Vaporizers To Be Banned In US Mail
- Thread starter vtac
- Start date
It's still not clear how this will all work. USPS has kicked the can down the road on how to handle this. I suspect that is mainly because they don't want to and they are not interested in being the governing body on this. It seems there was little thought that went into how this would be administered and from whom when this bill was shoved in the stimulus plan.
Edit:. FedEx, UPS and DHL all jumped on this stating they will no longer ship vaporizers as part of their normal terms of service. That is what I call folding to special interest groups. But honestly our part of the business is much more difficult to identify and they are only rejecting stuff that screams I'm a vape, so just consider that.
cybrguy
Putin is a War Criminal
I'm shocked! Who would have thought there was gambling in this establishment?
DJ Colonel Corn
The Vapor Ninja
OK guys
Things have been pretty quiet since around the end of April, when the USPS failed to finalize their decision by the deadline.
As of today, probably being announced tomorrow, the USPS will now comply with the PACT act, which, originally was aimed at considering 'ENDS" products (vaping) to be tobacco products, and therefore banned from the US mail.
Since April, UPS, FedEx, and DHL have self-regulated, banning vape stuff from being shipped with their companies.
Now you can say cannabis-related vapes are not intended to help people quit tobacco, however, if you read the language of what the USPS just put out, it expressly mentions cananbis vapes as part of the ban.
Here's some more info: https://thevapor.ninja/2021/10/20/usps-ruling-on-ends-products/
Grim news indeed. Of course we hope our particular products will go 'under the wire' but there is no guarantee.
Things have been pretty quiet since around the end of April, when the USPS failed to finalize their decision by the deadline.
As of today, probably being announced tomorrow, the USPS will now comply with the PACT act, which, originally was aimed at considering 'ENDS" products (vaping) to be tobacco products, and therefore banned from the US mail.
Since April, UPS, FedEx, and DHL have self-regulated, banning vape stuff from being shipped with their companies.
Now you can say cannabis-related vapes are not intended to help people quit tobacco, however, if you read the language of what the USPS just put out, it expressly mentions cananbis vapes as part of the ban.
Here's some more info: https://thevapor.ninja/2021/10/20/usps-ruling-on-ends-products/
Grim news indeed. Of course we hope our particular products will go 'under the wire' but there is no guarantee.
I wonder if those cigarette electric machines that take blanks and bulk-rate tobacco are banned too. I’d call them rollers but they’re different. I knew a guy who must have been a dedicated smoker because he owned one of those things. Are flavored wraps like Juicy Jay’s or flavored Backwoods banned too?
It say flowers not included, but then says said shipments are already illegal… how the fuck is that true. I signed for my Crafty shipped from S&B 2 weeks ago, guess that was illegal shipment???
“USPS notes that products like dry herb vaporizers, intended to vape cannabis flower rather than “solutions” like e-liquid or oil, may not fit the POSECCA definition, but are already prohibited from the U.S. Mail under separate rules. They are considered drug paraphernalia intended to be used with federally controlled substances, and therefore “unmailable.”
vaping360.com
“USPS notes that products like dry herb vaporizers, intended to vape cannabis flower rather than “solutions” like e-liquid or oil, may not fit the POSECCA definition, but are already prohibited from the U.S. Mail under separate rules. They are considered drug paraphernalia intended to be used with federally controlled substances, and therefore “unmailable.”
USPS Vape Mail Ban Is Now in Effect
The U.S. Postal Service will issue a rule tomorrow prohibiting U.S. Mail shipment of vaping products. It will become effective immediately.
3l3tric
Well-Known Member
Another wild point from that article: They mention that existing laws banning mail of cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products were put in place to prevent tax evasion (IE you live in NYC where cigarettes have high taxes, so order your cigarettes from SC where the taxes are way lower).It say flowers not included, but then says said shipments are already illegal… how the fuck is that true. I signed for my Crafty shipped from S&B 2 weeks ago, guess that was illegal shipment???
“USPS notes that products like dry herb vaporizers, intended to vape cannabis flower rather than “solutions” like e-liquid or oil, may not fit the POSECCA definition, but are already prohibited from the U.S. Mail under separate rules. They are considered drug paraphernalia intended to be used with federally controlled substances, and therefore “unmailable.”
USPS Vape Mail Ban Is Now in Effect
The U.S. Postal Service will issue a rule tomorrow prohibiting U.S. Mail shipment of vaping products. It will become effective immediately.
