FDA deeming rule could happen tomorrow
- Thread starter Oberon75
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Bump on the Whitehouse petition
Overturn the FDA's ruling on ecigarette classification as a tobacco product. | We the People: Your Voice in Our Government
Overturn the FDA's ruling on ecigarette classification as a tobacco product. | We the People: Your Voice in Our Government
You can never have enough. Got 10 litres of 72 but havn't even got a freezer yet 
. I am in a race to get this to a cold space. I need to straighten out my priorities. Seriously...
. I am in a race to get this to a cold space. I need to straighten out my priorities. Seriously...
The loss of the American market will surely force many Chinese startups and smaller manufacturers out of business. Companies like Joyetech will surely survive, but smaller offshots like Liasimo and Wismec are doomed. The US is the largest consumer market on earth, and these companies cannot survive if they lose all access to that market. Especially considering that the EU is getting ready to shut them out of the European market as well. The EU is placing even more strict regulation on ecigs than the US is.
You're also going to see the loss of around 99% of the B&M shops, and the only ones that will be left are ones that have Big Tobacco corporate backing. B&Ms survive off juice sales, that's where 95% of their profits come from, but that profit margin disappears if they can't mix their own juices. And they certainly can't afford the FDA requirements for them to DIY juices for retail sales. So they'll be forced to buy juices supplied by a major corporation which means they lose the profit margin. For most B&Ms, that means they'll go out of business, and that really limits who the Chinese can import mods to.
A few Chinese companies may open shops in the US to distribute hardware. I can see Joyetech, Kangertech, Aspire, and a few others spending the money for FDA approval so they can sell in the US. For them the investment would certainly be worth it. I can see them either opening their own shops or supporting a few major B&Ms to act as distribution points as that investment would be worth it as well. A few million a year invested, tens of millions per year in sales. But I'm fairly certain that the days of B&Ms on every street corner and cheap retail juices are over.
I fully expect the price of juices to go up to $1 per ml on average, bringing a 50ml bottle in line with a carton of cigarettes, and Big Tobacco companies being the only real supplier of these juices, and the only B&M shops being tobacco shops that sell Big Tobacco products and a handful of Chinese corporate B&Ms used as distribution points for their hardware. Everyone else is out of a job.
I think the fda blew it. They came down too hard on this never going to survive through the courts
The discussion of possible taxation schemes has been discussed on the forum in the past.
What i boils down to is how to do the comparison. Makers of cigalikes claim (or use to claim)
there carto's produced on average 200 puffs. I believe the average smoker takes on average
10 puffs per cigarette. I believe the average amount of e-juice in a cigalike carto is 1ml.
It may be less but,fore the sake of argument lets say 1 ml. So at 200 puffs per carto and
10 puffs per cigarette that comes to an equivalence of 20 cigarettes per carto or one pack.
This is where estimates are going to vary depending on which state or locality one lives in.
The average cost per pack of cigarettes in Minnesota is $7.50. Taxes are lets say $5.00
of that cost.( I am probably under estimating this) That comes out to $5.00 per ml to
recoup lost tax money. This translates to an additional $250.00 per 50 ml bottle to
recoup lost tax money. As zero nic juice is considered a tobacco product the % of
nicotine will not be a determining factor as zero nic juice still replaces cigarettes
on a identical puff to puff basis.
Regards
Mike
PS. Why are my paragraphs blending into each other?
They didn't before.Do I have to double space. before
i just indented one space ,no problem.
I don't think they're going to base juice prices off of cigalike claims. Most cigalikes are disposable and come with disposable cartridges. Raw juice sales will more likely be geared towards Ego setups, and going through 3-5ml per day is not uncommon in those. I expect raw juice will be in the $1 per ml range, which is about the most the market would tolerate. At $250 for $50ml no one would buy it,and Big Tobacco definitely doesn't want people to not buy their products.
That's part of why this is happening...BT's faithful smokers have died off or switched to vaping....and they are getting fewer new younger smokers. They need to make money somehow, so they enter the market with crappy Blu and Vuse. No one really sticks with those, they need more effective nicotine delivery. But they (BT) still need more money...so they push $$$ into eliminating the competition and win. It's all starting to sound like the phone companies of yesteryear!
