Deeming Regulations have been released!!!!

[Bob Chill]

just have a random question about the regs etc...

will companies manufacturing in China have to follow these regs? Kanger coils for example. Will we be able to buy them from China even if these regs are put in place?

Probably available for the next 2 years or so. With increasing challenges as time goes on.

Ordering directly from China could become problematic because of age verification requirements starting on 8/8. There will be US retailers that comply with AV but then you have to fear what your State might cook up as far as interstate commerce of tobacco products. Everything from drip tip to the bottom of your mod and everything in between is now deemed a tobacco product.

My State only has 2 exemptions for tobacco products being shipped from out of state (premium cigars and pipe tobacco). I'm pretty nervous about how they will view hardware. I'm almost certain they will include e-liquid under PACT Act regulations (no shipping. Face to face only).

It's very muddy how this is all going to shake out. Over the next 2 years individual States will end up being much more threatening than the FDA regs. In 3 years it could be decimation if nothing changes.

 

[johnny hotsauce]

just have a random question about the regs etc...

will companies manufacturing in China have to follow these regs? Kanger Coils for example. Will we be able to buy them from China even if these regs are put in place?

Anything being exported into the US will need to follow the FDA regs. However if shipping to other countries they will not unless those countries have particular regs that these vendors have to adhere to, at least how I understood it.

 

[Lessifer]

just have a random question about the regs etc...

will companies manufacturing in China have to follow these regs? Kanger Coils for example. Will we be able to buy them from China even if these regs are put in place?

They can still make them, but technically, if they want to sell them in the US, they are supposed to follow the regulations.

 

[Yiana]

The FDA says any evidence of the effectiveness of e-cigarettes is "anecdotal".

According to this NCHS Data Brief, dated October 2015...

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db217.pdf

"nearly one in four recent former cigarette smokers (22.0%) currently used e-cigarettes"

(recent former smokers defined as those that quit within the past year)

So the FDA has airbrushed out almost a quarter of the 2013-2014 class of quitters. All the ex smokers that effectively used e-cigarettes to quit. Simply breathtaking Orwellian Doublespeak. And unlike Winston Smith's airbrushing, this is done in plain sight. That document comes up on top of just about any google search of e-cigarette usage statistics.

But wait, there's more...

According to this CDC document...

https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/statean...information-on-e-cigarettes-november-2015.pdf

"For adult smokers to benefit from e-cigarettes, they must completely quit combusted tobacco use. Smoking even a few cigarettes per day is dangerous to health."

So apparently, going from 2 packs/day to 2 cigs a day accomplishes nothing at all.

That's a load of bs, not counting people from various years. I quit three years ago.

 

[DC2]

It's very muddy how this is all going to shake out. Over the next 2 years individual States will end up being much more threatening than the FDA regs. In 3 years it could be decimation if nothing changes.

I'm seeing a situation where the states slowly smother us.
And by the time the FDA regulations take full effect, it will be an afterthought.

Yes, when the FDA regulations take full effect it would be like a nuclear bomb.
But there won't be much left to blow up, and few will care anymore.

I guess that's my positive vibes for the day.

 

[crxess]

CASAA is far from the only hope we have.
Nor even the best hope we have.

The courts are the best hope we have, and CASAA is working on that.
The Congress is the best hope we have, and CASAA is working on that too.

The public is really, really, the best hope we have though.
But unfortunately, CASAA is not working on that because, well, they can't.

And if they can, I'm sure they could use some suggestions for under $1 million.
The media refuses to allow our voices to be heard.

That's the real problem.

Yes, what you said.

SeniorBoy said: ↑
Respectfully, this is NOT the time to point fingers at a given "organization" and or "leader" in a public forum where these kinds of thoughts may diminish the effectiveness of our collective fight. Think of an increase in apathy. If you have thoughts then the best way is to send an email/form to the respective "organization" and or "leader" jam packed with respectful, candid, and civil details.

This?
I'm good then..............I'll take support from BT or Satan himself if it adds Fuel to our fight! Deal with them LATER<<<<<<<<<<<Like the FDA Has.

 

[VNeil]

That's a load of bs, not counting people from various years. I quit three years ago.

They did provide a number based on long term quitters (those who quit more than one year ago). 2.3% of those long term quitters vaped. But presumably that includes everyone who ever quit, even 40 years ago. So kind of a meaningless number without better granularity. The report seemed far more interested in e-cig usage differences among race, ethnicity and even LGBT sub-groups. Sigh.

It would have been interesting to include statistics (among recent quitters) of the methods used- gum, patch, e-cig, Chantix, etc. I suspect they did not dare do that because the efficacy of e-cigs would have stood out like a searchlight.

 

[BreSha6869]

Who's side are you on?

