Pending before the New Jersey Legislature is Assembly Bill No. 1586, which, among other things, would “impose[] the New Jersey Tobacco Products Wholesale Sales and Use Tax on electronic cigarettes.” New Jersey does not currently impose excise taxes on electronic cigarettes. The bill has been referred to the Assembly Health and Senior Services Committee, where it remains under consideration.
Continue Reading

Pending before the Mississippi Legislature is House Bill 906, which, if enacted, would increase the “tobacco equity tax” applicable to cigarettes manufactured by non-signatories to the State’s 1997 tobacco settlement agreement in Moore ex rel. State v. American Tobacco Co., et al., No. 94-1429 (Miss. Ch. Ct. Jackson Cnty.) (the “tobacco settlement agreement”). On January 11, 2018, the bill was referred to the House Ways and Means Committee, which is chaired by the bill’s principal author, Representative Jeffrey C. Smith (R-Dist. 39).
Continue Reading

A bill was introduced in the New Hampshire legislature on January 3, 2018 regarding the regulation of e-liquids. The bill, NH18-H.1812, specifically addresses labeling requirements for e-liquid products. Distributors and manufacturers of e-liquid products to be sold in New Hampshire would be required to add a product label which includes a list of ingredients

On November 8, 2017, Congresswoman Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) introduced H.R. 4273. The next day, Senator Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) introduced S. 2100. If passed, either bill would enact the “Tobacco to 21 Act.” The bills have been referred, respectively, to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Continue Reading

Just last year, Pennsylvania passed a draconian new tax on electronic cigarettes.  Imposed at the rate of 40% of the retailer’s purchase price, the tax applies to all “electronic cigarettes,” which is defined to mean an “electronic oral device, such as one composed of a heating element and battery or electronic circuit, or both, which provides a vapor of nicotine or any other substance and the use or inhalation of which simulates smoking.”  This term is defined to include both (1) a device, as described in the definition above, and irrespective how it is marketed, and (2) any liquid or other substance placed or sold for use in such a device. 
Continue Reading

Troutman attorneys Bryan M. Haynes and Robert S. Claiborne, Jr. were featured in the February 2017 issue of SMOKESHOP, a tobacco industry magazine, in an article discussing the Indiana Vapor Act. This article discusses the federal appeals court’s decision that Indiana’s Vapor Pens and E-Liquid Act is unconstitutional to the extent that it regulates out-of-state

On March 24, 2017, the Third Court of Appeals of Texas decided Hegar, et al. v. Texas Small Tobacco Coalition, et al., No. 03-13-00753-CV. The court held that a tax on nonparticipating or non-settling manufacturers (“NPMs”) did not violate either the Equal Protection or the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The law at issue, Subchapter V to Chapter 161 of the Texas Health & Safety Code (“Subchapter V”), taxed NPMs remaining outside of the Master Settlement Agreement (“MSA”) at approximately $0.55 per cigarette pack and companies subsequently joining the MSA at approximately $0.15 per pack. The case was of particular interest because Texas is not a party to the MSA, yet the MSA’s distinctions were the bases for Subchapter V’s.
Continue Reading