Bryan Haynes of the Troutman Pepper Tobacco + Nicotine Team will attend the InterTabac trade show in Dortmund, Germany on September 20-21. 

InterTabac is known as the world’s largest trade fair for tobacco products and smoking accessories, with hundreds of exhibitors from more than fifty countries around the world.  InterTabac…

Agustin Rodriguez is attending the Third Annual New Approaches Summit on September 23 during UN week in New York City, which will focus on how policy, innovation, and technological advancements can collectively prevent 1 billion tobacco-related deaths this century.

Agustin will be participating on a panel discussion titled “Chevron, Triton…

Agustin Rodriguez and Bryan Haynes will be attending the upcoming Tobacco Science Research Conference in Atlanta, GA, from September 8 to 11.

This year’s conference is focused on “Tobacco Harm Reduction: What Have We Learned and How Do We Move Forward?”

Agustin will be participating in a panel discussion on…

On August 27, the New Jersey Attorney General (AG) and the Division of Consumer Affairs announced that the state had issued notices of violation and $4,500 civil penalty demands to 19 retailers across New Jersey for allegedly selling banned flavored vapor products. This is New Jersey’s first public enforcement of the state’s 2020 flavor ban, and New Jersey joins a number of other state AGs taking similar action across the U.S.

We recently had the opportunity to attend, and present at, the industry portion of the 2024 Federation of Tax Administrators Tobacco Tax Annual Conference in Mobile, Alabama.

Presentations at the conference included topics of interest to state tobacco tax administrators and industry (the agenda is located here). The conference was well attended by both industry members and state and federal agencies responsible for enforcing tobacco and nicotine laws. Our team has attended this conference for several years and it always provides a great opportunity for collaboration between government and industry, and this year was no different.

In August, a group of tobacco companies filed a petition for certiorari at the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking review of a lower court’s holding that the First Amendment does not prohibit the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from requiring graphic warnings on cigarette packs. As we noted in prior coverage, the March 2020 FDA rule at issue would require new textual, health warning statements alongside color, photorealistic images displayed on the top 50% of the front and rear panels of cigarette packs and the top 20% of cigarette advertisements.

Agustin Rodriguez and Nicholas Ramos of the Troutman Pepper Tobacco Team will be attending the 2024 Federation of Tax Administration (FTA) Tobacco Section Annual Conference. This in-person event will be held in Mobile, Alabama from August 18-21, 2024, and presents a great opportunity for government and industry members to collaborate…

In June, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) argued in federal court that the federal Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking (PACT) Act requires tribal retailers to obtain state licenses to sell cigarettes on their own reservations. If accepted, ATF’s position would greatly expand the scope of state authority over tribal tobacco sales.

On August 2, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit decided a case addressing Nebraska’s authority to require tribal cigarette manufacturers that are not parties to the Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) to comply with the state’s escrow statute with respect to cigarettes sold in Indian country. See HCI Distrib., Inc. v. Peterson, No. 23-2311 (8th Cir., Aug. 2, 2024).

In late June, the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana held that federal law preempts the Montana Attorney General (AG) from removing the cigarette brands of Grand River Enterprises Six Nations, Ltd. (Grand River) from the state tobacco directory based on Grand River’s alleged violations of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act (FDCA). The FDCA preempts state law actions based solely on FDCA violations if the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not already found that such violations exist, the court explained.