Philippines Fails to Lower Age for Vaping and Heated Tobacco Purchase

Aug.30.2022
Philippines Fails to Lower Age for Vaping and Heated Tobacco Purchase
A proposed law in the Philippines to lower the age limit for purchasing e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products was rejected.

According to reports, a bill aimed at lowering the purchasing age for electronic and heated tobacco products in the Philippines failed to be passed recently.


The bill proposes transferring the regulation of electronic cigarettes from the Food and Drug Administration to the Department of Commerce and Industry, and lowering the minimum age for purchasing electronic cigarettes and heated tobacco products from 21 to 18.


The proposal was not approved after being submitted to the presidential office.


This article contains excerpts or reprints from third-party sources, whose copyright belongs to the original media and authors. If there is any infringement, please contact us for deletion. Any individual or organization that wishes to reprint must contact the author and refrain from direct reprints.



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.

Juul Sublicense Reshapes Vuse Alto Patent Bill as Court Ends R.J. Reynolds’ 5.25% Royalty Obligation to Altria
Juul Sublicense Reshapes Vuse Alto Patent Bill as Court Ends R.J. Reynolds’ 5.25% Royalty Obligation to Altria
According to Law360 on August 31, 2026, a federal judge in North Carolina ruled that a patent sublicense between R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co. and Juul Labs Inc. relieves Reynolds of its obligation to continue paying royalties to Altria Client Services LLC over Vuse Alto. A jury had previously found that Vuse Alto infringed three Altria patents and awarded approximately $95.2 million in past damages, after which Reynolds was ordered to pay an ongoing royalty equal to 5.25% of positive net sales. The new ruling finds that a valid sublicense can eliminate future infringement, potentially ending what Altria described as hundreds of millions of dollars in future royalties.
Sep.01
How Many Nicotine Pouch Factories Does Europe Need? 2Firsts Interviews AIRSCREAM on the OEM Market
How Many Nicotine Pouch Factories Does Europe Need? 2Firsts Interviews AIRSCREAM on the OEM Market
At InterTabac 2026, nicotine pouch growth was visible not only in brands but across equipment, raw materials and OEM manufacturing. 2Firsts interviewed AIRSCREAM commercial head Steve Moore on how many pouch factories Europe may ultimately need and where manufacturers can differentiate, from formulation and flavour to pouch materials, production consistency and customer service. The category continues to expand, but questions remain over future capacity, consolidation and the long-term structure of the supply chain.
Sep.18
Philip Morris Malaysia Again Meets Religious Authority Over Cigarette Alternatives as Perlis Mufti Responds on Halal Criteria
Philip Morris Malaysia Again Meets Religious Authority Over Cigarette Alternatives as Perlis Mufti Responds on Halal Criteria
Philip Morris Malaysia Managing Director Naeem Shahab Khan met Perlis Mufti Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin on September 17 and presented the company's shift from conventional cigarettes toward alternative products. The mufti said a product could be considered halal if it is clean, its side effects are not harmful or can be controlled, and it does not involve excessive waste. His remarks did not mention IQOS or any other specific PMI product and did not amount to a new product-specific religious ruling. It was at least the second publicly reported engagement between Philip Morris Malaysia and a Malaysian religious institution over cigarette alternatives within six months.
Regulations
Sep.18 by 2Firsts Perspectives
Product | BAT Expands VELO Peach Ice Medium to FamilyMart Stores Nationwide in Japan
Product | BAT Expands VELO Peach Ice Medium to FamilyMart Stores Nationwide in Japan
British American Tobacco Japan (BAT Japan) expanded VELO Peach Ice Medium to FamilyMart stores nationwide in Japan from September 7, 2026. The oral tobacco product first launched on July 6 and had previously been sold through VELO's official online store, glo Store Ginza and tobacco retailers. It combines peach flavor with menthol cooling at a Medium strength level and is priced at JPY 360. Japanese tobacco retailers list 15 pouches per pack. The move adds the new SKU to an existing nationwide FamilyMart distribution network for VELO rather than marking the brand's first entry into the convenience-store chain.
Sep.15
UK HMRC Issues One-Month Countdown Warning, Urges Vape Businesses to Prepare for New Tax Rules
UK HMRC Issues One-Month Countdown Warning, Urges Vape Businesses to Prepare for New Tax Rules
The UK’s Vaping Products Duty and Vaping Duty Stamps Scheme will take effect on October 1, 2026. All vaping liquids manufactured in or imported into the UK will face a flat excise duty of £2.20 per 10ml, whether or not they contain nicotine. Newly manufactured or imported products released onto the UK market from October 1 will require a valid duty stamp, while eligible existing unstamped inventory can continue to be sold through March 31, 2027. From April 1, 2027, all vaping products outside duty suspension must carry a valid stamp.
Sep.03
Australia Adds 6-Methylnicotine to Schedule 9 Prohibited Substances, Effective October 1
Australia Adds 6-Methylnicotine to Schedule 9 Prohibited Substances, Effective October 1
Australia's Therapeutic Goods Administration published a final decision on September 25 to classify 6-methylnicotine as a Schedule 9 prohibited substance under the Poisons Standard, effective October 1, 2026. TGA said the chemical has been reported in e-cigarette liquids sold in Australia and marketed as nicotine-free or nicotine alternatives, while evidence also indicates its use in preparations such as oral pouches. The government originally proposed a Schedule 7 classification but ultimately adopted the stricter Schedule 9 designation, citing acute toxicity, dependence risk, use in unapproved consumer products and misleading marketing.
News
Sep.29 by 2Firsts Perspectives