Vermont Considers Banning Flavored E-Cigarettes Amid Health Concerns

Regulations by 2FIRSTS.ai
Mar.15.2024
Vermont Considers Banning Flavored E-Cigarettes Amid Health Concerns
Vermont considers banning flavored tobacco products, including popular "ZYN," to protect youth health. Concerns over economic impact and enforcement.

According to WCAX on March 15th, Vermont is considering voting on a ban on flavored tobacco, including all flavored e-cigarette products such as "ZYN" popular among young people, from being sold.

 

Anne Morris, a family doctor at the Vermont Family Medicine Institute, expressed concerns about the significant health risks associated with these products, stating, "We are concerned about lung cancer, oral cancer, dental issues, and the potential need for extensive dental treatment in the future." However, some lawmakers remain worried about the impact of such a ban on small businesses and potential loss of state revenue. Gina Galfetti, a lawmaker, said, "The original intent of this legislation may not be achieved, as children still have many other avenues to purchase e-cigarettes, such as online or by crossing state lines into New Hampshire."

 

The measure was passed by the Vermont Senate last year. House Speaker Jill Krowinski believes that lawmakers have enough votes to pass the ban, but it is unclear if they have enough votes to override a potential veto by Governor Phil Scott.

 

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

UK Vape Tax Countdown: Retailer Vape HQ Estimates 100ml E-liquid Prices Could Rise From £12.99 to £39.39, While Pod Kits Increase Less Than 10%
UK Vape Tax Countdown: Retailer Vape HQ Estimates 100ml E-liquid Prices Could Rise From £12.99 to £39.39, While Pod Kits Increase Less Than 10%
The UK’s Vaping Products Duty (VPD), scheduled to take effect in October 2026, is prompting retailers to assess how different vape categories may be affected. UK retailer Vape HQ has estimated potential price changes under the new volume-based tax system, showing that 100ml shortfill e-liquids could see prices rise from around £12.99 to £39.39, a 203% increase, while 2ml prefilled pod vape kits could rise from £5.99 to £6.52, an increase of about 9%. The estimates highlight how a volume-based tax structure creates uneven cost impacts across product categories.
Aug.19
EU ‘TPD3’ Enters Next Phase on Aug. 14 as Fragmented Vape and Nicotine Pouch Rules Push the Single Market Toward Regulatory Overhaul
EU ‘TPD3’ Enters Next Phase on Aug. 14 as Fragmented Vape and Nicotine Pouch Rules Push the Single Market Toward Regulatory Overhaul
A 12-week European Commission consultation on revising the Tobacco Products Directive and Tobacco Advertising Directive is due to close on Aug. 14, 2026. The Commission has identified e-cigarette flavours, disposable vapes, tobacco heating devices, nicotine pouches, nicotine-free e-cigarettes, packaging and digital marketing among areas for possible new EU rules. National regulations already vary significantly across the bloc, a fragmentation the Commission says creates internal-market barriers and distorts competition. No formal revised TPD/TAD legislative text has yet been published, with the Commission currently indicating December 2026 for the legislative initiative.
Aug.14
China’s Zhengzhou Tobacco Research Institute develops end-to-end heated tobacco analysis to trace aerosol compound origins
China’s Zhengzhou Tobacco Research Institute develops end-to-end heated tobacco analysis to trace aerosol compound origins
The Zhengzhou Tobacco Research Institute of China National Tobacco Corporation has filed a patent application for an end-to-end method to analyze the migration and transformation of chemical compounds in heated tobacco products. Using GC-Orbitrap/MS non-targeted analysis, the method compares tobacco substrate and aerosol samples to distinguish compounds transferred directly from the substrate from those newly formed during heating, while also calculating transfer rates. In an example involving nine heated tobacco products, the patent identified 17 newly formed thermal decomposition compounds and 38 transferred compounds.
Aug.13
Smoore Seeks to Toss CCELL Price-Fixing Claim as Court Weighs Vertical Distribution Versus Horizontal Conspiracy
Smoore Seeks to Toss CCELL Price-Fixing Claim as Court Weighs Vertical Distribution Versus Horizontal Conspiracy
Smoore and four authorized U.S. CCELL distributors are asking a California federal court to permanently dismiss a core antitrust claim brought by direct purchasers. Plaintiffs allege that Smoore coordinated minimum wholesale prices, customer allocation and limits on price competition among distributors, amounting to a per se unlawful horizontal conspiracy. The defendants say the alleged conduct reflects ordinary vertical relationships between a manufacturer and its distributors. The court previously dismissed a similar claim, and the latest dispute centers on whether the second amended complaint adds sufficient facts to establish a horizontal agreement.
Sep.14
Australia’s Victoria Steps Up Illegal Tobacco Enforcement With Store Closures and Penalties of Up to A$2.5 Million
Australia’s Victoria Steps Up Illegal Tobacco Enforcement With Store Closures and Penalties of Up to A$2.5 Million
Australia’s state of Victoria has activated new powers allowing Tobacco Licensing Victoria and police to shut premises suspected of selling, supplying or possessing illicit tobacco for up to 90 days. Longer closures can be ordered by a magistrates’ court. Businesses subject to closure orders must generally cease all trading and will be placed on a public list. Breaching a closure order can carry penalties of up to A$2.5 million and 20 years in prison.
Sep.10
U.S. Ninth Circuit Upholds FDA Denial of MH Global’s Flavored Vape PMTA Applications
U.S. Ninth Circuit Upholds FDA Denial of MH Global’s Flavored Vape PMTA Applications
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the FDA’s denial of MH Global LLC’s applications to market flavored electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). The court ruled that FDA’s comparative-efficacy framework, which requires applicants to show that flavored products provide greater cessation or switching benefits than tobacco-flavored alternatives, is consistent with the Tobacco Control Act’s “appropriate for the protection of the public health” standard. The court also found that FDA was not required to establish the framework through notice-and-comment rulemaking.
Aug.26