Block or Guide? Where Vaping Industry Policy Should Go

As a new industry, where should it go?

Different perspectives lead to completely different conclusions.

From the perspective of e-cigarette practitioners, it is clear that e-cigarettes are a completely new harm-reduction product, and policies should not only avoid prohibition but should encourage it.

Last year, tobacco tax revenue exceeded one trillion, and the explosion of e-cigarettes will inevitably reduce the profits of traditional tobacco interests, making it imperative for traditional tobacco stakeholders to suppress e-cigarettes.
 

However, from the perspective of policy-making, the question of which is more harmful, tobacco or e-cigarettes, is less important than the following issues:

The social issues arising from regulation far outweigh health issues.

If e-cigarettes are banned outright, it clearly contradicts the recent advocacy for "mass innovation and entrepreneurship," and although tobacco tax revenue exceeds one trillion, there are suspicions of "competing with the public for profits."

In the past five years, the two sessions have aimed for an 8% GDP growth rate, now adjusted to 6-6.5%, and with the economy's continuous growth faltering, how should consumption be stimulated? Whether through supply-side reform or consumption upgrades, the policy level needs new concepts to resolve the awkward situation.

Therefore, regarding the above issues, it is more likely that the policy tools will lean towards "guiding" rather than "blocking."

In the process of guiding and sorting, the focus of the policy will concentrate on the following aspects:

1. Control scale

From a policy perspective, I won’t kill you outright, but I won’t allow you to develop too wildly in terms of overall scale. The country does not compete with the public for profits, but allowing you to "run wild" still needs to consider the income of tobacco farmers and national tax revenue. The means of controlling scale lies in regulating the supply of core raw materials, such as nicotine supply.

2. Control scope:

Do not allow e-cigarettes to be marketed to minors. This is already an industry standard for e-cigarettes and needs no further elaboration.

3. Control taxation:

The anticipation of taxes on e-cigarettes is inevitable. On one hand, it squeezes tobacco tax revenue, which cannot be disregarded just because you are an e-cigarette. In addition to the basic consumption tax, as a product with addictive properties, it will inevitably increase public health expenditures, and this part of the expenditure will also have to be reflected in taxation.

Using "guidance" instead of "blocking," controlling scale, controlling taxation, and controlling scope are the general speculations regarding the regulatory direction of the heated non-combustion information network surrounding the e-cigarette industry. Any shortcomings are welcome to be critiqued.