Vapor Technology Association
Sign In Sign In Sign Out Sign Out
  • Home
  • About
    • About VTA
    • Priorities
    • Governance
    • Industry Marketing Standards
    • FAQ
  • American Impact
  • Membership
  • Action Center
  • News

Vapor Technology Association Vapor Technology Association

Join Today Dashboard
  • Home
  • About
    • About VTA
    • Priorities
    • Governance
    • Industry Marketing Standards
    • FAQ
  • American Impact
  • Membership
  • Action Center
  • News

The Negative Impact of New Nicotine Tax

December 7, 2021 by Black Development Leave a Comment

Prepared by John Dunham & Associates

John Dunham & Associates


for the Vapor Technology Association

December 2021

THE NEGATIVE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF THE
NEW NICOTINE TAX IMPOSED ONLY ON VAPOR PRODUCTS

IN THE RECONCILIATION BILL (HR 5376)

Executive Summary

Background

  • The vapor product industry is an important part of the US economy.  About $8.1 billion in vapor sales lead to 133,600 jobs and $22.1 billion in economic activity. 
  • About 35,000 of these jobs are held by people working for the over 9,850 independent adult-only, retail vape shops located across the country.  Even so, the number of independent adult-only, vape shops has fallen by 27 percent since 2018 as a result of new state and federal taxes and regulations. 
  • Congress is currently deciding whether to impose a new tax only on vapor products of 2.78-cents per milligram of nicotine, believing that such a tax would “equalize” or create “parity” with cigarette taxes.
  • Conclusions
  • Our analysis finds that the bill would not create anything close to parity with cigarette taxes but, rather, would tax vapor products at a much higher rate – up to nine times higher – than the tax on a pack of cigarettes.
  • Our analysis also finds that, if passed, the proposed nicotine tax in the Reconciliation Bill:
  • Would lead to a net price increase on vapor products at retail of about 53 percent (21.2 percent for a standard two-pack of closed-system pod products and 73.5% for a standard 60 milliliter bottle of open system e-liquid), while the price of cigarettes and other tobacco products would remain unchanged as they would not be subject to any additional federal tax.
  • Would lead to a reduction of nearly 42,800 full-time equivalent jobs and the loss of $2.2 billion in wages and benefits.
  • Would negatively impact the size of the overall economy which would fall by about $7.0 billion.
  • Would result in states and their localities losing $620.1 million in taxes while the federal government attempts to generate revenues.
  • Would lead to a loss of about 31.9 percent of vapor product sales or 3.7 million milliliters of e-liquid consumed.  Of this loss, 61.2 percent would be the result of consumers switching to other tobacco products, including combustible cigarettes.  An additional 18.5 percent of these lost sales would move to the black market.

Table 1
Economic Impact of Proposed Nicotine Vapor Product Tax Increase

 DirectSupplierInducedTotal
Jobs-21,331-8,974-12,470-42,776
Wages-$869,866,251-$636,356,853-$707,328,020-$2,213,551,124
Economic Output-$2,562,607,363-$2,205,386,235-$2,255,024,480-$7,023,018,078
State and Local Taxes   -$620,087,422

Background on the Proposed Nicotine Tax Increase in HR 5376

The U.S. Senate is currently considering the Reconciliation Bill, known as HR 5376, which was recently passed by the U.S. House of Representatives.  As passed by the House, HR 5376 would impose a new tax only on e-cigarettes or vapor products containing nicotine that are manufactured in or imported into the United States in the amount of $50.33 per 1,810 milligrams of nicotine.  The nicotine tax rate would be $0.0278 for each milligram of nicotine in a vapor product ($50.33 / 1810 milligrams of nicotine = 2.78-cents/mg). In HR 5376, taxes on existing tobacco products, including combustible cigarettes, would remain unchanged.[1]


The proposal claims to equalize the tax on e-cigarettes at the same rate as cigarettes, at least at the Federal level, in an effort to create parity between the products.  However, our analysis finds that the bill would not create anything close to parity with cigarette taxes but, rather, would tax vapor products at a much higher rate – up to nine times higher – than the tax on a pack of cigarettes.

The current federal tax on cigarettes is $50.33 for every 1000 cigarettes, which amounts to a federal tax of $1.01 for a pack of cigarettes ($50.33 / 1000 = $0.05033 x 20 cigarettes per pack).  

