ELFBAR to 2FIRSTS: Disappointed about the Disposable Ban

Industry Insight by 2FIRSTS
Jan.30.2024
ELFBAR to 2FIRSTS: Disappointed about the Disposable Ban
UK government announces comprehensive ban on sales of disposable e-cigarettes and flavor restrictions on refillable e-cigarettes.

Special Statement: 

In light of recent events, we feel it necessary to address the current situation in a formal manner.

This article is intended for internal research and communication within the industry and does not make any brand or product recommendations. Access is prohibited for minors.


 

On January 29th, the UK government announced a complete ban on the sale of disposable e-cigarettes and placed restrictions on the flavors available for refillable e-cigarettes. 2FIRSTS immediately reached out to the owners of LostMary and ELFBAR, two popular brands of disposable e-cigarettes, who are represented by IMiracle (Heaven Gifts). In response to inquiries from 2FIRSTS, IMiracle (Heaven Gifts) stated that their e-liquid product line is an integral part of their overall product strategy and is not affected by any predictions. They further referenced a statement from Eve Peters, the UK government affairs representative for ELFBAR, stating the following:

 

ELFBAR aligns with the viewpoints of the British government on the public consultation of e-cigarettes in many aspects, particularly on the issue of preventing underage access to e-cigarettes. Even before the public consultation on e-cigarettes in the UK began, ELFBAR had already been working towards the goal of preventing children from knowing, seeing, and buying e-cigarettes, and implementing corresponding measures.

 

ELFBAR expresses disappointment at the ban on disposable e-cigarettes in the UK. Especially concerning is the recent research conducted by the UK Cancer Research Center and University College London, which clearly demonstrates the crucial role disposable e-cigarettes play in adult smoking cessation.

 

ELFBAR strongly supports the British government's efforts to prevent children from using disposable e-cigarettes. However, in fact, there are more pragmatic and effective control measures than a blanket ban, such as the implementation of a licensing system for retail channels and more rigorous on-site enforcement.

 

Since last year, market participants, including ELFBAR, have made tremendous efforts in self-regulation and have made significant progress. However, it is regrettable that some irresponsible industry participants have blurred the lines with their actions, making it difficult for the public to discern. Banning disposable e-cigarettes may further exacerbate the proliferation of illegal e-cigarettes.

 

In the future, ELFBAR will continue to collaborate with various regulatory agencies, steadfastly aiding adult smokers in quitting smoking and reducing harm.


 

"UK Disposable E-Cigarette Ban" Series Report

 

Policy Updates
【1】UK Government Announces Ban on Disposable E-Cigarettes
【2】Original Text of UK Government's Disposable Ban Announcement

 

Market Dynamics
【1】After UK Disposable Ban: Retailers Clearing Stock, Major Distributors Turning to E-liquids and Open-Systems
【2】UK Announces Disposable E-Cigarette Ban: Smoore and Yinghe Technology Stock Prices Decline

 

Various Perspectives
【1】Black Market or Opportunity? Insiders' Perspectives on UK Disposable Ban

【2】Interview with Arcus Managing Director: Ban Will Lead to Black Market Surge, Manufacturers should Switch to Open Systems

 

Business Review

【1】Disposable Ban Impact: Is Smoore's Strategic Layout Empty Again?

 

 

We welcome news tips, article submissions, interview requests, or comments on this piece.

Please contact us at info@2firsts.com, or reach out to Alan Zhao, CEO of 2Firsts, on LinkedIn


Notice

1.  This article is intended solely for professional research purposes related to industry, technology, and policy. Any references to brands or products are made purely for objective description and do not constitute any form of endorsement, recommendation, or promotion by 2Firsts.

2.  The use of nicotine-containing products — including, but not limited to, cigarettes, e-cigarettes, nicotine pouchand heated tobacco products — carries significant health risks. Users are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions.

3.  This article is not intended to serve as the basis for any investment decisions or financial advice. 2Firsts assumes no direct or indirect liability for any inaccuracies or errors in the content.

4.  Access to this article is strictly prohibited for individuals below the legal age in their jurisdiction.

 

Copyright

 

This article is either an original work created by 2Firsts or a reproduction from third-party sources with proper attribution. All copyrights and usage rights belong to 2Firsts or the original content provider. Unauthorized reproduction, distribution, or any other form of unauthorized use by any individual or organization is strictly prohibited. Violators will be held legally accountable.

For copyright-related inquiries, please contact: info@2firsts.com

 

AI Assistance Disclaimer

 

This article may have been enhanced using AI tools to improve translation and editorial efficiency. However, due to technical limitations, inaccuracies may occur. Readers are encouraged to refer to the cited sources for the most accurate information.