Last edited:
There will be a bunch of attorneys lickin' their chops to go after this, and I'm looking forward to liking them much more than I normally would.
Sooner or later some bright eyed bushy tailed bureaucrat will figure this out
on his or her own. When they decide on a formula to convert usage from
cigarette to vaping $1.00 per ml is not going to cut it. Buy some estimates
a 1 liter bottle of 100 mg per ml nic base represents 55.5 liters cut 18 mg
per liter.(these figures for arguments sake) That's 55,500.555 ml x $5.00 of
tax loss based on the cost per pack in Minnesota. That comes to $277,777.00
in potential lost revenue based on a ml per pack comparison.
If you take into account that the only vendors that attempted to make
equivalent comparisons of vaping v smoking in quantitative terms were
cigalike makers this becomes the only reference to base any taxation
rate.
3 years ago or so anything approaching 5 ml of juice a day was considered
a lot in most cases. I myself smoked 2 packs a day smoking. I vape about
2 ml a day in juice. In the meantime devices have developed more power
and consume ever increasing amounts of juice. I doubt this will be taken into
consideration by the tax man.
One also must consider that if everyone in the US that smokes switched
to vaping today and all new would be smokers started vaping instead that
would mean the end of vaping as a tax base or profit maker in 20 years time.
When the vapers that have never used tobacco have replaced all of us once
smokers there will be nothing to prevent them from just quitting due to exorbitant
prices because nicotine does not cause dependence in lifetime non-tobacco users.
The myth of nicotine addiction - Formindep
The government, BP and, BT know this. That is why these regulations are designed
to destroy the industry not,to protect the children. Vaping in the absence of smoking
is not economically viable to the extent it is today with out new smokers to feed
into the user base. They are simply going to kill vaping off to maintain there revenue base.
and it's just my 2 centsRegards
Mike
Your last paragraph sums it up....they need the revenue, so they have to kill free market vaping to take it over.Sooner or later some bright eyed bushy tailed bureaucrat will figure this out
on his or her own. When they decide on a formula to convert usage from
cigarette to vaping $1.00 per ml is not going to cut it. Buy some estimates
a 1 liter bottle of 100 mg per ml nic base represents 55.5 liters cut 18 mg
per liter.(these figures for arguments sake) That's 55,500.555 ml x $5.00 of
tax loss based on the cost per pack in Minnesota. That comes to $277,777.00
in potential lost revenue based on a ml per pack comparison.
If you take into account that the only vendors that attempted to make
equivalent comparisons of vaping v smoking in quantitative terms were
cigalike makers this becomes the only reference to base any taxation
rate.
3 years ago or so anything approaching 5 ml of juice a day was considered
a lot in most cases. I myself smoked 2 packs a day smoking. I vape about
2 ml a day in juice. In the meantime devices have developed more power
and consume ever increasing amounts of juice. I doubt this will be taken into
consideration by the tax man.
One also must consider that if everyone in the US that smokes switched
to vaping today and all new would be smokers started vaping instead that
would mean the end of vaping as a tax base or profit maker in 20 years time.
When the vapers that have never used tobacco have replaced all of us once
smokers there will be nothing to prevent them from just quitting due to exorbitant
prices because nicotine does not cause dependence in lifetime non-tobacco users.
The myth of nicotine addiction - Formindep
The government, BP and, BT know this. That is why these regulations are designed
to destroy the industry not,to protect the children. Vaping in the absence of smoking
is not economically viable to the extent it is today with out new smokers to feed
into the user base. They are simply going to kill vaping off to maintain there revenue base.
Regards
Mike
The PMTA for ENDS will be Legally Challenged saying that the FDA has placed such Costly and Complex requirements on New Products that it Disenfranchises ALL but BT.
Can't comment much on the Information I have due to the Legal Nature of it.
If you would Like, I will amend my post with an IMO.
eta: I will make one Clarification. There will be a Legal Challenge(s) if the PMTA for ENDS is Implemented in it Currently Released Draft form.
- Status
Similar threads