So, all this talk of "making ecigs follow the laws we've had for cigarettes forever" is an absolute farce. No child was getting cigarettes from the mail in the first place, that mail ban was entirely to restrict people from utilizing a very real tax loophole. So why apply the same rules to vaping products that don't fall at all within the same situation? There's little to no incentive to buy vape products online just to avoid paying some taxes.
These rules seem like they just can't admit that the products are different. I absolutely guarantee that all the kids vaping in middle schools got their vapes from a shady convenience store clerk, not some random online storefront. And the idea that "oh you can't mail cigarettes so you shouldn't get to mail vapes" completely misses the point of WHY you aren't allowed to mail cigarettes.
God, all this just makes my blood absolutely boil. None of this legislation will help a single person, besides maybe big tobacco (which was probably the point) and hurt so many nicotine/cannabis consumers for absolutely no. reason.
EDIT: I'd also just like to point out, I'm a former vape user. Quit using nicotine entirely months ago. I started using nicotine with vapes, not tobacco. And I STILL support people's right to use nicotine products, especially vaporizers, and get those products mailed to them. Even if you personally abhor nicotine, the fact remains vaping is a vital harm reduction tool to get people away from tobacco products, and treating the two products the same is a severely misguided approach that reduces the efficacy of vaping as a quitting tool.
flammy
Well-Known Member
The farce isn't about treating e-cigs similarly to analog cigarettes as that is exactly what the PACT Act amendment did as both are now classified similarly. Rather its the purpose of the amendment that is a bit of a farce as you alluded to...the name of the amendment is Preventing Online Sales of E-Cigarettes to Children Act. And you're right, this has always been about excise taxes and whether it has an impact very much depends on where you live as there are still numerous states that do not have any form of excise tax on vapor products while states such as California, Oregon and Minnesota have very high excise taxes:
How High Are Vapor Taxes in Your State?
Several states are considering introducing or increasing taxes on vapor products to make up declining tax revenue from traditional tobacco products or to fill budget holes in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic. However, lawmakers should approach the issue carefully because flawed excise tax...
taxfoundation.org
The ruling does allow for an exception for FDA approved smoking cessation devices but the current problem is that none currently exists. Hopefully this changes as there are real concerns (and studies to support) about how this will affect the ability of some to effectively stop smoking.
DJ Colonel Corn
The Vapor Ninja
Vaping retialiers are already hitting me with news that they have 'alternative regiional shipping companies' that will 'expand to more ZIP codes as teh weeks and months go by"....
So there IS hope I guess...... Stay tuned !
So there IS hope I guess...... Stay tuned !
floribud
Well-Known Member
Did everyone see this in the Federal Register:
The PACT Act makes sending "ENDS" mostly illegal. While ENDS stands for Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems. The had defined that broadly to include anything that turns a solution into an aerosol that is meant to be inhaled.
The key is that Cigarettes are banned AND electronic devices that "aerosolize" a "solution" are banned. But since solid tobacco leaf, and most likely solid cannabis flowers are not a "solution", that means TEDS are not ENDS. And the PACT act only applies to ENDS
The PACT Act makes sending "ENDS" mostly illegal. While ENDS stands for Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems. The had defined that broadly to include anything that turns a solution into an aerosol that is meant to be inhaled.
The key is that Cigarettes are banned AND electronic devices that "aerosolize" a "solution" are banned. But since solid tobacco leaf, and most likely solid cannabis flowers are not a "solution", that means TEDS are not ENDS. And the PACT act only applies to ENDS
cybrguy
Putin is a War Criminal
What is technically true and what is actually true are often dissimilar. I think if we are expecting the USPS to make these decisions about what is legal and what is not legal to ship that is unlikely to go well. They are certain to take the easiest path, and that is likely to prohibit shipping for much of the industry.
floribud
Well-Known Member
Have you noticed that every dry herb vape company has stopped using the word "vaporizer"? This is the reason, dry herb vapes will continue to be fine. The law is all about "technically". The Post Office can't say "technically" your not an ENDS but we'll ban you anyway. I mean they could, but they'd be sued by all the companies that make TEDS and then the PO would lose
E-Cigarettes, Vapes, and other ENDS
Get an overview of FDA regulation of vapes, e-cigarettes, and other electronic nicotine delivery systems. You can also find statistics about current use.