Tapatyped

The side that is based in reality.

Reality being that vaping nic is NOT clinically proven to be 100% safe and yes.... It contains nicotine. SNUs, nic gum, nic inhalers and even smoking cessitation drugs are taxed. Why should eLiquid be different? Sucks, but it IS enevitable.

IMO taxing mods, wire and premade coils is akin to taxing rolling papers and BBQ lighters, but that isn't what I am talking about.

If millions of people start and continue vaping nic, do you honestly think ANY government anywhere will let any vape company manufacture and/or sell millions of dollars of product containing NIC and not tax it?

I vape and don't smoke and vaping will save/extend my life (unless I get hit by a bus) but thinking things won't change in the vaping industry is just being foolish.

Be prepared or pay a fortune for eJuice moving forward. Simple. OR vape gas station BT cigalikes.

 

[VNeil]

The side that is based in reality.

Reality being that vaping nic is NOT clinically proven to be 100% safe and yes.... It contains nicotine. SNUs, nic gum, nic inhalers and even smoking cessitation drugs are taxed. Why should eLiquid be different? Sucks, but it IS enevitable.

IMO taxing mods, wire and premade coils is akin to taxing rolling papers and BBQ lighters, but that isn't what I am talking about.

If millions of people start and continue vaping nic, do you honestly think ANY government anywhere will let any vape company manufacture and/or sell millions of dollars of product containing NIC and not tax it?

I vape and don't smoke and vaping will save/extend my life (unless I get hit by a bus) but thinking things won't change in the vaping industry is just being foolish.

Be prepared or pay a fortune for eJuice moving forward. Simple. OR vape gas station BT cigalikes.

NRTs are not sin taxed. Might be subject to standard sales tax but that is not what we're talking about.

 

[BreSha6869]

Thank you!

We might Get Taxed, but we should Fight like Hell to have it Revoked.

No <Moderated> Taxation and regulation is going to happen but real studies need to prove beyond a doubt that vaping saves lives.

If vaping is proven to be 95% safer than cigarettes, the education process really begins. Fighting taxation is more about the amount levied than anything else.

 

[BreSha6869]

NRTs are not sin taxed. Might be subject to standard sales tax but that is not what we're talking about.

Sorry, not sin taxed as the FDA approval/bribes/political donations route is much higher. You get my point.

 

[Shawn Hoefer]

No <Moderated>. Taxation and regulation is going to happen but real studies need to prove beyond a doubt that vaping saves lives.

If vaping is proven to be 95% safer than cigarettes, the education process really begins. Fighting taxation is more about the amount levied than anything else.

If? So the Royal College of Physicians and Public Health England (and many others) are in error?

Vaping IS safer, scientifically proven. No, there are no 60 year long term studies, but eliminating vaping now will not allow for that.

The problem is not with the studies and research, but with the corporations' stranglehold on the media.

Education, then, begins with US. We're not doing a bang up job thus far, either...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

 

[VNeil]

Sorry, not sin taxed as the FDA approval/bribe process is much higher. You get my point.

No I don't get your point. And further, it is simply wrong to tax something because it might be harmful but nobody has bothered to check. Assuming all the studies that show no harm to date aren't enough. You're arguing the I Dare You To Prove A Negative theory, a favorite of ANTZ propagandists.

 

[Bronze]

This thread can be fun sometimes. It's like going to a fight and waiting for a hockey game to break out.

 

[Max-83]

And further, it is simply wrong to tax something because it might be harmful but nobody has bothered to check.

I'm not sure sin tax is applied because it maybe harmful, more like it's a vice that they can exploit.

 

[wiredlove]

This thread can be fun sometimes. It's like going to a fight and waiting for a hockey game to break out.

 

[VNeil]

I'm not sure sin tax is applied because it maybe harmful, more like it's a vice that they can exploit.

Name another heavily taxed can consumer product that has no proven harm.

 

[wiredlove]

I'm not sure sin tax is applied because it maybe harmful, more like it's a vice that they can exploit.

Both. All of the above. It's theory is rooted in driving up the cost of things that are considered harmful to the public good. Vaping fails that test, as it hasn't been shown to be generally harmful and can be a pathway out of the more harmful behavior of smoking. That's why the Royal Physicians recommended against levying sin taxes against it.

 

[zoiDman]

This thread can be fun sometimes. It's like going to a fight and waiting for a hockey game to break out.

Strange as it Sounds, I rather see the Hockey Game.

Cause the World Keeps Turning. And everyday we are One Day Closer to a Fully FDA Regulated e-Cigarette Market.

 

[Max-83]

Name another heavily taxed can consumer product that has no proven harm.

Just noting that this type of tax is generally referred to as a sin tax. This lets the puritanical governments and governed believe that its a good thing