A pack of cigarettes contains approximately 204 milligrams of nicotine (10.2 mg/cigarette x 20 cigarettes per pack).  Applying the proposed nicotine tax of 2.78-cents per milligram to cigarettes, means that the tax on a pack of cigarettes should be $5.41, not $1.01. 

Viewed another way, the federal tax on cigarettes, if applied to their nicotine content, would only amount to less than half a penny per milligram, not the 2.78-cents Congress seeks to impose on e-cigarettes ($1.01 per pack / 204 mg of nicotine per pack).

As defined in the bill, the proposed tax would be equal to about $2.22 on the standard closed system nicotine vapor product (such as a two pack of JUUL pods), and an astonishing $10.01 on the standard average 60 milliliter bottle of nicotine containing e-liquid used in an open system vapor device. The following table shows the significant tax differential on a per unit and as a percentage of the retail price for each of these products and demonstrates that HR 5376 fails to create any parity, but significantly overtaxes e-cigarettes, making cigarettes more financially attractive.

Table 2
Comparison of Proposed Nicotine Tax to Actual Cigarette Taxes in the United States

 Cigarettes(pack)Closed-System Vape (2-pods)Open-System Vape (60ml)Cigarette Tax < Closed-SystemCigarette Tax < Open-System
Tax Per Unit$1.01$2.22$10.01-120.3%-891.1%
Tax as Percent of US Retail $14.4%21.2%73.5%-47.1%-410.2%
Tax Per Mg of Nicotine0.5-cents2.8-cents2.8-cents-461.6%-461.6%

The Negative Effect of Recent Taxes and Restrictions on the Vaping Industry

The nicotine vapor industry is an important segment of the American economy; however, a range of new laws including a ban on most flavored nicotine vapor products, increased age-of-use, and the imposition of taxes and bans at the state and local levels have already led to significant losses in jobs and tax revenues from the sector.

The first comprehensive analysis of the economic impact of the industry in the country was completed in 2018.[2] At that time, over 166,000 jobs depended on the production and sale of vapor and electronic cigarette products. Those holding these jobs received nearly $7.9 billion in wages and benefits, while generating almost $24.5 billion for the US economy.  (Table 3)

In 2018, the Federal government received about $1.9 billion in various tax revenues from the industry’s businesses and employees. State and local governments received about $1.5 billion in tax revenues from the industry and its employees, and an additional $909.0 million in state excise and sales tax revenues from adult consumers who purchased nicotine vapor products during that year. (Table 3)

Table 3

Economic Impact of Nicotine Vapor Industry in the United States (2018)

 DirectSupplierInducedTotal
Jobs87,58129,42748,999166,007
Wages$3,277,220,400$2,092,844,100$2,527,825,000$7,897,889,500
Economic Output$9,151,211,700$7,272,386,500$8,033,914,100$24,457,512,300
     
Federal Taxes   $1,860,313,877
State and Local Taxes   $2,359,821,765
  Taxes on Businesses and Employees  $1,450,820,541
  Consumption Taxes   $909,001,224
Total Taxes   $4,220,135,642

 Of the jobs created by the industry in 2018, nearly 87,600 were direct jobs, including people working in the vapor product manufacturing and distribution chain, and most importantly, 58,430 jobs were at small, independent vapor retail stores, or vape shops.[3],[4]  (Table 4)

Table 4

Breakdown of Independent Vape Shop Jobs (2018)

 JobsPercent of JobsStores
Direct Jobs87,574100.0% 
Vape Shop Jobs58,42966.7%13,481

In 2021, we completed a full review of the current vapor industry to determine the current state of the industry.[5]  We found that following the imposition of significant restrictions on the sale of these products at the Federal, state and local levels, the impact of the vapor industry has decreased by about 11.6 percent.  Even so, it is still a major contributor to the US economy, and an even larger taxpayer.  (Table 5) 

While employment is down by about 32,400 jobs in the industry itself (or 24.2 percent), sales are down by just 11.6 percent.  At retail, due to higher prices, sales are down by just 9.7 percent.  However, this was before the FDA required that most vapor product producers pull their items from the shelves.[6]

Overall, due to higher state excise and sales tax rates, the amount collected by government’s has increased by about $494.2 million or 11.7 percent.

