Deeming Regulations have been released!!!!
- Thread starter Oliver
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
The first post in that thread was Friday, the day after the deeming.
I'm not positive, but I think a lot has to do with how hard it is to verify someone's age online, possibly opening them up to legal action if someone were caught selling to a minor.What are the CC companies scared of ...guilty by association?
Check out the Research Data page.
Ask him then why cigarette manufacturers don't have to demonstrate that their products are not harmful (actually, that they are good for public health), while vapor product manufacturers do. If it's about parity?
And yes, ask him to support HR 2058 and the Cole-Bishop amendment to the 2017 Agricultural appropriations bill.
They actually figured out a way to ban flavors without banning them, all they have to do is not approve any PMTA for a flavored product. That way, they don't have to deal with the dichotomy of allowing the BT "tobacco" flavors, but not allowing other flavors since they're all technically characterizing flavors.
watch the market flood with new BLU cigarettes and tweeker vapes at the effing gas station. Our govt likes to scare us....as Americans we are used to being stolen from and lied to so nothing has changed there.
But 100mg/ml strength nic is not really readily vapable without diluting it to typical eliquid levels... so not sure how the PMTA process would fit into that.
Like I said earlier, a few smart vendors will get PMTAs for flavorless eliquid (only nic and PG) in various strengths (probably a little higher than the normal 3/6/12/18). This solves any flavor bans, and simplifies the PMTA process. What the consumer does with it once they arrive home is nobody's business.
Too many different state level rules on tobacco purchases. It's easier for them to just not process tobacco purchases than to keep track of ever changing local regs.
Exactly, to work around flavor bans, as they were not under FDA tobacco control until just now. Same thing with hookah. Now, everybody get screwed equally.
Bummer. Maybe they could remove that page.
I'm just wondering what the "intended use" would be for sale directly to consumers, if it's not for e-liquid?
They are also in Swedish snus, if you need them, and in (now discontinued) dissolvable tobacco like Ariva and Stonewall. Perhaps in WTA e-liquids, but this is a new product so jury is still out. Snus has been around for 200 years and its safety record and efficacy are not under dispute.
Last edited:
Quite right Endor. Don't forget Maxwell House, Folgers and all those old school
blends made for the electric peculator were not exactly premium blends.
Theoretically nothing other than the 90 day restrictions as described should be all
that happens but like you I think it advisable not to close ones eyes or hold our
breathes waiting two years. It might be just me but, I have this vague feeling
that by this regulation is written something in the way regulations are introduced,
written and ,enacted is being profoundly altered. Nothing I can nail down.
Regards
Mike
Oh, that's simple.
"We tax cigarettes, and that funds all sorts of programs. Without that money, we'd have to raise real taxes, which would harm my re-election potential.
We receive money each year from cigarette companies as part of the MSA that supposed to go to anti-tobacco education, but really goes into the General Fund. We even securitized some of those future payments in tobacco bonds, because we were greedy, and we're on the hook to pay those back (plus interest).
Vapor products undermine those revenue streams. We can't figure out how to tax it appropriately without a bunch of fuss from vapers, and the reduction in cigarette consumption will reduce MSA payouts in the near future, putting those bonds at risk of default and causing further tax increases to cover the difference (with the increased risk to my re-election).
Oh, and they attract children to a lifelong nicotine addiction. Yeah, that too."
Done.
I checked out their partners. Chem Nerdz is unsettling. They have one nicotine listed at 1000mg, but none of the others listed indicate the strength.
FDA vaping ban:
Deem everything vaping related a "tobacco product"
CC processors no longer support businesses
USPS, UPS, FedEx no longer ship
Mexican cartels start growing tobacco, building mods....
Deem everything vaping related a "tobacco product"
CC processors no longer support businesses
USPS, UPS, FedEx no longer ship
Mexican cartels start growing tobacco, building mods....
What are the CC companies scared of ...guilty by association?
No, not that. The list of "high risk" merchant accounts is pretty long. Many of which on the face wouldn't appear high risk at first glance but they are for various legitimate reasons.
For example, antique stores are high risk. Wouldn't think that is a risky business right? Well, there are plenty of antique deals who sell "clones". lol.
Consignment and pawn shops are high risk...don't want an electronic transaction tied to a stolen goods sale.
One more closely related to the vape industry is supplement and vitamin sales. Very controversial product with a lot of gray areas on what is legal and what isn't. That industry is always pushing the limit as well. Legal and safe until a class of people have an adverse reaction.
Even more closely related to the ecig world is other uses for a PV. That in itself makes our hardware high risk from a merchant account standpoint among other things.
Vices are categorically considered high risk from an electronic transaction standpoint. Anything related to gambling (even betting advice businesses), modeling, and online tobacco are high risk. I have a good bit of experience in credit card processing stuff and it doesn't surprise me one bit that it's difficult for retailers.
OTOH- a group of processors will grab it all. It's low ticket/high volume transactions with physical product changing hands. No chance that card processing will be eliminated from the vape industry. Well, at least not before a multi billion dollar black market gets rolling. We're a few years away from that. haha
So much for pesticides.
In 2008, the EPA received a request, from the registrant, to cancel the registration of the last nicotine pesticide registered in the United States. This request was granted, and since 1 January 2014, this pesticide has not been available for sale.
There could be "Actions" taken on Flavored e-Liquids. Or even Classes of Flavors. Or Flavors may be Addressed as the FDA has said they will Address Flavors. On an Individual PMTA by PMTA basis.
It just Hard to Say.
I would be (more?) concerned about a Limitation on mg's per ml. Or in the Limitation of Total ml's that may be Purchased in a Single Order.
I think if one Looks at what is going on in the UK, one could See Things that the FDA could view as a Good Idea.
Similar threads
- Locked
