Key Points
- Malaysia withdrew its appeal in August, leaving in force a High Court ruling that invalidated the 2023 exemption of liquid and gel nicotine from the Poisons List.
- Liquid nicotine is therefore again regulated as a Group C poison under the Poisons Act 1952, while Act 852 continues to regulate vaping products.
- Two MPs are calling for nicotine vape retail sales and excise collection to stop and for more than RM354 million in duties collected since 2023 to be refunded.
- Vape industry and consumer groups want Act 852 to remain the main regulatory framework and are pressing the government for clarity on legality, inventory and taxation.
2Firsts
September 4, 2026
According to a series of reports by Malaysian health policy publication CodeBlue between September 2 and September 4, nicotine vaping products in Malaysia have entered a new period of legal and tax uncertainty after the government withdrew its appeal against a High Court ruling that invalidated the 2023 exemption of liquid and gel nicotine from the Poisons List under the Poisons Act 1952, or Act 366.
The withdrawal leaves the High Court judgment in force, bringing liquid and gel nicotine used in vaping products back within the scheduled-poison framework.
At the same time, Malaysia’s Control of Smoking Products for Public Health Act 2024, or Act 852, continues to regulate vaping products through a dedicated public-health framework.
The government has yet to clearly explain how the two legal regimes are now meant to operate together.
The uncertainty has prompted competing calls from lawmakers, vape businesses and consumer groups. Some MPs want nicotine vape retail and excise collection to stop, while industry and consumer representatives are pressing the government to continue regulating the sector under Act 852.
Government Withdrawal Leaves High Court Ruling in Force
The dispute dates back to a 2023 ministerial decision.
At the time, Malaysia’s health minister exempted liquid and gel nicotine used in e-cigarettes and vaping products from the Poisons List.
That change enabled nicotine vaping products to enter the ordinary consumer market and supported the government’s subsequent excise framework for nicotine-containing vape liquids.
In May 2026, however, the Kuala Lumpur High Court ruled in favour of three public-health groups challenging the exemption.
The court found the decision irrational and unlawful, including on the grounds that there had not been proper or adequate consultation with the Poisons Board.
The government initially appealed.
On August 18, however, the Attorney-General’s Chambers filed a notice at the Court of Appeal withdrawing and discontinuing the appeal in full.
Health Minister Dzulkefly Ahmad later said the issue carried legal and policy implications and that the Health Ministry had presented its position to Cabinet.
As of September 4, the government has not issued a final public explanation setting out how nicotine vape retail should operate following the court ruling.
Liquid Nicotine Again Falls Under Group C Poison Controls
Malaysia’s current Poisons Act framework continues to classify nicotine preparations as controlled poisons.
CodeBlue reported that the principal nicotine-related exemptions currently cover tobacco and registered nicotine patches or gum used for smoking cessation.
With the 2023 exemption for liquid and gel nicotine nullified, vape nicotine again falls within the Group C poison framework.
Group C poisons are generally supplied through legally defined medical or pharmacy channels, creating an apparent conflict with the previous retail model for nicotine vaping products sold as ordinary adult consumer goods.
CodeBlue has described the situation as potentially amounting to an “accidental ban” that arose without a formal government prohibition.
That characterization is a legal analysis by the publication rather than an official Malaysian government declaration.
The more precise position is that the exemption has been nullified and the government has not yet clarified the consequences for ordinary retail sales.
Act 852 Still Regulates Vaping Products
The legal position is complicated by the continued existence of Act 852.
The law provides a dedicated public-health framework for smoking products, including vaping products, covering matters such as product registration, packaging, labelling, advertising, promotion, sales and age restrictions.
The Malaysian Vape Chamber of Commerce, or MVCC, argues that the industry has already invested in compliance based on that framework and should not be left in renewed legal uncertainty.
The Malaysian Vapers Alliance, or MVA, has similarly called for clear rules and continued enforcement of Act 852 for adult consumers.
Both groups say regulatory concerns should be addressed through Act 852 and any necessary amendments rather than by destabilising the existing regulated market.
CodeBlue, however, noted that those positions do not resolve the central legal question: regulation of vaping products under Act 852 does not automatically remove liquid nicotine itself from controls under the Poisons Act.
MPs Call for Sales and Excise Collection to Stop
On September 2, Petaling Jaya MP Lee Chean Chung and Kuala Langat MP Dr Ahmad Yunus Hairi called on the government to treat nicotine vape as subject to the restored poisons controls and halt ordinary retail sales.
Both lawmakers also urged the Ministry of Finance to stop collecting excise duties on nicotine-containing vape liquids.
Lee cited an affidavit filed in the 2023 court case by Treasury secretary-general Johan Mahmood Merican, which stated that cancelling the exemption of liquid and gel nicotine from the Poisons List would affect the basis for collecting excise on the substance.
Lee called on the government to refund more than RM354 million in vape excise duties collected since April 2023.
He also said the amount was continuing to increase by roughly RM8 million per month.
Those refund figures represent lawmakers’ demands and arguments. The Malaysian government has not acknowledged that the taxes were unlawfully collected or that it faces a confirmed RM354 million refund liability.
