On February 19, 2021, a proposed rule from the U.S. Postal Service (the “USPS”), regarding the treatment of electronic nicotine delivery systems (“ENDS”) in the mail, was published in the Federal Register. The USPS will receive comments on or before March 22, 2021.
Continue Reading U.S. Postal Service Issues Proposed Rule Regarding ENDS Nonmailability and Exceptions
THC, CBD and other Non-tobacco Vaping Product Sellers Should Take Note of New PACT Act Provisions
On December 22, 2020, we blogged about the omnibus 2021 Consolidated Appropriations Act passed by Congress, which included legislation extending the applicability of the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking (“PACT”) Act to electronic nicotine delivery systems or “ENDS.” The legislation, called the ‘‘Preventing Online Sales of E-Cigarettes to Children Act,’’ sweeps ENDS into the PACT Act by amending the PACT Act’s definition of a cigarette to include electronic nicotine delivery systems, thereby subjecting remote sales of these products to various requirements and restrictions. Another important feature of this new law is that the defined term “ENDS” in this new legislation actually covers more than electronic nicotine delivery systems.
Continue Reading THC, CBD and other Non-tobacco Vaping Product Sellers Should Take Note of New PACT Act Provisions
Philadelphia Appeals Preliminary Injunction Against Flavor Ban
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit will review a preliminary injunction against Philadelphia’s enforcement of an ordinance banning the sale of certain flavored tobacco products.
Will a preliminary injunction against Philadelphia’s flavored tobacco ban stand? The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit will have the opportunity to decide in Cigar Association of America, et al. v. City of Philadelphia, et al., No. 20-3519 (3d Cir.), appealed from, No. 2:20-cv-03220 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 13, 2020).
Continue Reading Philadelphia Appeals Preliminary Injunction Against Flavor Ban
DC Circuit Decides Deeming Rule Doesn’t Violate Appointments Clause or First Amendment
By Robert Claiborne, Dascher Pasco & Bryan Haynes, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP
Did the FDA violate the Constitution when it issued its rule Deeming Tobacco Products to Be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, & Cosmetic Act, 81 Fed. Reg. 28,973 (May 10, 2016) (the “Deeming Rule”)? No, according to a recent decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
Continue Reading DC Circuit Decides Deeming Rule Doesn’t Violate Appointments Clause or First Amendment
New Virginia Law Taxes Remote Sellers of Tobacco Products Beginning Jan. 1, 2021
Does your business make remote sales of tobacco products (“OTP”) into Virginia? If so, you should consider whether a recent enactment requires you to pay Virginia’s OTP excise tax.
Continue Reading New Virginia Law Taxes Remote Sellers of Tobacco Products Beginning Jan. 1, 2021
Two U.S. Courts of Appeals to Consider Federal Preemption of Local Flavor Bans
Plaintiffs have appealed to the Eighth and Ninth Circuits, challenging flavored tobacco bans in Los Angeles County, California, and the City of Edina, Minnesota. The cases could have implications for similar laws in other States and localities.
Has Congress preempted local authority to ban the sale of flavored tobacco products? Two different U.S. Courts of Appeals will have the opportunity to answer the question in R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., et al. v. City of Edina, et al., No. 20-2852 (8th Cir.), and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., et al. v. Los Angeles County, et al., No. 20-55930 (9th Cir.).
Continue Reading Two U.S. Courts of Appeals to Consider Federal Preemption of Local Flavor Bans
Is L.A. County’s Flavored Tobacco Ban Unlawful?
Cases challenging Los Angeles County’s flavored tobacco ban could define the limit of State and local authority in addressing flavored tobacco products and could have implications for similar laws in other States and localities.
Los Angeles County’s flavored tobacco ban is being challenged in two cases: R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., et al. v. Los Angeles County, et al., No. 2:20-cv-04880 (C.D. Cal.), and CA Smoke & Vape Association, Inc., et al. v. Los Angeles County, et al., No. 2:20-cv-4065 (C.D. Cal.). Both cases are before the Honorable Dale S. Fischer of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
Continue Reading Is L.A. County’s Flavored Tobacco Ban Unlawful?
Troutman Sanders Tobacco Team Featured in Bloomberg Tax Article Regarding Post-Wayfair Taxation of Small Businesses and Potential Congressional Legislation
In a recent article in Bloomberg Tax, Troutman Sanders attorneys Robert Claiborne and Agustin Rodriguez discuss a House subcommittee hearing on the effect of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Wayfair decision on small businesses and whether Congress might try to mitigate the effects of state and local taxation on interstate commerce in the wake of
Troutman Sanders Tobacco Team Featured in the August 2019 SMOKESHOP Magazine Article Regarding Trump’s Limits on Federal Regulations that Could Impact FDA Tobacco Regulations
In the August 2019 edition of SMOKESHOP Magazine, Troutman Sanders attorneys Robert Claiborne and Bryan Haynes discuss the tobacco regulatory implications of President Trump’s 2017 Executive Order 13771 reducing regulation and adding cost controls. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued guidance surrounding the Order which prompted a lawsuit to be filed in
Troutman Sanders Tobacco Team featured in April 2017 SMOKESHOP Magazine on a Recent $247 Million Judgment Against UPS for Cigarette Trafficking
Troutman Sanders attorneys Bryan Haynes and Robert Claiborne, Jr. were featured in the April 2017 issue of SMOKESHOP magazine. The article, titled “UPS Untaxed Cigarette Trafficking Liability: Increased Scrutiny on Tobacco Companies”, discusses a recent court decision finding United Parcel Service liable to New York City and New York State for claims related to alleged