US Judge Rules Against FDA on Premium Cigar Regulation

Jul.07.2022
US Judge Rules Against FDA on Premium Cigar Regulation
A US judge ruled FDA's decision on regulating premium cigars as arbitrary and capricious, asks for briefing on decision reversal.

On Tuesday, a federal judge in the U.S. ruled that the FDA's decision to regulate premium cigars under the same federal laws as cigarettes and other tobacco products was arbitrary and capricious.


District Judge Amit Mehta in Washington D.C. has stated that the FDA disregarded relevant data on the health risks associated with high-quality cigars. He has requested the FDA and industry groups that question this regulation, including the Premium Cigar Association and the Cigar Rights of America, to submit briefs explaining why he should overturn the FDA's decision.


Michael Edney, the attorney for the plaintiff firm Steptoe & Johnson, stated that the family-owned manufacturer and retailer of high-quality cigars has long believed that the FDA has mishandled its regulation of premium cigars. He expressed gratitude for the court's ruling and the opportunity to pursue further legal action on this matter.


At this time, it is not possible to immediately reach out to the FDA for comment on this matter.


The focus of the lawsuit is the so-called certification rules passed by the agency in 2016, in which it exercised regulatory authority over a wide range of tobacco products, including premium cigars and cigarettes, under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act.


The plaintiff stated that the organization considered and rejected high-quality cigars before finalizing its regulations, as well as during additional consultations in 2017 and 2018.


According to them, the FDA's regulations require cigar manufacturers to register their products annually and provide a list of ingredients for each product. They also require all products to undergo laboratory testing, which is impractical for "craftsmen" who produce high-quality handmade cigars.


Industry organizations state that unlike cigarettes and e-cigarettes, high-quality cigars are not appealing to young people and are not associated with addiction. They cite research indicating that young people are unlikely to use high-quality cigars, and those who do use them are unlikely to smoke cigars on a regular basis, thus not contributing to increased death rates.


On Monday, Mehta agreed that the FDA did not adequately consider the studies cited by the plaintiffs and instead claimed "there is no evidence to suggest" that high-quality cigars pose less of a health risk.


The judge wrote that when an institution unequivocally claims there is no evidence, while in fact there are relevant documented pieces of evidence, and the institution ignores or disregards it, it acts arbitrarily and capriciously.


The case is the lawsuit filed by the U.S. Cigar Association against the FDA in the District Court of Columbia, case number 16-cv-01460.


This article is a compilation of information from third-party sources and is intended solely for educational and informational purposes. All copyrights to the compiled information belong to the original media and authors, and any infringements should be reported for prompt removal.



Disclaimer

This article is provided solely for professional research, industry discussion, and informational purposes. Any references to brands, companies, products, technologies, or policies are made for factual reporting and analytical purposes only, and do not constitute endorsement, recommendation, promotion, or advertising by 2Firsts.

Nicotine-containing products, including but not limited to cigarettes, e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products, and nicotine pouches, carry significant health risks. Readers are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions, including age restrictions and access limitations.

The information contained in this article should not be regarded as investment, legal, medical, regulatory, or commercial advice. While 2Firsts strives to ensure the accuracy and reliability of its content, it does not assume liability for any direct or indirect loss arising from errors, omissions, inaccuracies, or reliance on the information contained herein.

This article is not intended for individuals below the legal age for accessing tobacco or nicotine-related information in their jurisdiction.

 

Copyright Notice

This article is either original content produced by 2Firsts or content reproduced, translated, summarized, or adapted from third-party sources with attribution where applicable. The intellectual property rights of the original content remain with 2Firsts or the respective original rights holders.

No individual or organization may copy, reproduce, distribute, republish, modify, translate, or otherwise use this content without prior authorization. Any unauthorized use may result in legal action.

For copyright-related inquiries, corrections, or removal requests, please contact: info@2firsts.com.

 

AI-Assisted Translation and Editing Notice

Portions of this article may have been translated, edited, or reviewed with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools to improve efficiency and readability. Due to the limitations of AI-assisted translation and editing, discrepancies, omissions, or inaccuracies may exist when compared with the original source.

Where applicable, readers are advised to refer to the original source for the most complete and accurate information. If you identify any errors or believe that any content infringes upon your rights, please contact us at info@2firsts.com, and we will review and address the matter promptly.

