Does this seem right to you?

[zoiDman]

Does this seem right to you? | Page 55 | E-Cigarette Forum

I just haven't been Following this very closely. So I can't really Comment on it.

"The FDA issued the guidelines to help clarify what changes require regulatory approval under the 2009 tobacco Control Act.

But the tobacco companies said the FDA’s authority to regulate labeling was limited to products that claim to reduce tobacco-related harm or other circumstances addressed by formal rulemaking.


The guidelines go far beyond that authority, the plaintiffs said, by requiring FDA authorization to make any labeling changes that would render a product already on the market “distinct,” like a name change."


I do know that the FDA and BT have a Long History of going back and forth on Issues. And that the Lawyers who fight for Either side are probably on a First Name Bases with their respective Counterparts.

 

[zoiDman]

The other thing to consider, is that once vaping is deemed a tobacco product, whether it is just eliquid or all products for the intended use of vaping (and is still quite likely to be anything to do with vaping like mods and tanks), it will be immediately subject to federal (and most likely state) tobacco tax laws for tobacco products and I think it will be pretty much automatic that taxes will be levied. After all, it will BE tobacco at that point if the regs pass.

Whereas some things will happen Automatically, like Needing to declare that you sell "Tobacco Products" on your Business License. And Complying with all City, County, State and Federal requirements to Sell a Tobacco Product.

Taxes will be a Little Different. Because the FDA has No Authority to Tax.

And yes, there is a $1.01 Federal Tax on Every Pack of Cigarettes sold in the USA. That Tax Can't be Applied to an e-Liquid.

So Congress will need to do what States are doing as well Speak. Draft and then Pass New Tax Laws for e-Liquids that contain Nicotine.

 

[Lessifer]

I thought they already did. Instead of medical it was a tobacco product. I am now confused. Well I am on my 4th guineas happily vaping away poolside.

No, the Sottera(sp?) case ruled that the FDA didn't have the authority to regulate vapor products as drugs/medical devices unless there were health claims, or marketing as a cessation device. The Judge said they could pursue regulations under Tobacco Control.

 

[zoiDman]

...

Ahhh maybe it's the derived by point.

No Problem bluecat.

These 3 Words, "Derived from Tobacco", is kinda the Long and the Short of the "Deeming".

The Nicotine we use Is "Derived from Tobacco".

A person who uses 0mg does Not Use anything that is "Derived from Tobacco".

An 18650 Battery is Not "Derived from Tobacco"

etc...

 

[Jazzman]

Whereas some things will happen Automatically, like Needing to declare that you sell "Tobacco Products" on your Business License. And Complying with all City, County, State and Federal requirements to Sell a Tobacco Product.

Taxes will be a Little Different. Because the FDA has No Authority to Tax.

And yes, there is a $1.01 Federal Tax on Every Pack of Cigarettes sold in the USA. That Tax Can't be Applied to an e-Liquid.

So Congress will need to do what States are doing as well Speak. Draft and then Pass New Tax Laws for e-Liquids that contain Nicotine.

I don't think so, the FDA will just have to assign a value to eliquid as a tobacco product. Since it will already be deemed a tobacco product it will not require congressional approval. That's kind of the whole point of deeming vape products as tobacco, so the FDA can have free reign to do what they want. And they will.

 

[zoiDman]

I don't think so, the FDA will just have to assign a value to eliquid as a tobacco product. Since it will already be deemed a tobacco product it will not require congressional approval. That's kind of the whole point of deeming vape products as tobacco, so the FDA can have free reign to do what they want. And they will.

The FDA Can Not Tax e-Liquids that contain Nicotine. Or any other Product for that Matter.

Under what Authority would they be Able to Levy Taxes?

 

[Lessifer]

I don't think so, the FDA will just have to assign a value to eliquid as a tobacco product. Since it will already be deemed a tobacco product it will not require congressional approval. That's kind of the whole point of deeming vape products as tobacco, so the FDA can have free reign to do what they want. And they will.

The FDA Can Not Tax e-Liquids that contain Nicotine. Or any other Product for that Matter.

Under what Authority would they be Able to Levy Taxes?

Zoid is right on this one. The taxes would not be automatic. Congress would have to amend the current tax law to account for vapor products, which I'm sure they would do fairly quickly, if they can figure it out.

 

[bluecat]

Thanks. Now I understand better. We are still in that can stage.

 

[zoiDman]

Zoid is right on this one. The taxes would not be automatic. Congress would have to amend the current tax law to account for vapor products, which I'm sure they would do fairly quickly, if they can figure it out.