A TED contains no liquid and there's no place to put a liquid. The DynaCoil on the other hand might disappear.
cybrguy
Putin is a War Criminal
You are presumably referring to a VC here, which is not an electronic device and is not included in this particular law and should not be effected by it. This is not a law prohibiting vaporiers, it is a law prohibiting electronic devices that vaporize. Butane vapes should me fine.
DJ Colonel Corn
The Vapor Ninja
Well.
Personally, I also vaporize cannabis concentrates, so, this is a big problem for me, and as mentioned, falls under the wide brush they are painting with regarding 'vaporizers'. Sucks.
Yes, they are all changing the wording to avoid potential problems. Since years ago actually when the 1st bans were taking place, many companies changed their return addresses so they no longer contained 'ecig' or 'vapes' or anything resembling vaporizers.
Also, if you read the PDF you can clealy see where they are including cannabis vaporizers in their ban.
See here: https://thevapor.ninja/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/2021-22787.pdf .
Reading a more explanatory synopsis, it's clear here as well that cannabis vaporizing is included in this ban, see here: https://vaping360.com/vape-news/111617/usps-final-rule-banning-vape-mail/ .
I do believe they could avoid the USPS ban insisting that their product is not intended to stop people from smoking, which is also their agenda if you read the PDF.
It seems folks like Arizer and others are doing UPS or other modes of shipment, because UPS and other carriers have a more specific 'nicotine device' ban, rathjer than a 'vape' ban, because of the PACT ruling declaring nicotine liquid and devices, including things like metal wire, batteries, mods, etc... are now classified as 'tobacco' and thus cannot be shipped.
Actually, for years now Arizer has sold their products stricly as 'aromatherapy devices' and even include some lavender and rose petals for u to put in your aroma bowl and get the effect of aromas (terpenes).
One manufacturer I know is now selling his concentrate vapes as 'volatile terpene distributors' and 'concentrate heaters'.
Where there is a will, there is usually a way, and some folks are dedicated to getting their devices to people, so they can use their medicine in a truly medicinal way.
Speaking of lawsuits, by the way, there are a few vape companies challenging the ruling: https://vaping360.com/vape-news/111563/vape-companies-challenging-fda-marketing-denials/ .
Also, talking about heat-not-burn devices, Atria is going to stop selling their IQOS heat-not-burn device which was basically a vapoorizer but it got FDA approval. So there goes that.
What Cybeguy said is true, though, the USPS and GOV are not interested in the fine details that make our medicinal herb products a different animal than nicotine delivery systems, ENDS.
So I can say it will take some ingenuity but I think there will be a way. Also, there are 'Regional Carrriers' operating and widening the range of ZIP codes they will deliver to over the coming months, and they have no vape ban.
All the best !
flammy
Well-Known Member
Only cannabis devices that are capable of vaporizing a solution is within the PACT Act's purview. Thus most dry herb vapes are not affected by PACT. However, the USPS did mention in the ruling that even if a cannabis device is not considered an ENDS under the PACT Act PACT, the mailing of cannabis devices was already explicitly illegal due to the drug paraphernalia law. There simply isn't a need for the PACT to regulate cannabis devices and the likelihood of that happening is relatively small.
Also, UPS' ban and stance regarding vaping devices is congruent with current USPS ruling in that it does not have to involve tobacco:
"Vaping Products are considered Tobacco Products for the purpose of this policy. UPS no longer accepts for U.S. domestic shipment, including import and export into or from the U.S., any Vaping Product, including but not limited to e-cigarette devices and e-liquids or gels, regardless of nicotine content, even if a Shipper or consignee is permitted to ship and receive Vaping Products under applicable laws or regulations."
DJ Colonel Corn
The Vapor Ninja
Yes. Indeed.
This is why they are known as aromatherapy devices, soldering irons, heating devices... anything but 'vape' or 'vaporizer'.
The problem with this ban is that it gives a very broad definition regarding things turned into vapor with which u inhale directly.
The other problem is that some cannabis vapes require a 'mod', I.E. the battery and chip with housing, in order to operate. Such as the Splinter series of vapes. You simply DO need a mod for them to work. Under the current ruling, they are considered 'tobacco products, believe it or not, and thus cannot be shipped now.
This is also an issue with concentrate vaporizers which require a mod to operate.