North Carolina Tightens Vape Product Directory Enforcement, Expands State and Local Powers as Violators Face Fines, Product Seizures and License Suspension or Revocation
North Carolina Tightens Vape Product Directory Enforcement, Expands State and Local Powers as Violators Face Fines, Product Seizures and License Suspension or Revocation
North Carolina has expanded enforcement of its vapor product directory rules, authorizing more state and local law enforcement participation and establishing a task force led by the State Bureau of Investigation. The legislation requires at least one unannounced compliance inspection annually for retailers, distributors and wholesalers handling covered products. Penalties effective October 1, 2026, include civil fines of $500–$750 for a first violation and $1,000–$1,500 for repeated violations within 12 months, along with potential license suspension or revocation. Manufacturers may face penalties of $10,000 per unlisted product. The measures strengthen the product directory system established in 2024.
Regulations
Oct.28
NATO Executive Director David Spross Sees U.S. Vape Regulation Improving, Calls for More PMTA Authorizations and Warns of 2027 State Tax Pressure
NATO Executive Director David Spross Sees U.S. Vape Regulation Improving, Calls for More PMTA Authorizations and Warns of 2027 State Tax Pressure
The National Association of Tobacco Outlets is calling for more FDA marketing authorizations, greater transparency in the PMTA process and continued enforcement against unauthorized e-cigarettes, even as its executive director, David Spross, points to recent regulatory developments as signs of progress. At the state level, excise taxes, flavor restrictions and vapor product directories remain major issues for tobacco retailers. By August 2026, 17 states had enacted laws establishing state-managed e-cigarette directories or similar systems.
Innovation
Sep.29 by 2Firsts Perspectives
Arizona Turns to a 50% Retail Vape Tax as Tobacco Tax Revenue Falls 47% From 2008
Arizona Turns to a 50% Retail Vape Tax as Tobacco Tax Revenue Falls 47% From 2008
Arizona's First Things First is pushing for an excise tax equal to 50% of the retail price of vaping products, estimating that the measure could generate about $100 million annually. The agency says its tobacco-tax revenue has fallen 47% from 2008 levels. Arizona has attempted to broaden its nicotine tax base in each of the past two years: a 2025 bill proposed a 50% wholesale-price tax, while a 2026 measure shifted to a 50% retail-price tax covering alternative nicotine products and vapor products. Separately, the state enacted HB 4001 this year to establish a new licensing and sales framework for alternative nicotine products.
Sep.21
Hawaii's Largest Independent Vape Retailer and Wholesaler Volcano to Close All 13 Stores Ahead of 2027 Sales Rules
Hawaii's Largest Independent Vape Retailer and Wholesaler Volcano to Close All 13 Stores Ahead of 2027 Sales Rules
Hawaii-based vaping company Volcano eCigs plans to close all 13 physical retail stores on December 31, 2026, affecting approximately 56 employees. Volcano operates retail, wholesale, proprietary product and online sales businesses and has previously described itself in legislative testimony as Hawaii's largest independent vape retailer and wholesaler. Its operating company, Jocor Enterprises LLC, filed a formal closure notice on November 4, citing changes in the state's regulatory environment. From January 1, 2027, Hawaii will restrict the sale, acquisition and possession of vaping devices and e-liquids not listed in a state product directory, alongside separate restrictions on certain disposable devices. The closure concerns Volcano's physical retail network; the company has not announced the termination of wholesale or online operations.
Market
Nov.09
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
Philippines Mandates Safety Certification for Nicotine Pouches, Gives Industry 12 Months to Comply
Philippines Mandates Safety Certification for Nicotine Pouches, Gives Industry 12 Months to Comply
The Philippines Department of Trade and Industry has placed nicotine pouches under mandatory product certification through Department Administrative Order No. 26-07, Series of 2026. Nicotine pouches must obtain a Philippine Standard, or PS, license before they can be manufactured, imported, packed, distributed or sold in the country. The regime requires testing for nicotine content, pH and water activity, while packaging must disclose nicotine strength, ingredients, allergens, batch information, the PS certification mark and prescribed health warnings. Existing market participants have a 12-month transition period to comply.
Regulations
Oct.12