abboud
Second, under Section (d)(2)(B), Congress expressly stated that companies which filed PMTAs “may continue to market” their products during what the Act calls a “transition period.”
Third, under Section (d)(2)(C), Congress expressly required that if a company did not file a PMTA for its synthetic products by May 14, 2022, that company is “not eligible for continued marketing.” In each of these sections, Congress expressly uses some variation of the term “market” to articulate its direction on what may (not) be marketed and when.
However, in the operative Section (d)(3), which addresses what happens after July 13, 2022, Congress makes no statement regarding marketing at all. Instead, it states that products with pending PMTAs not yet approved would be “in violation of…section 910” of the FDCA (21 USC 387g).
When presented with this question, a court likely would rule that because Congress did not expressly state that pending applicants are “not eligible for continued marketing” or that they “may not market” after July 13, as it clearly said in the immediately preceding sections, Congress did not require the removal of products with pending PMTAs.
This places synthetic nicotine products with pending PMTAs in precisely the same position as all other products with pending PMTAs which, for years, FDA has made clear are “illegal” (i.e., in violation of section 910) but are allowed to remain on the market at FDA’s enforcement discretion.
Congressional Intent Supports Enforcement Discretion
Even if a court finds that Section (d)(3) is ambiguous, there is nothing in Congressional intent that would lead to the conclusion that Congress intended for products with pending PMTAs to be removed from the market.
First, Congress could have banned synthetic nicotine products, if that is what it intended, but it did not do so. To the contrary, Congress expressly authorized manufacturers to bring new products to market after the Act’s passage. Thus, it would be folly to suggest that Congress intended all synthetic nicotine products be removed from the market without PMTA review.
Second, Congressional intent is generally divined by on the record statements made in committee hearings and in floor debate (not from press releases or media statements). But there is little to nothing which a court could rely on [with] this question because the provision was quietly slipped into the Ukraine-omnibus spending bill with no relevant hearing or floor debate.
Third, Congress was fully aware that FDA could not review PMTAs within 180 days (as required under the FDCA). In fact, the FDA told a court it will not be finished reviewing tobacco derived PMTAs until June of 2023. Thus, no one could suggest that there ever was any reasonable expectation or intent that the FDA would rule on synthetic nicotine PMTAs in 60 days.
Hence, the only reasonable conclusion that can be drawn from the plain language and Congressional intent is that Congress did not require removal of products with pending PMTAs but, rather, expected the FDA to continue to use its discretion in enforcing its PMTA regulation after July 13.
Congress did, however, expressly state that products for which no PMTA was timely filed have no continuing ability to market, authorizing the FDA to take immediate action. VTA has repeatedly communicated to the FDA the need for it to aggressively remove all tobacco products from the market for which no PMTA has been filed and to publish a list of all products covered by a synthetic nicotine PMTA so that retailers know which products can be sold.
A Careful and Complete Evaluation of Synthetic Nicotine PMTAs is Required
We live in a world that remains captive to [combustible] cigarettes. Congress won’t ban them and Congress has prevented the FDA from doing so. While electronic nicotine-delivery system (ENDS) products offer a technological solution to delivering nicotine in a substantially less harmful way, synthetic nicotine now represents the first technological innovation in nicotine itself.
Synthetic nicotine uniquely offers consumers the cleanest and purest form of nicotine with numerous benefits, i.e., the absence of heavy metals, nitrosamines, and pesticides. Synthetic nicotine uniquely offers consumers the opportunity to break free from the last remaining vestige of the tobacco plant.
Synthetic nicotine uniquely offers the FDA unprecedented product constituent clarity, replicability, and traceability down to the batch level. Not only does synthetic nicotine offer companies the opportunity to change the dynamics regarding total reliance on tobacco-derived nicotine for all tobacco and pharmaceutical nicotine products, but it also provides companies the ability to address their ESG [sustainability] goals and take a significant step to ameliorate the adverse environmental impacts of tobacco.