Table 5

Current Economic Impact of Nicotine Vapor Industry in the United States (2021)

 DirectSupplierInducedTotal
Jobs66,36428,09839,111133,575
Wages$2,741,178,400$2,018,273,300$2,243,794,900$7,003,246,600
Economic Output$8,087,436,700$6,879,165,500$7,124,240,600$22,090,842,800
     
Federal Taxes   $1,480,211,544
State and Local Taxes   $3,234,123,298
  Taxes on Businesses and Employees  $1,351,790,191
  Consumption Taxes   $1,882,333,107
Total Taxes   $4,714,334,842

A new federal tax on nicotine of 2.78-cents per milligram, as proposed in HR5376 will increase smoking in the United States, as people switch from more expensive vapor products to less expensive cigarettes. Not only will cigarette taxes be substantially lower than vapor taxes under the House bill, but the bill will increase cigarette sales.

In fact, the tax is regressive and a new tax on consumers making less than $400,000 a year.  It would also make cigarette taxes 9 times lower than those on less harmful vapor products.


The Negative Economic Effects of a New Regressive Tax on Nicotine Vapor Product Sales

Based on an analysis conducted by JDA, were the Federal government to impose a new tax on the sale of nicotine vapor products in HR 5376, the impact on the economy would be more than $7.0 billion, with as much as 3.7 billion milliliters in lost sales.[7] 

As many as 42,800 jobs would be lost throughout the country – at a time when nearly 2.6 million people are looking for work. Moreover, the jobs lost as a result of the proposed tax would result in a loss of $2.2 billion wages. Further, state and local governments would lose about $620.1 million in taxes from the vapor industry and its consumers.

Table 6

Economic Losses Resulting from a 2.78-cents per MG Tax on Nicotine Vapor Products

 DirectSupplierInducedTotal
Jobs-21,331-8,974-12,470-42,776
Wages-$869,866,251-$636,356,853-$707,328,020-$2,213,551,124
Economic Output-$2,562,607,363-$2,205,386,235-$2,255,024,480-$7,023,018,078
State and Local Taxes   -$620,087,422

Most importantly, a large number of the remaining 9,847 independent adult-only vapor shops would likely be forced to close, since their fixed costs could far outweigh any remaining sales.

These small, often family-owned retailers have already suffered under the regulations imposed on vapor products.  Between 2018 and 2021, over 3,630 of these stores have shut their doors, putting almost 23,500 people out of work.  These are real people, with real jobs, located throughout the United States.[8]

Table 7

Losses in Adult-Only Vapor Shops Since 2018

As of 2021JobsPercent of JobsStores
Direct Jobs66,364100.0% 
Vape Shop Jobs34,95752.7%9.847
Change from 2018JobsPercent ChangeStoresPercent Change
Direct Jobs-21,210-24.2%  
Vape Shop Jobs-23,472-40.2%-3,634-27.0%

Nicotine Tax Will Increase Cigarette Smoking and Black Market Sales

Economists have long known that for all normal goods, such as vapor products, higher prices lead to lower sales.  That is the nature of most markets and was first contemplated by the 256th couplet of Tirukkural, which was composed around the year zero.[9]

It was not until 1767 that the phrase “supply and demand” was first used by Scottish writer James Denham-Steuart in his Inquiry into the Principles of Political Economy.[10] Adam Smith popularized the term in his 1776 book The Wealth of Nations and brought it to the forefront of economic theory.[11]  In effect, higher taxes lead to higher prices which in turn would lead consumers to either: 

  1. Completely stop using nicotine products,
  2. Switch to another tobacco product, such as cigarettes,
  3. Continue to vape but purchase their products over the already growing black market.

Table 8

Shift in Vapor Sales to Combustible Cigarettes or Other Nicotine Products

 MillilitersPercent
Current Vapor Sales11,692,582,699 
Lost Vapor Sales-3,732,570,585 
   
Of Which  
  Switch to Other Products-2,283,717,02861.2%
  Quit-757,711,82920.3%
  Black Market-691,141,72918.5%

JDA’s modeling suggests that a large portion of consumers would react by purchasing unregulated products over the black market or make their own e-liquids. Overall, the market for vapor products would fall by about 31.9 percent, with 18.5 percent of that shifting to black market sales.  Of the remaining 81.5 percent of lost sales, 20.3 percent would be due to vapor users quitting the use of nicotine products entirely, while the remainder, 61.2 percent would result from consumers shifting to other nicotine-based products including combustible cigarettes.[12]

These figures (which reflect a price increase resulting from the tax of 53 percent) are conservative and are not out of line with other studies examining the substitution of vapor products and combustible cigarettes when taxes are imposed. 

