State Regulatory

Subscribe to State Regulatory via RSS

In this post, we take a closer look at state tobacco and nicotine product licensing considerations. When approaching state licensing issues, it may be helpful to establish a checklist to help manufacturers, importers, distributors, and retailers determine the impact of these laws on their products and distribution models. State licensing requirements can be complicated but, with a basic understanding of the key issues described below and good practices, manufacturers, importers, distributors, and retailers can ensure they remain compliant.  

The landscape of tobacco product and cannabis flavor bans or restrictions varies significantly across the country. In both industries, some states restrict all or some flavors in all types of products, while other states restrict all or some flavors in some, but not all, products. Below, we provide a high-level overview of the flavor ban and restriction landscape in both industries. As we will discuss, there is a wide disparity between cannabis and tobacco product flavor bans or restrictions and, where they exist, there appears to be more flexibility among cannabis flavor restrictions than for tobacco product flavor bans or restrictions.

In August 2023, Judge Amit P. Mehta of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia partially vacated a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) rule that had “deemed” premium cigars subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), known as the “Deeming Rule.” This decision exempted premium cigars from FDA’s tobacco product authorities. In September 2023, however, FDA appealed, and the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is currently weighing the matter. So, what would it take for FDA to succeed on appeal, and what is at stake for the premium cigar industry?

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) recently upheld, in a unanimous decision, the town of Brookline’s ordinance banning the sale of tobacco and e-cigarette products to anyone born after Jan. 1, 2000 (the Tobacco Sales Ban). Brookline is the first U.S. locality to impose a tobacco sales ban based on a specific date.

A couple of years ago we posted an overview of state licensing and excise tax considerations for tobacco companies. In this post, we take a closer look at state excise tax considerations. When approaching state excise tax issues, it may be helpful to establish a checklist to help manufacturers, distributors, and retailers determine the impact of these laws on their products and distribution models.

Over the past decade, at least five states and hundreds of localities have passed, or attempted to pass, laws banning flavored tobacco products. To date, litigants have brought many challenges to these laws, often arguing that such bans are preempted under the federal Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (TCA). This argument, however, has largely proven unsuccessful — a trend that continued in January when the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company’s challenge to California’s ban on the sale of flavored tobacco products.

In December, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued warning letters to online retailers for reportedly selling unauthorized e-cigarette products. Consistent with the Center for Tobacco Products’ (CTP) recent focus, the letters target unauthorized products, which FDA states are particularly appealing to youth — including Lost Mary, Funky Republic/Funky Lands, and Elf Bar/EB Design. These warning letters follow FDA’s recent issuance of civil money penalty complaints against 25 brick-and-mortar retailers for failing to comply with prior warning letters. Those civil money penalty complaints, which we previously discussed here, continued the agency’s approach of seeking the maximum penalty approved by law.

Recently, NJOY LLC filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California against more than 30 foreign and domestic defendants that manufacture, market, distribute, and sell tobacco products in an (indirect) effort to force them to comply with federal and state laws. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company (collectively, RJR) also recently filed a complaint with the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) against more than 25 foreign and domestic manufacturers, distributors, and retailers (collectively, the respondents) that seeks to prevent the import and resale of certain tobacco products. These lawsuits serve as two examples of how industry is trying to take independent legal action to target allegedly noncompliant actors and force them to comply with applicable law.