Our message to the FDA has been constructive and clear: it is critical to the adult smoker that FDA takes aggressive steps to create an orderly and regulated marketplace with a diversity of desirable nicotine alternatives.
Given recent history with tobacco derived PMTAs, the best way for FDA to realize that objective now is to avoid the blanket denial mistakes of the past which have mired the agency in protracted litigation. Such litigation will only delay the time until we achieve an orderly and regulated marketplace.
Instead, we have asked the FDA to work companies which timely filed synthetic nicotine PMTAs – the good actors – through the PMTA scientific process and provide them the requisite time and guidance to fulfill FDA’s requirements.
At the same time, we have asked the FDA to aggressively enforce against the non-compliant companies that have refused participate in the PMTA process – the bad actors – by interdicting such products at the border and removing such products from the market Congress has clearly required.
In the end, it is incumbent on the new FDA leadership to use its power to create an orderly marketplace by embracing scientific innovations, stimulating additional financial investment, accelerating authorizations of pending tobacco-derived PMTAs, and ensuring that synthetic nicotine products which now contain the cleanest and purest form of nicotine that science has created are available to adult smokers.
Tony Abboud serves as president for Strategic Government Solutions, Inc., and executive director of the Vapor Technology Association (VTA).
July 12, 2022
VTA Meets With FDA for 2nd Time on Synthetic Nicotine
The Vapor Technology Association (VTA) has again met with the U.S. Food & Drug Administration’s Center for Tobacco Products (CTP) to help clarify any questions the regulatory agency may have surrounding synthetic nicotine.
VTA representatives met with dozens of CTP regulators from seven different offices inside CTP to confront any concerns about premarket tobacco product applications (PMTAs) for synthetic products that are due on May 14, according to a VTA email.
Credit: Opolja
During the meeting, several speakers joined the VTA in shedding light on how synthetic nicotine is manufactured, its purity, and its similarities and differences compared to tobacco-derived nicotine. Dr. Bill Jackson, PhD (Organic Chemistry), Dr. David Johnson, PhD (Physical Analytical Chemistry), Dr. Ray McCague, PhD (Organic Chemistry), and Dr. Willie McKinney, PhD (Inhalation Toxicology), all have experience in synthetic products and shared that expertise with the regulatory agency.
Johnson and McKinney also have extensive experience with the FDA having previously served on FDA’s Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Council, according to the VTA.
“As with our first meeting, we are encouraged by the level of engagement by the CTP’s Office of Science on this issue,” the VTA stated in a release. “And, we greatly appreciate the participation of numerous FDA scientists from the various responsible divisions within the office with whom we were able to share our scientific knowledge and advanced thinking on the key issues.”
The VTA is hoping to continue to engage the FDA to help the agency better understand the nature of synthetic nicotine, according to Tony Abboud, executive director of the VTA.
“Our work is not done. These meetings, and the additional meetings that we are working on, are just part of VTA’s multi-pronged strategy to ensure the proper and full assessment of synthetic nicotine PMTAs,” said Abboud. “If your company is manufacturing products containing synthetic nicotine and is serious about regulatory compliance, or if your retail operation wants the ability to continue to diversify its retail offerings with synthetic nicotine products, or if you want to have continued access to innovative products containing synthetic nicotine, you should strongly consider being engaged in our strategic efforts.”
May 4, 2022
Report: Nicotine Tax Will Boost Smoking, Hurt Economy
A new report finds that combustible cigarettes will become less expensive than vaping products and nearly 43,000 jobs would be lost if the proposed nicotine tax contained in the Build Back Better bill (HR 5376) were to become law. The Vapor Technology Association (VTA) funded study, The Negative Economic Impacts of the New Nicotine Tax Imposed Only on Vapor Products In the Reconciliation Bill, conducted by economist John Dunham & Associates, is being billed as a comprehensive analysis of the negative effects that the proposed tax will have on smokers, the industry and the economy.
