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of Justice on this issue is crucial, as Section 29 of RA 11900 stipulates that any laws inconsistent with it will be repealed or amended.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

NAS 2026 | FDA CTP Director Says PMTA Pathway Is “Predicated on Tobacco Harm Reduction”
NAS 2026 | FDA CTP Director Says PMTA Pathway Is “Predicated on Tobacco Harm Reduction”
At the 2026 New Approaches Summit in New York, FDA Center for Tobacco Products Director Bret Koplow said the PMTA pathway is “predicated on tobacco harm reduction.” He outlined four CTP priorities: youth prevention, helping adults quit or switch to lower-risk products, improving relative-risk communication, and reducing unauthorized products. Koplow also addressed flavored e-cigarettes, public risk perceptions, industry credibility and efforts to make PMTA reviews more efficient and predictable.
Sep.26
JUUL2 Sued Within a Week of FDA Authorization as AJ Marketing Alleges Infringement of Programmable Vape Patent
JUUL2 Sued Within a Week of FDA Authorization as AJ Marketing Alleges Infringement of Programmable Vape Patent
Less than a week after JUUL2 received U.S. FDA marketing authorization on August 28, 2026, JUUL Labs was sued for patent infringement in federal court in Delaware. AJ Marketing LLC filed the complaint on September 3, alleging that both JUUL 1 and JUUL2 infringe U.S. Patent No. 8,851,068 B2. The patent covers aspects of programmable electronic vaporization devices, including controls over dose delivery, usage frequency and operating parameters. The plaintiff is seeking reasonable royalties and ongoing royalties tied to the remaining life of the patent. JUUL has not yet publicly responded to the case.
Sep.10
New Zealand Associate Health Minister Casey Costello Warns on Illicit Cigarettes as Legal Tobacco Sales Halve Over Decade
New Zealand Associate Health Minister Casey Costello Warns on Illicit Cigarettes as Legal Tobacco Sales Halve Over Decade
New Zealand Associate Health Minister Casey Costello said legal tobacco sales in the country have fallen by more than half over the past decade, with sales declining more than 20% in 2025 compared with the previous year. She warned that the decline may not fully reflect lower smoking rates, as increased availability of illicit cigarettes could also be contributing. The government said it would continue strengthening tobacco and vape retail enforcement while monitoring the impact of illicit tobacco on public health and tax revenue.
Aug.26
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
Wall Street Journal: U.S. FDA Plans Faster Vape and Nicotine Pouch Reviews, Revisit of 2021 PMTA Rule
Wall Street Journal: U.S. FDA Plans Faster Vape and Nicotine Pouch Reviews, Revisit of 2021 PMTA Rule
The Trump administration is preparing changes intended to accelerate FDA market authorization reviews for e-cigarettes and nicotine pouches, according to The Wall Street Journal. The FDA is expected to revisit its 2021 PMTA rule and may simplify some scientific study requirements and shorten review times. The agency has not formally announced the changes. Over the past year, the FDA has already accelerated nicotine-pouch reviews, expanded ENDS authorizations and upgraded its CTP Portal NextGen application system. As of August 2026, 43 nicotine pouch products and 48 e-cigarette products had received FDA marketing authorization.
Sep.24
South Korea Constitutional Court Upholds Volume-Based E-Liquid Tax, With Challenged Rates at KRW 370 and KRW 628 per Milliliter
South Korea Constitutional Court Upholds Volume-Based E-Liquid Tax, With Challenged Rates at KRW 370 and KRW 628 per Milliliter
South Korea's Constitutional Court has upheld fixed taxes on nicotine-containing e-cigarette liquids based on solution volume, ruling that challenged provisions imposing KRW 370 per milliliter in individual consumption tax and KRW 628 per milliliter in tobacco consumption tax do not violate the Constitution. The cases stemmed from historical disputes involving importers that reported nicotine as being extracted from tobacco stems rather than leaves. South Korea has since broadened its tobacco definition to include synthetic nicotine, while current tax laws provide reduced rates for certain products not derived from tobacco.
Sep.18