For example, a study analyzing Minnesota’s 2013 tax on e-cigarettes suggested that it led to increased adult smoking and reduced smoking cessation.  The analysis suggested that there was cross elasticity of current smoking participation with respect to e-cigarette prices of 0.13.[13]  Note that this suggests that a 53 percent increase in the price of vapor products would increase smoking incidence by 6.89 percent.  Since about 34.1 million Americans currently smoke cigarettes, this would lead to an increase in the number of smokers of 2.16 million individuals.[14]  Since an estimated 8.1 million adults are vapor users, this would mean that more than a quarter of these people would switch to cigarettes.[15]

Still other studies have shown even higher demand elasticities and levels of substitution that are modeled here.[16]

– John Dunham & Associates, 2021


[1] See Rules Committee Print 117-17 Text Of Hr 5376, Build Back Better Act, November 3, 2021, found at https://rules.house.gov/sites/democrats.rules.house.gov/files/BILLS-117HR5376RH-RCP117-18.pdf 

[2] The Vapor Industry Economic Impact Study (2018), Prepared for Vapor Technology Association, by John Dunham & Associates, April 29, 2019.

[3] Ibid.  This includes as many as 3,094 jobs (803 shops) in Florida, 2,832 jobs (614 shops) in Ohio, 2,280 jobs (533 shops) in Pennsylvania, 1,522 jobs (359 shops) in Michigan and 898 jobs (204 shops) in Wisconsin.

[4] In addition, there are 11,920 full-time equivalent jobs created by vapor product sales at traditional retailers like supermarkets, convenience stores, drug stores, and department stores.

[5] The Vapor Industry Economic Impact Study (2021), prepared for Vapor Technology Association, by John Dunham & Associates, September 20, 2021.

[6] See for example: FDA Denies Marketing Applications for About 55,000 Flavored E-Cigarette Products for Failing to Provide Evidence They Appropriately Protect Public Health: Action Marks First Marketing Denial Orders for E-Cigarette Products; Press Release, Food and Drug Administration, August 26, 2021, at: https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-denies-marketing-applications-about-55000-flavored-e-cigarette-products-failing-provide-evidence

[7] Based on a multi-state, multi-market demand model developed for the Vapor Technology Association by John Dunham & Associates, 2021.

[8] The proposed federal tax on vaping liquids would harm small businesses, resulting in a 31.9 percent reduction in their overall sales. Very few businesses can withstand such a reduction in revenues.

[9] Chendroyaperumal, Chendrayan, The First Laws in Economics and Indian Economic Thought – Thirukkural, SSRN, January 29, 2010, at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1545247 The citation states: if people do not consume a product or service, then there will not be anybody to supply that product or service for the sake of price.

[10] Steuart, James, An Inquiry Into the Principles of Political Oeconomy: Being an Essay on the Science of Domestic Policy in Free Nations, James Williams; and Richard Moncrieffe, 1770.

[11] Smith, Adam, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, (London: Methuen and Co., Ltd.), 1904.

[12] Quit rates from: Estimating Consequences of a Ban on the Legal Sale of Menthol Cigarettes, prepared by Compass Lexecon for Lorillard Tobacco Company, January 19, 2011.  On-line at: https://www.thecre.com/ccsf/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/compass_1_19_2011.pdf  According to its website, Compass Lexecon is one of the world’s leading economic consulting firms.

[13] Based on a 40.7 percent increase in price. See: Saffer et al., E-Cigarettes and Adult Smoking: Evidence from Minnesota, NBER Health Economics Program, December 2019, at: https://www.nber.org/papers/w26589

[14] Fast Facts and Fact Sheets, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, at: www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/index.htm?s_cid=osh-stu-home-spotlight-001

[15] Villarroel, Maria, et. al., Electronic Cigarette Use Among U.S. Adults, 2018, NCHS Data Brief No. 365, April 2020 at:  www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db365.htm

[16] Cotti, Chad, et al., The Effects of E-Cigarette Taxes One-Cigarette Prices and Tobacco Product Sales: Evidence From Retail Panel Data, National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 26724, Revised April 2021, at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w26724

Filed Under: Government Updates, News

Gov. DeSantis Veto’s Flavor Ban SB 810!