Taxation Becomes a Second Legal Flashpoint
Malaysia’s Royal Customs Department continues to maintain excise information covering electronic cigarette devices and vaping liquids.
That has turned the dispute from a product-legality question into a tax question as well.
Lawmakers calling for tax collection to stop argue that if liquid nicotine cannot lawfully be sold as an ordinary consumer product, the government should not continue treating it as a taxable retail commodity.
The industry, meanwhile, faces potential exposure involving already-taxed inventory, registered products, imported stock, raw liquid nicotine and existing retail arrangements if the legal basis changes abruptly.
The Malaysian Electronic Vaporisers and Tobacco Alternative Association, or MEVTA, has previously said that if the government ultimately bans vaping products, businesses should receive at least a six-month transition period to deal with inventories, imports, raw materials and other commercial commitments.
Health Ministry Has Yet to Issue Final Clarification
Responsibility for resolving the current legal position has increasingly been directed toward the Ministry of Health.
Malaysia’s Domestic Trade and Cost of Living Ministry has said nicotine is a controlled chemical and poison affecting public health rather than an ordinary trade item, placing the legal issue primarily within the Health Ministry’s jurisdiction.
The Finance Ministry has similarly pointed questions over nicotine’s status under the Poisons Act toward the Health Ministry.
Dzulkefly said on August 26 that the ministry would explain the government’s withdrawal of the appeal and acknowledged that the matter carried both legal and policy implications.
As of September 4, no final Health Ministry clarification has been identified addressing:
● whether nicotine vaping products can continue to be sold through ordinary retail channels;
● how Act 852 and the Poisons Act should interact;
● whether existing stock must be removed or receive a transition period;
● whether excise collection should continue;
● whether the government will return to the Poisons Board to reconsider nicotine’s legal classification.
Government Faces Several Possible Policy Routes
CodeBlue outlined three broad options available to Putrajaya after withdrawing the appeal.
One would be to treat liquid nicotine’s restored poison status as grounds for removing nicotine vaping products from the ordinary consumer market.
A second would be to return the issue to the Poisons Board and reconsider an exemption through the legally required process.
A third would be to enact legislation explicitly classifying tobacco and nicotine products as regulated consumer commodities rather than relying on the Poisons Act for market access.
Those are analytical policy options rather than measures the government has formally adopted.
At the same time, Dzulkefly has repeatedly said the government is studying a phased nationwide vape ban and has previously indicated that the issue has been discussed at government and Cabinet level.
The legal uncertainty created by the High Court judgment is therefore now overlapping with a separate policy debate over whether Malaysia should ultimately prohibit vaping products altogether.
From Regulatory Vacuum to Legal Conflict
Malaysia’s vaping framework has changed significantly over the past three years.
The 2023 removal of liquid nicotine from the Poisons List initially created a period widely criticised as a regulatory gap. Act 852 later established a dedicated framework for tobacco and vaping products.
Now, with the High Court nullifying the 2023 nicotine exemption while Act 852 remains in force, the problem has shifted from a regulatory gap to a potential conflict between two legal frameworks.
The key issue is therefore not whether Malaysia has formally announced a nationwide nicotine vape ban.
It is that the legal status of liquid nicotine has changed, while product regulation, retail access and taxation have not yet been clearly realigned with that change.
Until the government issues further guidance, Malaysia’s nicotine vape market is likely to remain exposed to significant legal, inventory and tax uncertainty.
Follow 2Firsts for timely updates on global vaping and nicotine regulation, taxation and market-access developments.
Cover Image: CodeBlueSources
Disclaimer
This article is provided solely for professional research, industry discussion, and informational purposes. Any references to brands, companies, products, technologies, or policies are made for factual reporting and analytical purposes only, and do not constitute endorsement, recommendation, promotion, or advertising by 2Firsts.
Nicotine-containing products, including but not limited to cigarettes, e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products, and nicotine pouches, carry significant health risks. Readers are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions, including age restrictions and access limitations.
The information contained in this article should not be regarded as investment, legal, medical, regulatory, or commercial advice. While 2Firsts strives to ensure the accuracy and reliability of its content, it does not assume liability for any direct or indirect loss arising from errors, omissions, inaccuracies, or reliance on the information contained herein.
This article is not intended for individuals below the legal age for accessing tobacco or nicotine-related information in their jurisdiction.
Copyright Notice
This article is either original content produced by 2Firsts or content reproduced, translated, summarized, or adapted from third-party sources with attribution where applicable. The intellectual property rights of the original content remain with 2Firsts or the respective original rights holders.
No individual or organization may copy, reproduce, distribute, republish, modify, translate, or otherwise use this content without prior authorization. Any unauthorized use may result in legal action.
For copyright-related inquiries, corrections, or removal requests, please contact: info@2firsts.com.
AI-Assisted Translation and Editing Notice
Portions of this article may have been translated, edited, or reviewed with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools to improve efficiency and readability. Due to the limitations of AI-assisted translation and editing, discrepancies, omissions, or inaccuracies may exist when compared with the original source.
Where applicable, readers are advised to refer to the original source for the most complete and accurate information. If you identify any errors or believe that any content infringes upon your rights, please contact us at info@2firsts.com, and we will review and address the matter promptly.