We welcome any corrections or feedback. Please contact us at: info@2firsts.com

U.S. Health Groups Seek to Overturn FDA Enforcement Discretion for Pending PMTAs as Altria's Helix, NJOY and AVM Move to Intervene
U.S. Health Groups Seek to Overturn FDA Enforcement Discretion for Pending PMTAs as Altria's Helix, NJOY and AVM Move to Intervene
American Vapor Manufacturers (AVM) and Altria subsidiaries Helix Innovations and NJOY filed separate motions on October 7, 2026, seeking to intervene on the FDA's side in a lawsuit challenging its enforcement guidance for certain e-cigarette and nicotine pouch products with pending premarket tobacco product applications (PMTAs). Seven public health and tobacco-control organizations, including the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, sued the agency in July to overturn the policy. AVM argues that vacating the guidance could disrupt orders, inventory, retail distribution and investments in regulatory submissions.
Regulations
Oct.09
South Korea Fully Reviews Nicotine-Analog and Nicotine-Free Vape Liquid Imports, With Over 99% From China and Chinese Supply-Chain Documents Under Scrutiny
South Korea Fully Reviews Nicotine-Analog and Nicotine-Free Vape Liquid Imports, With Over 99% From China and Chinese Supply-Chain Documents Under Scrutiny
Korea Customs Service has tightened import controls on nicotine-analog and nicotine-free e-cigarette liquids, placing the products under 100% document review and subjecting all e-cigarette liquid import declarations to pre-clearance ingredient analysis. As of September 20, 2026, South Korea had imported about 15 metric tons of nicotine-analog liquids, 99.99% from China, and about 316 metric tons of nicotine-free liquids, including roughly 315 metric tons, or 99.7%, from China. The measures follow South Korea's April expansion of its tobacco definition to include synthetic nicotine products and include new checks on Chinese manufacturing, transaction and export documentation.
Sep.24
On-Site Report | After FDA Announces Review of PMTA Framework, CTP Director Details Reform Priorities
On-Site Report | After FDA Announces Review of PMTA Framework, CTP Director Details Reform Priorities
FDA CTP Director Bret Koplow used his FDLI keynote in Washington to outline how the agency is rethinking the PMTA framework. He discussed category-specific review, nicotine pouch and sPMTA pilots, AI-assisted review, a 70% reduction in pending applications, and a major staffing constraint: CTP currently has only nine scientific review teams. He also reaffirmed tobacco harm reduction while stressing youth protection, flavored products, risk communication, and the challenge of unauthorized e-cigarettes.
Regulations
Oct.06
Australia Extends Illicit Tobacco Crackdown From Tougher Penalties to Customs and Logistics Supply Chains
Australia Extends Illicit Tobacco Crackdown From Tougher Penalties to Customs and Logistics Supply Chains
Australia's federal government introduced a new illicit tobacco enforcement bill on September 10 that would strengthen evidentiary presumptions, representative sampling, seizure and forfeiture procedures, proceeds-of-crime powers and obligations for customs and logistics operators. The proposal follows the Combatting Illicit Tobacco Act 2026, which took effect in August and increased penalties while expanding investigative and asset-recovery tools. Together, the reforms extend Australia's crackdown from tougher criminal sanctions into import, logistics and evidentiary enforcement.
Sep.14
JTI Liggett Puts U.S. Value Cigarette Brands in Spotlight at 2026 NACS Show
JTI Liggett Puts U.S. Value Cigarette Brands in Spotlight at 2026 NACS Show
At the 2026 NACS Show in Las Vegas, JTI Liggett highlighted its value-priced cigarette portfolio, including LD and Montego, following JT Group's acquisition of Vector Group. The company's U.S. business reported market share gains, with LD sales volume rising 32.6% in the first half of 2026. Meanwhile, Ploom was displayed separately at Altria's booth under an existing partnership. JTI Liggett booth staff told 2Firsts that the company had not yet launched nicotine pouch products in the United States.
EXPO
Oct.09
U.S. Fifth Circuit Vacates NicQuid Vape MDO, Says FDA Comparative-Efficacy Standard Violated APA Procedures
U.S. Fifth Circuit Vacates NicQuid Vape MDO, Says FDA Comparative-Efficacy Standard Violated APA Procedures
According to VitalLaw on August 27, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated an FDA marketing denial order (MDO) against NicQuid LLC, ruling that the agency’s comparative-efficacy standard for electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) applications had become a substantive rule requiring notice-and-comment rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The court did not reject FDA’s authority to compare the public health benefits and risks of flavored vapes, but held that the agency could not establish a broadly binding standard through informal adjudications. The case was remanded to FDA for further proceedings.
Aug.28