September 9, 2020 by Black Development Leave a Comment

VAPOR TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION APPLAUDS GOVERNOR DESANTIS FOR DECISION TO VETO ADULT FLAVOR BAN BILL

Governor DeSantis is the First Governor to Veto A Flavor Ban

Washington, D.C. – September 9, 2020 – The Vapor Technology Association (VTA) applauds Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (R) for his decision to veto SB 810, a flavor ban. SB 810 was passed by the legislature in March of this year under the mistaken belief that it would raise the age to purchase vapor products to 21. But, due to federal legislation passed in December 2019, the legal age to purchase vapor products was already 21 in Florida making that portion of the bill “superfluous” in the Governor’s words.

“Governor DeSantis has shown true leadership and understanding in his decision to veto SB 810,” said Tony Abboud, Executive Director of the Vapor Technology Association. “On behalf of all the vapor companies, large and small, and the more than one million vapers in the state of Florida, VTA thanks Governor DeSantis for his bold decision to protect Florida’s public health and economy, which comes at a time of great uncertainty for many. This is the positive reinforcement the industry and the people of Florida need.”

The Vapor Technology Association worked closely with the Florida Smoke Free Association, a VTA member association, to educate legislators throughout the legislative session and had moved a meaningful regulatory bill that would have provided real solutions to the core issue of youth access and/or appeal. However, that effort was tossed in favor of an unnecessary and last minute flavor ban, disguised as a bill that would merely raise the age to 21.

Immediately after the bill’s passage in March, VTA went to work on a multi-media veto campaign strategy that involved:

  • the VapersSayVeto call to action site,
  • the industry’s only television advertisement directed at the Governor,
  • a social media drumbeat, and
  • professional economic analysis from VTA economist John Dunham & Associates

The statewide campaign educating the Governor and his advisors on the negative public health and economic impacts of SB 810 was deployed in cooperation with the Florida Smoke Free Association, which also delivered sophisticated and passionate messages of their own to the Governor.

Moreover, VTA’s economists prepared a report and were deployed to explain that, if enacted, this bill would have removed $605.6 million from Florida’s economy, cost $41.3 million in state and local tax revenue, and put more than 4,500 Floridians out of work. In addition, VTA’s economist testified before the Florida Office of Economic Development Review Committee and was asked to provide additional data for consideration leading to the commission announcing that SB 810 would have serious adverse tax implications for Florida’s economy.

Governor DeSantis took the time to learn about the industry’s impact in the state and understand the legislation’s negative consequences, as seen in his veto transmission letter to Florida’s Secretary of State Laurel Lee. He also recognized that this bill would not achieve its goal of reducing youth vaping. We are pleased that the Governor’s thoughtful veto message clearly reflected the same core issues that we presented in VTA’s request for a veto.

VTA has led national efforts to address underage use of e-cigarettes. Our comprehensive plan announced last year, ensures controlled distribution of all tobacco products, including e-cigarettes, and to impose real limits on access and appeal of all tobacco products to youth. Flavor bans like SB 810 are not effective, rather they eliminate adult alternatives to dangerous cigarettes for adult smokers and devastate small businesses. VTA commends Governor DeSantis for listening to his constituents and understanding the real public health policy implications at stake, specifically, that flavor bans will lead to an unregulated black market and will drive adults back to smoking dangerous cigarettes.

About the Vapor Technology Association

The Vapor Technology Association is the U.S. non-profit industry trade association whose 1000+ members are dedicated to innovating and selling high quality vapor products that provide adult consumers with a better alternative to traditional combustible cigarettes. VTA represents the industry-leading manufacturers of vapor devices, e-liquids, flavorings, and components, as well as the largest wholesalers, distributors, importers, and e-commerce retailers, in addition to hundreds of hard-working American brick-and-mortar retail store owners throughout the United States. Follow us on Twitter.

Filed Under: Government Updates, News

PMTA Deadline Reached: Now, What’s Next?

September 9, 2020 by Black Development Leave a Comment

PMTA DEADLINE ARRIVES:
VAPOR INDUSTRY RESPONDS

This is a BIG DAY for the vapor technology industry. The day that so many said could not come has arrived. And, just like with every other deadline imposed by the FDA, the vapor industry has stepped up to the task.

Once thought impossible, already reports are coming in of many manufacturers filing their Pre-Market Tobacco Applications (PMTAs) covering what is sure to be thousands of products. Congratulations to all those companies who dug in, did the hard work, gathered the science and submitted their PMTAs by the deadline. Yes, companies had to make some tough decisions along the way, but that was always expected as we headed into the final phase of the Deeming Regulation.

