US Graphic Warning Implementation Delayed to 2023

Aug.15.2022
US Graphic Warning Implementation Delayed to 2023
Implementation of US graphic health warnings delayed until October 6, 2023, due to legal challenges and Covid-19.

According to the Winston-Salem Journal, the implementation date for the U.S. graphic health warnings has been postponed by three months to October 6, 2023.


On August 10th, a judge from a Texas regional court approved the latest delay in the release date for the graphic health warnings. This is at least the ninth time a judge has ordered a delay.


The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a final rule in March 2020 requiring new graphic warnings on cigarette packages. The rule mandates the use of labels featuring lesser-known smoking health risks, such as diabetes, and the warnings must cover the top 50% of both the front and back panels of packages and at least 20% of top advertising space.


In April and May of 2020, cigarette manufacturers and retailers sued the FDA, arguing that the graphic warning requirements were equivalent to government anti-smoking propaganda because the government has never forced legal product manufacturers to use their own ads to spread messages urging adults not to use their products.


In a recent challenge, tobacco companies argued that the deadline delay due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has become too burdensome. They also pointed out that if graphic health warnings are required to be rejected in court again, they face the risk of losing new packaging investments. In March 2021, a regional court in Texas approved the motion by the plaintiffs to postpone the effective date of the final rule until April 14, 2022. This resulted in an additional delay.


Statement:


This article is based on compiled information from a third party and is intended solely for industry exchange and learning purposes.


This article does not represent the views of 2FIRSTS and 2FIRSTS cannot confirm the authenticity or accuracy of the article's content. The translation of this article is only intended for industry exchange and research purposes.


Due to limitations in the compiler's abilities, this article's translation may not be an exact representation of the original. Please refer to the original text for accuracy.


2FIRSTS maintains complete alignment with the Chinese government on any domestic, Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, and foreign issues and stances.


The copyright of the compiled information belongs to the original media and authors. If there is any infringement, please contact us for deletion.


This document has been generated through artificial intelligence translation and is provided solely for the purposes of industry discourse and learning. Please note that the intellectual property rights of the content belong to the original media source or author. Owing to certain limitations in the translation process, there may be discrepancies between the translated text and the original content. We recommend referring to the original source for complete accuracy. In case of any inaccuracies, we invite you to reach out to us with corrections. If you believe any content has infringed upon your rights, please contact us immediately for its removal.

Brazil’s federal prosecutors sue for strict e-cigarette rules, urging regulation over a “paper ban”
Brazil’s federal prosecutors sue for strict e-cigarette rules, urging regulation over a “paper ban”
Brazil’s Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office (MPF) has filed a public civil action seeking to compel the federal government and Anvisa to establish a strict, enforceable regulatory framework for electronic smoking devices, replacing the current blanket ban. The lawsuit calls for mandatory product registration, nicotine caps, bans on youth-targeted advertising, and clear health warnings on packaging, and demands a national consumption report and an implementation timetable within 90 days.
Jan.30 by 2FIRSTS.ai
Smoore, Distributors Move to Toss Cannabis Vape Price-Fixing Suit
Smoore, Distributors Move to Toss Cannabis Vape Price-Fixing Suit
Several vape manufacturers and distributors, including Shenzhen Smoore Technology Co. Ltd., Smoore International Holdings, 3Win Corp., Jupiter Research LLC, Canna Brand Solutions, and Greenlane Holdings Inc., have filed motions seeking dismissal of consumer claims in consolidated antitrust litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
Events
Feb.24
Two Florida Bills Move: One Restricts Vape Advertising, Another Rewrites Cigarette Tax Treatment for Heated Tobacco
Two Florida Bills Move: One Restricts Vape Advertising, Another Rewrites Cigarette Tax Treatment for Heated Tobacco
The Florida Senate Industries Committee advance SB 980, the “Florida Age-Gate Act,” which would restrict advertising, promotion, and open displays of certain nicotine dispensing devices that lack FDA marketing authorization, with escalating penalties. Separately, the Florida House Ways and Means Committee advance HB 377, which would exclude heated tobacco products from being taxed like cigarettes.
Jan.28 by 2FIRSTS.ai
Proposed vaping duty in Jersey: £467,000 forecast for 2026 as it takes effect in the second half of the year
Proposed vaping duty in Jersey: £467,000 forecast for 2026 as it takes effect in the second half of the year
Jersey is proposing a vaping duty. The Treasury Minister said the duty is forecast to raise £467,000 in 2026 because it will take effect in the second half of the year, and £955,000 per year from 2027 to 2029. Implementation is estimated to cost around £400,000 over four years, with an initial cost of £145,000 in 2026. The policy is described as aiming to reduce nicotine consumption and improve public health, while avoiding a shift to smoking.
Feb.26 by 2FIRSTS.ai
Bangladesh High Court rule targets vape-ban clause; fines up to about $1,635 cited
Bangladesh High Court rule targets vape-ban clause; fines up to about $1,635 cited
Bangladesh’s High Court issued a rule asking why Section 6(G) of the Smoking and Tobacco Products Usage (Control) Act, 2005 — which bans the import, supply and sale of vapes and e-cigarettes — should not be declared unconstitutional and illegal.
Mar.02 by 2FIRSTS.ai
California: Stiiizy hit with another lawsuit alleging high-THC vapes marketed to teens
California: Stiiizy hit with another lawsuit alleging high-THC vapes marketed to teens
A new lawsuit in California state court accuses Stiiizy Inc. of steering high-THC vape products toward teens through youth-appealing branding and weak age verification, alleging the plaintiff’s underage use was followed by cannabis-induced psychosis-related symptoms and significant personal harm.
Feb.06 by 2FIRSTS.ai