I agree with your tax reasoning and of course our government doesn't have our best interest in mind, just theirs as you pointed out with revenue. Just can't see how vaping could be classified as a tobacco product when there is none present at all and the only link between ecigs and analogs is nicotine and the act itself. god forbid us regular citizens save a buck or two in this overpriced world!
FDA proposes BANNING ONLINE SALES of electronic cigarettes
- Thread starter Oliver
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I agree with your tax reasoning and of course our government doesn't have our best interest in mind, just theirs as you pointed out with revenue. Just can't see how vaping could be classified as a tobacco product when there is none present at all and the only link between ecigs and analogs is nicotine and the act itself. god forbid us regular citizens save a buck or two in this overpriced world!
Many of us already are selling models comparable to what you find on popular forum sponsored sites etc. But the "Deeming regulations" have not been made clear either. Short of a law insisting on selling that type of stuff I don't see that happening. People want the good stuff and a smart business person will respond to that demand accordingly. It's certainly the only reason I'm still around.
Even if the regulations were of that nature, there would likely be a lengthy court battle. Before they forced the more common B&M type stores out of business to make way for (shudder) 7-11 dominating the e-cig market with those types of toy/joke versions. I'm not convinced that the ban of online sales will stick in the first place, either. I guess we will see.
I see. Yes, clearly I misunderstood. Although I agree that negative attention is still attention and that anything that keeps e-cigs in the news counts as advertising to some extent. I am really sick of our government lying to us and trying to run game on us. It's maddening. I have been preparing for this possibility for some time and it may even help me. But that doesn't change the fact that it's wrong. The notion that preventing mail order and internet sales will somehow protect the children is flatly absurd and no one with even a shred of intelligence could possibly believe that. Since it's being purported by a science based organization that is run by academics, I fear it is little more then propaganda and rhetoric which speaks to just how corrupt and unethical our government really is. I do not for one minute believe they are this stupid. They just think the American people are. The question is are they right?
ETA I think the popular term for what you are describing is the "Streisand effect".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
Last edited:
I've often read that, according to our government/FDA, 'nicotine' is considered a tobacco product. Therefore ejuice is considered a tobacco product.
By the same reasoning, 'caffeine' would be considered a coffee (plant) product. Therefore soda should be considered a coffee (plant) product.
Right?
By the same reasoning, 'caffeine' would be considered a coffee (plant) product. Therefore soda should be considered a coffee (plant) product.
Right?
One corrupt agency reporting to another corrupt agency
and government regulating itself ... (sarcasm)
Completely illogical to me too. Makes zero sense. Square peg round hole. But none of that matters for one simple fact. Cigarette smokers are the primary user of ecigarettes. So that makes them cigarettes. That is the only logic the government will use. God help me I hope I'm wrong but I've been around long enough to know there is a very real threat staring us in the face.
I bet the way the vendors will get around this is that they will still have websites but to place an order you would have to call their "shop" and then like a convenient store type in your drivers license number and verify that you're of age to purchase.
I think a critical distinction will be whether they consider ejuice a tobacco product or a cigarette product. There's a huge difference. You can order many tobacco products online with the exception of cigarettes. You can order many tobacco product accessories online too. When push comes to shove I truly believe hardware will be left alone. Maybe age verification delivery at the worst. Maybe not even that.
Interesting. I didn't know that. (Heck, it never occurred to me to buy liquor over the internet.
)So the whole 'banning internet sales to prevent sales is minors' is complete hogwash because procedures are already in place (during the delivery process) to prevent that.
Now I'm even more peeved.
While it does seem a stretch to call e-liquid a tobacco product, nicotine is distilled most economically from tobacco .. synthetic nic / and / or nic from other plants is very much more cost prohibitive and if utilized would dramatically raise the price of distilled nicotine .. although I believe there are methods posted on ECF as to how to DIY your own nic, I don't know how successful they are ..
As well, those posting on this thread should keep in mind the history of the PV and the early legal battle with NJOY that saved us from the PV being called a Nicotine Cessation Device or Drug Delivery Device .. lumped into the same category as patches / gum etc ..