However, I didn't mean to doom-and-gloom in regards to this ban... it's just going to get a little trickier.
Also, this ban is for business-to-retail customer shipping. Does not include business-to-store/business, so vape shops can still sell them.
Issue with that is hardly any vape shops are open out where I am because of rampant 'flavor bans' sweeping across the state, county-by-county, forcing the vape shops to close due to lack of business.
Don't worry though folks there will be ways to get your supplies !
flammy
Well-Known Member
By no means am I saying that this ruling won't be problematic due its unintended consequences of prohibiting items that have close ties to cannabis vaporization. However, I just don't believe that it is meant to deal with cannabis devices at all. Rather, the broad definition of an ENDS is designed to deal with the scenario that you described in which a company can simply claim an alternative purpose to circumvent law.
This has to do with excise taxes and the fact that different states do not impose them uniformly which then creates an inventive to arbitrage the spread via smuggling across state lines. What has changed is that vapor-specific excise taxes are now found in certain states and again, there is a disparity between the different rates that are imposed and again creates incentive to circumvent the payment of those taxes. While the amendment was touted as a method to curb adolescent use of tobacco, I think its safe to say that is largely a farce.
DJ Colonel Corn
The Vapor Ninja
Indeed it IS a farce.
However it goes much deeper than excise taxes varying from state to state.
It has a lot to do with taxes, however. The MSA, the Master Settlement Agreement, guarantees states CASH MONEY in direct relation to how much TOBACCO is sold. Vaping has a lot , lot. to do with people suddenly not smoking tobacco as much, it's declined steadily and sharply every year almost for 14 yrs, since vaping began. There are roughly 11 million nicotine vapers in the US, most of whom are ex-smokers. That's 11 million times $10 a day. Add it tup to a month, to a year. We're talking big money.
Not only that but you have big tobacco (yes, big tobacco is AGAINST vaping, and almost ALL vaping aside from Juul is operated by individual non-tobacco companies) "lobbying" congress about this issue. Lobbying, for those that don't know, means GIVING CASH MONEY to congresspersons, while casually mentioning what they'd like to see happen in the U.S.
It's not just big tobacco either, it's private wealthy folks who have interests in vaping vanish. Take ex-mayor Bloomberg for example. He "lobbied" congress with $167 million in total, telling them he thinks vaping should be stopped. Think about that. Do the math on how many congresspersons there are and how much money that is. Yeah roughly $1 million to each one, telling them he'd "like to see" vaping demolished. Nice.
Don't think they don't depsise cannabis vaping either, as a note to those who think they don't care anymore.
So yes tobacco shipments were stopped for tax purposes. Then they labeled ecigs and their equipment as 'tobacco' Yeah. However the reasoning for declaring such was....quite nefarious.
I won't even get into the PMTA regulations which also passed, which basically says if a vaporizer, including mods and their supporting equipment, is changed since 2007 (!) then a whole huge data sheet costing millions must be created, proving the device's this and that.
It's utterly ridiculous, but what they've done is hammer many nails into the coffin of VAPING.
Mind, you, this can/does affect cannabis vaping, lest anyone think this is purely an 'ecig' issue.
Great comments by the way
Silver420Surfer
Downward spiral
Why are you guys acting like big tobacco is against e-cigs...they make and sell both?!?!?
Seantagon
Well-Known Member
Funny you mention this because I ordered a Mighty last week and chose USPS Priority. When I finally got the tracking info it was from UPS.
I believe that even if ”Cannabis vaporizers“ are banned/not shippable it wouldn't even matter. As long as the company doesn’t advertise it being made for cannabis. The Crafty for example, in the instructions it has several different descriptions and temps for several different herbs. None of them being tobacco or cannabis. It’s all in language and presentation.
Planck
believes in Dog
BT (big tobacco) aren't against e-cigs as long as they are the ones selling them. BT has brought a few fabulously unsuccessful product to the market. Meanwhile an essentially open source grass roots group came up with a product the works far better than anything from the tobacco of pharma segment. It quickly grew into a multi billion dollar market that the good old boys had no part of.
So what's one to do in a free market capitalist economy like the USA has?
Make it illegal for anyone but your friends and that is exactly what is happening.
It's a long a twisted tale but the end game of this legislation, to reestablish and maintain a monopoly market.
Oh and news flash Joe Public doesn't give a fuck about tobacco or cannabis consumers.