“Our analysis finds that the bill would not create anything close to parity with cigarette taxes but, rather, would tax vapor products at a much higher rate – up to nine times higher – than the tax on a pack of cigarettes,” the report states. “The proposed nicotine tax in the Reconciliation Bill would lead to a net price increase on vapor products at retail of about 53 percent (21.2 percent for a standard two-pack of closed-system pod products and 73.5 percent for a standard 60 milliliter bottle of open system e-liquid), while the price of cigarettes and other tobacco products would remain unchanged as they would not be subject to any additional federal tax.”
The study also concludes that the proposed nicotine tax would lead to a reduction of nearly 42,800 full-time equivalent jobs and the loss of $2.2 billion in wages and benefits, negatively impact the size of the overall economy which would fall by about $7 billion and would result in states and their localities losing $620 million in taxes while the federal government attempts to generate revenues.
“A pack of cigarettes contains approximately 204 milligrams of nicotine (10.2 mg/cigarette x 20 cigarettes per pack). Applying the proposed nicotine tax of 2.78-cents per milligram to cigarettes, means that the tax on a pack of cigarettes should be $5.41, not $1.01,” the study states. “Viewed another way, the federal tax on cigarettes, if applied to their nicotine content, would only amount to less than half a penny per milligram, not the 2.78-cents Congress seeks to impose on e-cigarettes ($1.01 per pack / 204 mg of nicotine per pack).”
As defined in the bill, the proposed tax would be equal to about $2.22 on the standard closed system nicotine vapor product (such as a two pack of JUUL pods), and a $10.01 on the standard average 60 milliliter bottle of nicotine containing e-liquid used in an open system vapor device,” according to the study.
If passed, the proposed tax would also lead to a loss of about 31.9 percent of vapor product sales or 3.7 million milliliters of e-liquid consumed. Of this loss, 61.2 percent would be the result of consumers switching to other tobacco products, including combustible cigarettes. An additional 18.5 percent of these lost sales would move to the black market, according to the study.
“Modeling suggests that a large portion of consumers would react by purchasing unregulated products over the black market or make their own e-liquids,” according to the study. “These figures (which reflect a price increase resulting from the tax of 53 percent) are conservative and are not out of line with other studies examining the substitution of vapor products and combustible cigarettes when taxes are imposed.”
December 9, 2021
Maryland Governor Vetoes Vapor Tax

Photo: Getulio Moraes
The US state of Maryland’s Governor vetoed vapor tax legislation in House Bill 732. The vapor industry initially faced an 86 percent wholesale tax on all vapor products, which included devices and liquids.
The Maryland General Assembly spent a majority of the legislative session in search of new revenues to fill budget gaps and eventually turned its attention to vapor products, according to Tony Abboud, executive director for the Vapor Technology Association (VTA).
The VTA and the Maryland Vapor Alliance (MVA) engaged key committee members, participated in hearings, and worked behind the scenes to offer alternatives to the 86 percent tax, according to a press note. “After much debate, the General Assembly decided to move forward with a 12 percent point of sale tax on devices and liquids with an exception on containers under 5 milliliters, which would have a 60 percent wholesale tax,” the note states. “After the tax passed, VTA and MVA worked to educate the Governor’s Office on the adverse impact such a tax would have on Maryland small businesses.”
Governor Larry Hogan then vetoed the legislation. “These misguided bills would raise taxes and fees on Marylanders at a time when many are already out of work and financially struggling. With our state in the midst of a global pandemic and economic crash, and just beginning on our road to recovery, it would be unconscionable to raise taxes and fees now,” Hogan said.

In Maryland, a three-fifths vote of the elected members of both chambers is necessary to override the Governor’s veto. Because there were several tax increases vetoed, there could be efforts in the General Assembly to override the veto, according to the VTA.
May 8, 2020