Two Sessions E-Cigarette Proposals Roundup, New Policies May Follow
[db:description]
It is unclear when proposals regarding e-cigarettes began to appear at the Two Sessions. This year, the delayed Two Sessions also addressed the topic of e-cigarettes, and there were quite a few proposals. Three representatives from the National People's Congress and two members of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference brought proposals regarding e-cigarettes, indicating that they have done their homework and are clearly aiming to regulate e-cigarettes more strictly.<\/div>
<\/div>
1. China should gradually prohibit the production and sale of e-cigarettes, and quickly amend and improve national smoking control and public place smoking bans to include e-cigarettes. Additionally, extensive campaigns should be conducted to prohibit the sale and use of e-cigarettes.<\/div>
<\/div>
—— Ding Lieming, Chairman and CEO of Betta Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd., NPC Representative.<\/div>
<\/div>
2. The revision of the Minor Protection Law should explicitly prohibit the sale of tobacco products and e-cigarettes to minors; prohibit the sale of tobacco products and e-cigarettes within 100 meters of kindergartens, primary and secondary schools, and other places where minors gather; and prohibit smoking and using e-cigarettes in classrooms, dormitories, activity rooms, and other places where minors gather. For violations of these regulations, it is suggested that market supervision and health administrative departments issue warnings, order corrections within a specified time, and impose fines.<\/div>
<\/div>
—— Qi Guoyan, Director of the Myasthenia Gravis Department at Shijiazhuang First Hospital, NPC Representative.<\/div>
<\/div>
3. By amending the Tobacco Monopoly Law and related regulations, e-cigarettes should be classified as tobacco products and strictly regulated, prohibiting the sale of e-cigarettes to minors and pregnant women, prohibiting the use of e-cigarettes in indoor public places and transportation, and prohibiting the promotion of e-cigarettes as smoking cessation products.<\/div>
<\/div>
—— Gao Yu, Executive Director of Chongqing Puyuwei Technology Innovation Center, NPC Representative.<\/div>
<\/div>
4. Strengthen the top-level design of the system, classify e-cigarettes as tobacco products, and implement monopoly management alongside traditional cigarettes; the National Health Commission and other departments should collaboratively establish mandatory national standards for e-cigarettes to provide a professional basis for regulation; at the same time, strengthen industry law enforcement and improve the joint governance system, with market supervision departments regulating the production quality standards, pre-market conditions, advertising, etc., and strictly prohibiting exaggerated claims about product efficacy such as "beneficial to health" and "smoking cessation miracle"; review and restrict e-cigarette information on apps like Kuaishou, Douyin, Weibo, and WeChat.<\/div>
<\/div>
—— Guo Guirong, Vice Mayor of Xiamen, CPPCC Member.<\/div>
<\/div>
5. The legal amendments should clearly state that operators of tobacco products and e-cigarettes must display signs indicating that they do not sell tobacco products and e-cigarettes to minors in prominent locations, and for those whose age is difficult to determine, they should be required to show identification; prohibit the sale of tobacco products and e-cigarettes within 100 meters of kindergartens, primary and secondary schools, and other places where minors gather; and prohibit smoking and using e-cigarettes in classrooms, dormitories, activity rooms, and other places where minors gather.<\/div>
<\/div>
—— Pan Biling, Deputy Director of the Hunan Provincial Department of Ecology and Environment, CPPCC Standing Committee Member.<\/div>
<\/div>
From these five proposals, one suggests a complete ban on the production and sale of e-cigarettes, which can be considered quite radical and unrealistic, potentially offending many industry professionals. The other four proposals aim to strengthen the regulation of e-cigarettes, which seems relatively rational and understandable, but classifying e-cigarettes as monopoly products may be excessive.<\/div>
<\/div>
Why is it said that banning the production and sale of e-cigarettes is unrealistic? <\/strong><\/div>
<\/div>
Since 2004, e-cigarettes invented and manufactured in China, primarily for export, have developed over more than a decade, forming a very mature and somewhat scaled industry chain, with thousands of companies and millions of practitioners, generating significant foreign exchange income for the country each year. If e-cigarettes were to be banned outright, many companies would close, and a large number of practitioners would lose their jobs, directly reducing the country's foreign exchange earnings. The stakeholders involved should be able to consider this relationship.<\/div>
<\/div>
Why is there support for strengthening the regulation of e-cigarettes? <\/strong><\/div>
<\/div>
Without rules, there can be no order. For any industry to develop healthily and sustainably, it requires a sound regulatory framework. The e-cigarette industry has been "running wild" for many years, and only in the past two years has it begun to receive attention from relevant authorities, resulting in some management notices. The "online ban" is considered the strictest management measure in the history of e-cigarettes. Although this is not the outcome that practitioners wish to see, from the perspective of industry development, practitioners support strengthening the regulation of e-cigarettes while hoping to see the introduction of national standards and related management measures as soon as possible. Only then can practitioners operate legitimately under clear guidelines.<\/div>
<\/div>
Why is it said that classifying e-cigarettes as monopoly products is excessive? <\/strong><\/div>
<\/div>
If e-cigarettes are forcibly classified as monopoly products, it lacks legal basis unless the Tobacco Monopoly Law is amended. If it is argued that the presence of tobacco components in e-liquids justifies classifying e-cigarettes under the Tobacco Monopoly Law, it would be unfair to manufacturers of vaping devices. E-cigarettes consist of two parts: e-liquids and vaping devices. In reality, within the entire production chain, e-liquids and vaping devices do not come from the same manufacturer. E-liquid manufacturers specialize in developing various flavors of e-liquids, supplying them directly to device manufacturers or retailers. Device manufacturers are responsible for producing the devices and sourcing e-liquids from e-liquid manufacturers, ultimately assembling them into finished products. Currently, the number of device manufacturers is significantly higher than that of e-liquid manufacturers. If all are subjected to monopoly regulations, many device manufacturers may be forced to "sell out" or go bankrupt.<\/div>
<\/div>
In summary, whether through prohibition or monopoly, neither approach will solve the problem. From the perspective of public health, industry development, and practitioners, it is essential to introduce industry national standards and related management measures early and strengthen unified regulatory efforts, which will be a win-win situation for all parties involved.<\/div>
<\/div>
Finally, regarding the five proposals from NPC representatives and CPPCC members at the Two Sessions concerning e-cigarettes, I believe this may accelerate the introduction of national standards and related management measures for the industry. I trust that relevant national departments will take this seriously, begin investigations, discern right from wrong, focus on the bigger picture, and soon provide clarity for the e-cigarette industry.<\/div>
Related Articles
Vaping News
Ahead of a Nationwide Ban, Hundreds of Russian Retailers Voluntarily Stop Selling Vapes
2026-04-16
Vaping News
Illegal Vape Brands Try to Evade FDA Scrutiny by Posing as “Made in the USA”
2026-04-08
Vaping News
Jordan’s New Tobacco Control Rules: Waterpipe Tobacco Market Set for Major Changes
2026-03-17