FDA Issues Civil Penalty Notices to 21 Retailers Selling Unauthorized Esco Bars

Regulations by 2FIRSTS.ai
Jan.31.2024
FDA Issues Civil Penalty Notices to 21 Retailers Selling Unauthorized Esco Bars
The FDA has issued civil fines to 21 retailers for selling unauthorized Esco Barse-cigarettes, popular among young people.

On January 30, in Pacific Standard Time, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Tobacco News Center released a statement announcing that civil penalty notices have been issued to 21 physical retailers for selling unauthorized Esco Barse-cigarettes, a popular brand among young people. Earlier, the FDA had sent warning letters to each retailer accusing them of selling unauthorized tobacco products. However, subsequent inspections revealed that these retailers failed to rectify their non-compliant actions, leading the agency to seek penalties of up to $20,678 for each retailer.

 

Today, the FDA announced its first ever civil penalties against the unauthorized sale of Esco Bars e-cigarettes, following complaints. Data indicates that these products are attractive to American teenagers. According to the 2023 National Youth Tobacco Survey, Esco Bars is the second most popular brand among adolescent e-cigarette users. Approximately one-fifth of middle and high school students who have used e-cigarettes in the past 30 days reported using Esco Bars during that period.

 

Dr. Brian King, director of the FDA Center for Tobacco Products, has stated that these retailers have been warned about the potential consequences if they continue to sell unauthorized e-cigarettes. They were supposed to responsibly address their violations, but they have chosen not to do so and must now face the repercussions of their decision. The FDA will not stand idly by and tolerate non-compliance with the law.

 

Currently, $20,678 is the maximum civil penalty amount that the FDA can seek from each retailer for a single violation, which aligns with similar fines sought by the FDA in September, November, and December 2023 for the sale of unauthorized Elf Bar products. Retailers have the option to pay the fine, reach a settlement agreement based on mitigating factors, request an extension for their defense, or present a defense and request a hearing. Retailers who fail to take action within 30 days of receiving a complaint will face default orders, resulting in full penalties being imposed.

 

Today's civil fines action is just the latest move by the FDA in its efforts to rid the entire supply chain of unauthorized e-cigarettes, especially those popular among young people. As of January 30, 2024, the FDA has issued over 440 warning letters and 88 civil penalty notices to retailers, including brick-and-mortar stores and online retailers, accusing them of selling unauthorized tobacco products. In addition to actions involving retailers, the FDA has also sent warning letters to over 660 companies for illegal manufacturing and/or distribution of unauthorized novel tobacco products, including e-cigarettes. The agency has also filed civil penalty complaints against 48 e-cigarette companies, accusing them of manufacturing unauthorized products, and has sought injunctions against seven unauthorized e-cigarette product manufacturers in coordination with the U.S. Department of Justice.

 

The FDA will continue its compliance and enforcement actions against the manufacturing, distribution, importation, or sale of unauthorized e-cigarette products, including imposing civil penalties on retailers found in violation of the law. As of now, the FDA has authorized 23 tobacco-flavored e-cigarette products and devices, which are the only legally sold e-cigarette products in the United States. Selling or distributing e-cigarettes without FDA market authorization is a violation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

 

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

Scottish Vape Display Rules Could Cost Businesses £61 Million, Affecting More Than 11,000 Retail Outlets
Scottish Vape Display Rules Could Cost Businesses £61 Million, Affecting More Than 11,000 Retail Outlets
A Scottish government impact assessment estimates that proposed vape display and packaging rules could create up to £61 million ($82 million) in compliance costs for businesses, affecting more than 11,000 retail outlets. The estimated costs are mainly linked to inventory adjustments, retail storage changes and the resources required for businesses to understand and implement the new requirements. The measures form part of the UK’s broader efforts to tighten vape regulation, particularly around product displays, packaging and sales practices.
Aug.10
Product | JT Expands Vote-Winning EVO Cacao Mint Crystal to Nationwide Retail in Japan, Adds 22-Stick Limited Pack at Same Price
Product | JT Expands Vote-Winning EVO Cacao Mint Crystal to Nationwide Retail in Japan, Adds 22-Stick Limited Pack at Same Price
Japan Tobacco (JT) will expand EVO Cacao Mint Crystal from limited channels to nationwide retail in Japan from October 6, 2026. The Ploom tobacco stick ranked first in the brand's first consumer voting campaign for new tobacco-stick SKUs held earlier this year. JT will also introduce a limited 22-stick pack at the same JPY 620 price as the standard 20-stick pack. The capsule-format product combines menthol with sweet, bittersweet cacao notes and adds a berry nuance when the capsule is crushed.
Sep.09
PMI Expands U.S. ZYN Portfolio With New 1.5 mg and 8 mg Strengths, Moves Toward a Unified 20-Pouch-Per-Can Format
PMI Expands U.S. ZYN Portfolio With New 1.5 mg and 8 mg Strengths, Moves Toward a Unified 20-Pouch-Per-Can Format
Philip Morris International is expanding its U.S. ZYN nicotine pouch portfolio with new 1.5 mg and 8 mg strengths and plans to move its core 3 mg and 6 mg dry-pouch products from 15 to 20 pouches per can in the fourth quarter of 2026. ZYN ULTRA is also commercially available, with FDA authorization covering 10 products at 9 mg and one 11 mg Smooth product. PMI U.S. lists the new 1.5 mg and 8 mg strengths as commercially available, but as of September 10 they do not appear on the FDA’s public authorization list. Public materials do not identify which PMTA submissions cover the two new strengths or their current review status.
Sep.11
China’s Zhengzhou Tobacco Research Institute develops end-to-end heated tobacco analysis to trace aerosol compound origins
China’s Zhengzhou Tobacco Research Institute develops end-to-end heated tobacco analysis to trace aerosol compound origins
The Zhengzhou Tobacco Research Institute of China National Tobacco Corporation has filed a patent application for an end-to-end method to analyze the migration and transformation of chemical compounds in heated tobacco products. Using GC-Orbitrap/MS non-targeted analysis, the method compares tobacco substrate and aerosol samples to distinguish compounds transferred directly from the substrate from those newly formed during heating, while also calculating transfer rates. In an example involving nine heated tobacco products, the patent identified 17 newly formed thermal decomposition compounds and 38 transferred compounds.
Aug.13
Product | HQD SiSA 80K Enters the U.S. Market With a Hookah-Inspired Approach to the High-Capacity Disposable Segment
Product | HQD SiSA 80K Enters the U.S. Market With a Hookah-Inspired Approach to the High-Capacity Disposable Segment
The HQD SiSA 80K Hookah Disposable Vape has appeared across U.S. and cross-border online retail channels. The device comes prefilled with 28ml of e-liquid, uses a 5% nicotine salt configuration and carries a brand claim of up to 80,000 puffs. Beyond puff count, the product differentiates itself through hookah-inspired features including adjustable airflow, a flowing-water sound effect and flavor options associated with traditional hookah consumption.
Aug.18
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