South Australia government crackdown on illegal tobacco and e-cigarette markets.

Dec.23.2024
South Australia government crackdown on illegal tobacco and e-cigarette markets.
South Australia's Malinauskas government cracks down on illegal tobacco and e-cigarette markets, closing multiple unlicensed stores.

According to Mirage News on December 23rd, the government of South Australia, under Premier Malinauskas, has begun implementing a new policy to crack down on the illegal tobacco and e-cigarette market. This includes taking a strong stance by closing multiple illegal tobacco shops for the first time.


Consumer Affairs and Business Services Minister Andrea Michaels has ordered the closure of five unlicensed shops in Hindmarsh, Dernancourt, Salisbury North, Blair Athol, and Campbelltown. The store in Hindmarsh has been inspected multiple times, with the most recent inspection by the Consumer and Business Services (CBS) department revealing close to ten thousand illegal cigarettes, two thousand pipes, and half a kilogram of tobacco.


The minister's closure order is effective for 72 hours and can be extended up to six months by applying to the local court. Businesses that violate the order will face fines of up to 1.1 million Australian dollars, while individuals could be fined up to 700,000 Australian dollars.


The new regulation, which takes effect on December 13th, allows consumers and business affairs departments to immediately shut down businesses suspected of selling or providing illegal tobacco and e-cigarettes.


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

STIIIZY Redesign Fails to Escape PAX Labs Patent Import Ban as Section 337 Case Also Involves China ALD
STIIIZY Redesign Fails to Escape PAX Labs Patent Import Ban as Section 337 Case Also Involves China ALD
U.S. Customs and Border Protection ruled that STIIIZY had not shown that the redesigned cannabis-vape products covered by its latest request fall outside an ITC limited exclusion order tied to PAX Labs patents. CBP accepted some of STIIIZY’s claim-construction and non-infringement arguments, but the company did not address two additional claims in the same patent. Earlier STIIIZY redesigned cartridges and certain associated components imported with them had received separate CBP clearance.
Sep.16
U.S. Judge Stays Helix, NJOY Challenge to FDA PMTA Rule Pending New Rulemaking Court Stays Altria's Helix, NJOY Challenge to PMTA Rule as FDA Prepares New Rulemaking
U.S. Judge Stays Helix, NJOY Challenge to FDA PMTA Rule Pending New Rulemaking Court Stays Altria's Helix, NJOY Challenge to PMTA Rule as FDA Prepares New Rulemaking
A federal judge in Texas on Oct. 8 granted a joint request by the FDA and plaintiffs including Altria subsidiaries Helix Innovations and NJOY to stay litigation challenging the agency's 2021 PMTA rule. The court cited FDA's anticipated rulemaking concerning the regulation at issue. FDA announced on Sept. 28 that it intends to reassess the PMTA framework and could initiate new rulemaking to replace it. The parties must file a joint status report within 45 days and every 45 days thereafter. A motion by three Reynolds American companies to intervene remains pending.
Regulations
Oct.10
Swedish Match Faces Broader Labeling Order After ZYN Inspection, Documents Obtained by 2Firsts Show
Swedish Match Faces Broader Labeling Order After ZYN Inspection, Documents Obtained by 2Firsts Show
Documents obtained by 2Firsts show that Sweden's Public Health Agency ordered Swedish Match to revise ingredient labels beyond the five ZYN products inspected. The dispute centers on whether flavoring ingredients must be individually disclosed, with Swedish Match citing trade-secret protection and the regulator insisting on full ingredient disclosure. The company faces a conditional penalty of SEK 2 million per month for noncompliance. As of October 22, the agency had received no appeal, despite the company's stated intention to challenge the decision.
Oct.22
As JUUL2 Wins FDA Authorization, Harm Reduction Journal Highlights the Role of Real-World Evidence in Nicotine Product Regulation
As JUUL2 Wins FDA Authorization, Harm Reduction Journal Highlights the Role of Real-World Evidence in Nicotine Product Regulation
A commentary published in the international open-access, peer-reviewed Harm Reduction Journal argues that randomized controlled trials remain central to evaluating smoking cessation efficacy but cannot alone capture real-world uptake, complete switching, longer-term use and population impact of non-combustible nicotine products such as e-cigarettes, heated tobacco and nicotine pouches. The authors frame impact as “reach × efficacy” and call for real-world evidence to complement RCTs. Three days after publication, the FDA authorized three JUUL2 products and highlighted complete switching among adult smokers in explaining its decision, providing a timely regulatory backdrop to the debate.
Sep.08
Product | JTI Introduces Fully Dissolvable PERLZ Nicotine Pearls in UK, Expands Range From 30-Pearl Dispensers to 10-Pearl Sachets
Product | JTI Introduces Fully Dissolvable PERLZ Nicotine Pearls in UK, Expands Range From 30-Pearl Dispensers to 10-Pearl Sachets
Japan Tobacco International (JTI) has introduced PERLZ nicotine pearls in the UK, expanding its oral nicotine portfolio beyond conventional nicotine pouches. The fully dissolvable, multi-layer pearls are placed under the tongue and come in Mint and Berry flavors at concentrations of 1mg/g and 2mg/g, equivalent to approximately 0.3mg and 0.5mg of nicotine per pearl. UK retailer Haypp published four 30-pearl dispenser listings on July 31, 2026, followed by three 10-pearl sachet products on August 17. The dispensers retail for £6.50, while the sachets cost £2.50.
product
Oct.12
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