Yeah... If there is one thing that Congress is Pretty Good at, it is Imposing Taxes. That, and Spending Money.

They are Actually Better at Spending Money than Taxing. And have No Problem Spending Money that Doesn't Exist. But that is Topic for Another Thread.

 

[AndriaD]

The FDA Can Not Tax e-Liquids that contain Nicotine. Or any other Product for that Matter.

Under what Authority would they be Able to Levy Taxes?

they'd have to do some serious sucking up to the House of Reps... the only folks who can levy taxes.

Andria

 

[bluecat]

No Problem bluecat.

These 3 Words, "Derived from Tobacco", is kinda the Long and the Short of the "Deeming".

The Nicotine we use Is "Derived from Tobacco".

A person who uses 0mg does Not Use anything that is "Derived from Tobacco".

An 18650 Battery is Not "Derived from Tobacco"

etc...

Definitely agree there is going to be a hard time getting 0 mg to fall and any battery tube.

 

[Lessifer]

Yeah... If there is one thing that Congress is Pretty Good at, it is Imposing Taxes. That, and Spending Money.

They are Actually Better at Spending Money than Taxing. And have No Problem Spending Money that Doesn't Exist. But that is Topic for Another Thread.

Taxation could actually be a pretty complex issue, especially since it probably won't be a flat $x.xx per pack kind of thing. Unless we're only allowed to buy "packs" of pre-filled cartos... then it would be relatively easy.

 

[bluecat]

they'd have to do some serious sucking up to the House of Reps... the only folks who can levy taxes.

Andria

All agencies have perfected the sucking sound. How do you think that bridge got built in alaska.

 

[zoiDman]

All agencies have perfected the sucking sound. How do you think that bridge got built in alaska.

Or a High Speed Rail from LA to Sacramento in California.

 

[Lessifer]

Or a High Speed Rail from LA to Sacramento in California.

I would love to be able to buy a $50 ticket for a 2 hour train ride to LA. I'll be heading down there in October and I really hate that 6 hour drive... I used to go to school down there.

 

[zoiDman]

Taxation could actually be a pretty complex issue, especially since it probably won't be a flat $x.xx per pack kind of thing. Unless we're only allowed to buy "packs" of pre-filled cartos... then it would be relatively easy.

Yeah... Closed System Cartridges would be a Very Easy Tax Vehicle.

And the Argument that there should be these Non Refillable Cartridges will be put forth as a way to Prevent Users from Evading Taxes by Refilling them with Non-Taxed, Black Market, Liquid e-Liquids.

 

[zoiDman]

I would love to be able to buy a $50 ticket for a 2 hour train ride to LA. I'll be heading down there in October and I really hate that 6 hour drive... I used to go to school down there.

So would Many People.

My only problem is when the Projected Cost has More than Tripled, and we haven't even started Yet, why Haven't they Revised the Projected Ticket Price the Public was Told that it would be?

You want to know how we do Public Transportation Projects in California. And How Much they Really Cost. Read a Little about the SF/Oakland Bay Bridge.

It will Blow your Mind.

 

[Lessifer]

So would Many People.

My only problem is when the Projected Cost has More than Tripled, and we haven't even started Yet, why Haven't they Revised the Projected Ticket Price the Public was Told that it would be?

You want to know how we do Public Transportation Projects in California. And How Much they Really Cost. Read a Little about the SF/Oakland Bay Bridge.

It will Blow your Mind.

My brother is a CalTrans engineer

 

[Jazzman]

I understand that many of you wish that taxation can not be enacted without further legislation. I just don't agree with you. I think once eliquid and or vaping is deemed as tobacco, tobacco laws... including at least federal taxation of tobacco products will not take additional legislation to enact. It will only require a eliquid equivalency to traditional tobacco products (a pack of cigarettes?) by the FDA to be taxable under current tax regulations. I hope you are all right and I am totally off base here... I just don't thinks so. Time will tell, but don't be shocked if it happens. After all, this is all about revenue not the children.

 

[Wow1420]

BTW - If I put this on the End of a Mech Mod...

... and then Market/Sell the Assembly as a 18650 Flashlight, can the FDA do anything about it?

I think mechs/mods in general are going to be OK.

From http://www.fda.gov/downloads/TobaccoProducts/NewsEvents/UCM397724.pdf

The term “covered tobacco products” is defined here as those products deemed to be subject to the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act under section 1100.2 of title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), other than a component or part that does not contain tobacco or nicotine.​

I'm not as sure about tanks/atomizers sold without any liquid.