Last week, the FDA confirmed it will take each applicant’s individual circumstances into account during the review process. To be sure, FDA already has been quickly replying to early applicants and issuing initial acceptance letters accepting applications for a variety of products.

While this may feel like a finish line, it is really only the beginning of an ongoing process with FDA as CTP reviews each application submitted and engages with further questions of the applicants.

VTA will continue our existing dialogue with FDA to strongly advocate for our members participating in the process.  To that end, the process rolls out as follows:

Phase 1:  Administrative Review.  FDA initially reviews the application to make sure that basic requirements are in the application, it is in English, it includes required contact information and that it contains product identifying information. If these basic elements are included, a company should receive a letter from FDA accepting their application for further action. If not, FDA will send a “refuse to accept” letter.

Phase 2:Filing.  FDA engages in a preliminary scientific review to make sure that everything required by the statute is included, such as health risk data, HPHC studies, descriptions of components, ingredients, additives, and principles of operation, description of facility controls, manufacturing, etc.  If FDA finds these elements, a company will receive a letter accepting the application for filing.  If not, FDA will send a “refuse to file” letter.

Phase 3:  Substantive Review:  This is FDA’s full-blown evaluation of all the science and data presented in each application.  FDA will take recommendations from TPSAC and will engage with the applicant with questions.  This process could take up to 12 months and during this time FDA may send the applicant a deficiency letter, giving them 90 days to provide missing or deficient information.  If FDA has made a scientific decision to issue a marketing order, FDA will send an environmental information request letter before it can issue a final marketing order. Otherwise, FDA will send a “no marketing order” letter.

Phase 4:  Post Marketing Reporting.  As part of its approval process, FDA may require that the sale and distribution of your product is restricted (i.e., to protect kids).  Or FDA may require the applicant to establish and maintain certain records and make certain reports available to FDA.  Post market reports will vary based on submission and may include a requirement that the applicant engages in serious or unexpected adverse experience reporting or any manufacturing deviations.

VTA’s full, in-depth analysis summarizing the important developments for those impacted by the PMTA deadline, particularly as it relates to FDA’s enforcement now that the PMTA deadline has been reached, can be found here.

Filed Under: Events, News

VTA Reacts to Gov. DeSantis Veto of SB 810

March 20, 2020 by Black Development Leave a Comment

VTA:  “Now is the time to support, not close, small businesses.”  Veto SB 810!

Check PDF

Filed Under: News, Press Releases

Dunham: SB 810 Will Result in 4,500 Layoffs in Florida

March 19, 2020 by Black Development Leave a Comment

Dunham & Associates: SB 810 will close hundreds of small businesses

Check PDF

Filed Under: News, Press Releases

HR 2339: A Big Gift to Big Tobacco

February 27, 2020 by Black Development Leave a Comment

Experts: HR 2339 will benefit Big Tobacco; hurt small businesses

Check PDF

Filed Under: Government Updates, News

NIH Funded Experts: Vapor Taxes Lead to Increased Smoking

February 27, 2020 by Black Development Leave a Comment

Two NIH-funded reports conclude that HR2339 Tax Will Increase Smoking

Check PDF

Filed Under: Government Updates, News, Reports

HR 2339 Flavor Ban Threatens Small Businesses

February 26, 2020 by Black Development Leave a Comment

HR 2339 will not protect youth and will shutter small businesses.

Check PDF

Filed Under: Government Updates, News

Federal Flavor Ban Economic Impact Analysis

November 22, 2019 by Black Development Leave a Comment

Economist: flavor ban will kill 151,000 jobs; close 13K small businesses

Check PDF

Filed Under: Government Updates, News, Reports

Universal Opposition to Vaping Flavor Bans and The Negative Impact of Vaping Bans

October 28, 2019 by Black Development Leave a Comment

Universal Opposition to Banning Flavors

Check PDF

Filed Under: News

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • …
  • 12
  • Next Page »

Follow Us

  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Facebook

Copyright © 2024 Vapor Technology Association.
All Rights Reserved.

Privacy Policy |
Terms Of Use

Created by Black

Association

  • About VTA
  • Priorities
  • Governance
  • FAQ
  • News

Resources

  • Reports
  • Action Center
  • Economic Impact
  • Additional Resources

Action

  • Become A Member
  • Action Center
  • Subscribe to VTA Insider
  • American Impact
  • Contact

Let’s Connect

Loading

Subscribe to VTA

Loading

Myth vs Fact

Continue to VTA