Shops in Ulan-Ude, Russia, Fined for Illegally Selling Nicotine Products to Minors

Regulations by 2FIRSTS.ai
Mar.05.2024
Shops in Ulan-Ude, Russia, Fined for Illegally Selling Nicotine Products to Minors
Two stores in Ulan-Ude, Russia, illegally sold nicotine products to minors, resulting in a favorable court ruling against them.

According to a report by baikal-daily on March 5th, two stores in Ulan-Ude, Russia were found to be illegally selling nicotine products to minors. These stores are located at 63 Lenina Street and 28A Geologicheskaya Street.

 

According to the Russian Federal Service for Supervision of Consumer Rights Protection and Human Welfare (Rospotrebnadzor), they have submitted a lawsuit to the court against an individual enterprise, demanding the cessation of sales of nicotine products at the mentioned location. The Oktyabrsky District Court has expressed support for this case and issued a favorable ruling.

 

Since May 2023, the Buryat Republic and across all of Russia have implemented a ban on selling e-cigarettes to minors. Adolescents are prohibited from purchasing e-cigarette devices, accessories, or e-liquid (whether or not they contain nicotine) or face hefty fines. For individuals, fines range from 40,000 to 60,000 rubles ($438-657); for public officials, fines range from 150,000 to 300,000 rubles ($1,642.5-3,285); for organizations, fines range from 400,000 to 600,000 rubles ($4,380-6,570).

 

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

JUUL Purchasers Ask Ninth Circuit to Preserve Antitrust Classes in Case Over Altria’s $12.8 Billion Investment
JUUL Purchasers Ask Ninth Circuit to Preserve Antitrust Classes in Case Over Altria’s $12.8 Billion Investment
Private antitrust litigation stemming from Altria's 2018 $12.8 billion investment for a 35% economic interest in JUUL is advancing before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Direct purchasers, indirect purchasers and indirect resellers of JUUL products filed answering briefs this week seeking to preserve class certifications granted by a California federal court in February. Altria and JUUL argue that individual consumers and large distributors differ too much in purchasing terms to remain in a single direct-purchaser class, while a separate dispute concerns whether California antitrust law can apply to indirect purchasers across 27 jurisdictions. A September trial has been put on hold during the appeal.
Sep.23
From Vuse, Velo and glo to AI Consulting: Former BAT Content Lead Launches Destreza
From Vuse, Velo and glo to AI Consulting: Former BAT Content Lead Launches Destreza
Former BAT global content lead Andy Parton has left the company and launched Destreza, a London-based AI-native marketing consultancy. Parton previously worked across BAT's New Category brands Vuse, Velo and glo and had also served as Global Brand Lead for Vuse Go. Destreza says it will advise consumer businesses on AI in brand strategy, operating models, capability and agency configuration, using specialist AI agents to support research, strategy and creative development. BAT reported £3.621 billion in New Category revenue in 2025.
Sep.22
China’s HTP Exports Fell 14.3% in H1 2026 as Russia and Belarus Accounted for 76% Lead
China’s HTP Exports Fell 14.3% in H1 2026 as Russia and Belarus Accounted for 76% Lead
In H1 2026, China’s HS 24041100 exports stood at $1.32 million, down 14.3% YoY, with volume falling 17.2% to 55.33 tons. Market distribution shifted drastically amid overall export drops. Exports to Russia and Belarus totaled $1 million, taking 76.0% of all shipments versus 29.5% in H1 2025. Belarus became the top destination with export value jumping 177.5%, while the Philippines, Singapore and Indonesia’s combined share slumped from 49.3% to 11.2%.Domestically, Yunnan led exporter registrations; Jiangsu and Shanghai were key suppliers, yet Anhui and Sichuan had no exports. Heavy concentration means order or declaration changes for Russia/Belarus greatly affect national aggregate data. The data shows customs entry points (not end markets), covering tobacco consumables only, excluding heating equipment and the complete HTP supply chain.
Aug.11
UK Vape Tax Countdown: Retailer Vape HQ Estimates 100ml E-liquid Prices Could Rise From £12.99 to £39.39, While Pod Kits Increase Less Than 10%
UK Vape Tax Countdown: Retailer Vape HQ Estimates 100ml E-liquid Prices Could Rise From £12.99 to £39.39, While Pod Kits Increase Less Than 10%
The UK’s Vaping Products Duty (VPD), scheduled to take effect in October 2026, is prompting retailers to assess how different vape categories may be affected. UK retailer Vape HQ has estimated potential price changes under the new volume-based tax system, showing that 100ml shortfill e-liquids could see prices rise from around £12.99 to £39.39, a 203% increase, while 2ml prefilled pod vape kits could rise from £5.99 to £6.52, an increase of about 9%. The estimates highlight how a volume-based tax structure creates uneven cost impacts across product categories.
Aug.19
Product | PMJ Adds Bold Ruby to IQOS ILUMA i Lineup in Japan, Convenience-Store Rollout Starts Sept. 29
Product | PMJ Adds Bold Ruby to IQOS ILUMA i Lineup in Japan, Convenience-Store Rollout Starts Sept. 29
Philip Morris Japan (PMJ) launched Bold Ruby as a new regular color for the IQOS ILUMA i and IQOS ILUMA i ONE in Japan on September 16, 2026, priced at JPY 6,980 and JPY 3,980, respectively. Initial sales began through IQOS online and physical channels, with convenience stores and selected tobacco retailers set to follow from September 29. Bold Ruby is a regular rather than limited-edition colorway and is available for the ILUMA i and ILUMA i ONE, but not the ILUMA i PRIME. The release does not involve changes to the devices' core hardware or functions.
Sep.22
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