FDA Loses Appeal, Can't Regulate Electronic Cigarettes as Drug, Court Says - Bloomberg
Many of us long time users clearly remember this early battle .. and if you think what may or may not come down on deeming is bad, then ponder what would have been if NJOY had not fought that early battle and won ..
Interesting. I didn't know that. (Heck, it never occurred to me to buy liquor over the internet.
So the whole 'banning internet sales to prevent sales is minors' is complete hogwash because procedures are already in place (during the delivery process) to prevent that.
Now I'm even more peeved.
Essentially, it is hogwash ..
There are very sophisticated age verification softwares that are being used .. in fact, I believe in Cali it's a requirement .. we are all in the system these days ..
I think One Thing that is Going on is the Distinction between "an e-Cigarette" and e-Liquids is not Clear.
To Us, and e-Cigarette and an e-Liquid are Two Different things. But to the Media, they might not Understand the Difference.
So all the FDA Regulations and Actions may be geared More towards e-Liquids. I can't see the FDA Trying to Regulate Rechargeable Batteries and Variable Voltage "Flashlights".
But an e-Liquid deemed as a Tobacco Product would Not Only fall under the FDA's Control, but also State, County and City Control.
I know that the City I live in Requires an Applicant to state if they Intend to Sell Tobacco Products when Appling for a Business License.
If the City Doesn't not want you sell a Tobacco Product, even if you are California Approved, you can't Sell them at your Business Location. Maybe in the Next City Over. Or maybe if your Business is in a Different Zoning.
But if the Courts say that e-Liquids are Tobacco Products, people are Going to have to Jump thru Many Hoops on Many Levels to Sell e-Liquids.
^^^ and in some areas, there are actual limits on the number of tobacco license's that can be issued within an area or city .. alcohol is the same way ..
That's certainly a valid point. Still it begs the question. If the idea here is public safety how can they possibly move to protect such a lethal product so blatantly while scapegoating products such as these where no direct harm has ever been proven and get away with it? I suppose that for better or worse "we the people" ultimately get the government we deserve. Be that government a product of our involvement or of our complacence..
I think they are blowing smoke up our butts. I think u can still buy cigarettes on line.
If that's the case wouldn't that be discrimination.....
Jmo
If that's the case wouldn't that be discrimination.....
Jmo
Yeah... And Cities have things like you Can't Sell ______ within 1,500 of a School. Or Exactly How and How much of a Product you can Have in Storage.
And then there is All the Things that Go with Having a Business. Like Tax Reporting. And DBA's. And Business Bank Accounts. And Employee Management. And Fire Requirements. And ... Well, you get the Idea.
The Day I heard that e-Liquids were being Considered to be a Tobacco Product, I pictured a Huge Hour Glass with the Sand going thru it Slowly.
Today, it seems like there is a Lot Less Sand in the Glass.
This is why and how the FDA will regulate electronic cigarettes as a tobacco product...
Regulation of E-Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products
The only question remaining is exactly HOW they are going to regulate them.
I wish I could Believe that e-Liquids could be Judged on there Health Merits. And would receive some sort of Exemption from the Layers of Regulations that I Fear are going to Piled on Them.
But I guess I am Too Jaded to think that they aren't just going to be a Tax Vehicle and in the Sole Possession of BT / BP.
Thank you for Posting that Link again DC.
I keeping reading this Portion again and again...
“Tobacco products” marketed as of February 15, 2007, which have not been modified since then are considered “grandfathered” and are not subject to premarket review as “new tobacco products.” A “tobacco product” that is not “grandfathered” is considered a “new” tobacco product, and it is adulterated and misbranded under the FD&C Act, and therefore, subject to enforcement action, unless it has received premarket authorization or been found substantially equivalent. FDA has already developed draft guidance explaining how manufacturers can request a determination from FDA that a “tobacco product” is “grandfathered.”
I wonder if a Blu would be considered "substantially equivalent"?
Or if the Vuse has Already been "premarket authorization"?
Or could it be Argued that Unflavored e-Liquids are Substantially Equivalent to e-Liquids made in 2007 so they should be Grandfathered?
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
