The Consistent Regulation of E-Cigarette Flavor in the Philippines

Apr.14.2025
The Consistent Regulation of E-Cigarette Flavor in the Philippines
Philippine Justice Secretary clarifies no conflict between RA 11467 and RA 11900 in e-cigarette flavor regulation.

Key points:

The Filipino Justice Secretary emphasized that RA 11467 and RA 11900 do not conflict in regulating e-cigarette flavors.

RA 11467 prohibits e-cigarette products with flavors other than tobacco and mint, while RA 11900 regulates the use of flavor descriptions. Both laws work together to enforce strict regulation of e-cigarette flavors.

Two pieces of legislation jointly regulate the sale and promotion of e-cigarette products.


According to Malaya Business Insight on April 14th, Filipino Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla stated that the ban on flavored e-cigarette products remains in effect under Republic Act 11467. Despite the implementation of the Vaporized Nicotine and Non-Nicotine Products Act (RA 11900), these two laws do not conflict when it comes to regulating e-cigarette flavors.

 

Remulla stated in a legal opinion publicly released on April 13 that Republic Act 11467 and RA 11900 are consistent in regulating the flavors of e-cigarette products.

 

Two years ago, former President Rodrigo Duterte signed RA 11467 into law, while RA 11900 automatically took effect two years later. Health Minister Teodoro Herbosa has therefore requested legal guidance to clarify the relationship between the two laws regarding the regulation of e-cigarette flavors.

 

Hebosa pointed out that RA 11467 prohibits the use of flavors other than original tobacco and mint, while RA 11900 regulates the use of flavor descriptors. Legal guidance is needed to clarify whether the flavor descriptor ban in RA 11900 conflicts with the flavor ban in another law. The opinion of the Department of Justice on this issue is crucial, as Section 29 of RA 11900 stipulates that any laws inconsistent with it will be repealed or amended.

 

Remulla emphasized that the purpose of the two laws is to regulate the sales and distribution of e-cigarette products, including those containing nicotine and those that do not. RA 11900 provides specific guidelines for the marketing of these products but does not repeal the provisions of RA 11467 regarding the ban on flavors.

 

Remulla pointed out in a four-page legal opinion that,

 

Previously, the ban on e-cigarette products applied to the products themselves, while the new law now regulates the packaging, labeling, display, or marketing of e-cigarette products. Therefore, we can harmonize the regulations of the two laws.

 

Given that there appears to be no contradiction between the two laws, and the legislative body has not clearly indicated an intention to repeal RA 11467, both laws should be appropriately applied.

 

Remulla further stated that the advertising guidelines in RA 11900 complement the prohibitions on the manufacturing, importation, sale, and distribution of products in RA 11467, collectively regulating the sale of products with flavors other than pure tobacco and mint menthol.

 

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

China Tobacco Hubei Industrial Patent Discloses Nicotine Tooth Patch for Fixed Oral Delivery
China Tobacco Hubei Industrial Patent Discloses Nicotine Tooth Patch for Fixed Oral Delivery
According to Chinese patent records, a “nicotine tooth patch” application filed by China Tobacco Hubei Industrial Corporation (CTHB) and Hubei Xinye Tobacco Sheet Development Co., Ltd. was published on May 19, 2026. The filing proposes a nicotine gel patch that adheres to the tooth surface, especially the lingual side, to reduce displacement, foreign-body sensation, and accidental swallowing risks associated with existing oral nicotine products.
Jun.10
Former ATF Official’s Claims on Chinese Vape Companies and 6-Methyl Nicotine Fuel US Regulatory Debate
Former ATF Official’s Claims on Chinese Vape Companies and 6-Methyl Nicotine Fuel US Regulatory Debate
Former ATF Deputy Director Edgar Domenech has warned that some Chinese vape companies may be using 6-methyl nicotine, a nicotine analogue, raising new questions over how US regulators should classify emerging nicotine compounds.
Jul.13
FDA Posts Environmental Assessment for Nicotine Pouches, May Influence Future PMTA Reviews
FDA Posts Environmental Assessment for Nicotine Pouches, May Influence Future PMTA Reviews
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration released a programmatic environmental assessment covering nicotine pouches and other oral nicotine products, concluding that their overall environmental impact is generally minimal.
Regulations
May.22
India Seizes $14 Million Worth of Illegal Vaping Products Imported From China
India Seizes $14 Million Worth of Illegal Vaping Products Imported From China
India’s Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) seized approximately 300,000 illegal e-cigarettes and vaping devices worth more than ₹120 crore (approximately $14 million) during coordinated multi-state enforcement operations.
Regulations
May.22
From Heating Blades to Heating Paper? CTHB Patent Points to Microwave Heated Tobacco Design
From Heating Blades to Heating Paper? CTHB Patent Points to Microwave Heated Tobacco Design
According to China’s patent office records, a patent owned by China Tobacco Hubei Industrial Corporation (CTHB) for “cigarette paper and a cigarette for microwave heating” was granted on May 19, 2026. The patent describes cigarette paper with an outer wrapping layer, a heating layer, and an isolation heat-conducting layer, allowing it to absorb microwave energy, convert it to heat, and transfer that heat to the aerosol-generating substrate.
Jun.10
PMI Oral Products Chief Says Lack of Rules May Push Nicotine Pouch Market Into Illicit Trade
PMI Oral Products Chief Says Lack of Rules May Push Nicotine Pouch Market Into Illicit Trade
Nick Ricketts, President of Oral Products at Philip Morris International (PMI), told Logos Press that nicotine pouches should be brought under clear regulatory frameworks covering nicotine limits, flavor rules, age verification, sales controls and marketing standards, arguing that the absence of clear rules or blanket bans may push consumer demand into illegal or semi-legal channels.
Jul.06