Tag: HHS

  • Tariffs, Executive Orders and Cuts: The Trump Administration’s First Six Months

    Tariffs, Executive Orders and Cuts: The Trump Administration’s First Six Months

    By Freddie Dawson, Senior editor, Tamarind Intelligence

    The first six months of the second Trump administration can be defined by tariffs, executive orders and no further action on reforming the issues facing the American vaping market.

    President Donald Trump embarked on his second term as president having promised to “save flavored vaping” in the U.S. in the lead up to the election. This has not yet happened despite a flurry of executive orders – at least 157 that have been published in the U.S. Federal Register as of May 23. (More have been announced but that was the date of the last one published at the time of writing.)

    Many vaping advocates had hoped he might use an executive order to reset or reassess the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Pre-Market Tobacco Application (PMTA) process. Thus far this has not happened and, instead, there have been some comments that could be construed as concerning.

    There was the U.S. Supreme Court decision in the long-running case with the vaping company Wages and White Lion Investments – doing business as Triton Distribution – and the vaping company Vapetasia. The Supreme Court unanimously decided to vacate and remand the appealed Fifth Circuit Court decision that had been in favor of the companies over whether the FDA had been right to issue market denial orders (MDOs) to the them.

    This was a disappointment for vaping advocates. The companies had argued the FDA had been arbitrary and capricious in the changes it made to PMTA requirements while also being unclear about those changes and what minimum requisites would need to be included to successfully be granted a market authorization and be considered a legal product able to be sold in the American market. Advocates hoped a decision in favor of the vaping companies would confirm the FDA approach had been wrong and pave the way for the new administration to implement a new policy.

    Instead, the Supreme Court mostly rejected the vaping companies’ arguments. It did not arbitrate on all issues presented and returned the case to the lower court for further work, making the decision not a total defeat. However, it was a pretty galling blow for those wanting to see a change. Many of them hoped the Department for Health and Human Services (HHS) – now under new management – would even decline to continue to argue the case following the change in leadership.

    Instead, they appeared to fully embrace the prior approach. A HHS spokesperson welcomed the Supreme Court decision. They said it represented confirmation that the approach taken by the FDA – including under the administration of former Democratic president Joe Biden – was the correct one. “The recent Supreme Court ruling supports the FDA’s efforts to regulate e-cigarette products in line with the standards outlined in the Tobacco Control Act,” a spokesperson said.

    Beyond this, comments by the new HHS secretary – Robert Kennedy Jr and head of the FDA – Marty Makary could also be construed to be viewed as negative takes on vaping from major administration figures.

    Both have been questioned by Florida Republican Senator Ashley Moody on what they will do to combat Chinese vaping products illicitly on the U.S. market. Makary told Moody he agreed that vaping products were proliferating on the American market and that this was due to the Chinese flooding it with cheap supplies.

    He said public health research would never be able to properly study them as the market moved faster than the science could but that the FDA could collaborate with other U.S. government departments to increase enforcement actions. “The Office of Inspections and Investigations has a lot of people with guns, and they do enforcement and raids,” he said.

    Several vaping commentators did not react well to this – particularly on the semi-serious threat of armed enforcement raids. However, it could also be theoretically read that Makary was implying the enforcement action would be directed at imported Chinese vaping products and that emphasis was placed on revamping the FDA’s approach to PMTAs.

    Kennedy Jr’s later comments in answer to questions from Senator Moody could potentially support such a reading. He told her that the FDA had created its own backlog and had deliberately dragged its feet on approvals for American vaping companies, which had been acting responsibly by putting age verification chips in vaping devices, providing information on addiction and were making labels not attractive to children.

    Chinese products had flooded the opening in the market provided by them obeying the law and that these were the products that were responsible for youth attraction issues with flavors, colors and youth-aimed enticements such as cartoon like imagery as well as features such as gaming capabilities on devices. He told Senator Moody that he promised to “wipe them out”.

    Despite being a complete misreading of the nicotine alternatives history – and almost certainly being a ‘barn door shut after the horse has already bolted’ sort of promise, it does at least show some favor for American vaping companies and a potential desire to address issues facing it in the future.

    That marks something of a change from Kennedy Jr’s initial nomination hearings where vaping did not come directly come up. However, his potential use of an Alp nicotine pouch during the sessions did draw a few headlines and suggested the new secretary may have a sympathetic stance on nicotine alternatives.

    But although the administration has not addressed the U.S. vaping regulatory situation through any means – such as the use of executive orders – it has taken other actions through those means that have had an impact on the industry.

    This includes several orders trimming resources for government entities that have some impact on vaping and other nicotine alternatives – including the HHS, the Center for Tobacco Products (CTP) itself and aspects of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) such as the Office on Smoking and Health (OSH). This has resulted in redundancy or resignation for myriad groups of former federal employees in these organizations up to and including the former head of the CTP, Brian King and – allegedly – the entirety of the OSH.

    The impact of these actions will likely take some time to properly be felt. In the short term it presumably has increased the disorder and delay already present in organizations such as CTP that would have had primary responsibility for PMTA assessment. Further in the future the decisions could potentially benefit vaping and other nicotine alternatives – depending how important intervening steps turn out.

    For example, significantly more will be revealed on the future direction of PMTA assessment by who becomes the next head of CTP. A new head and new staff could perhaps be more efficient in assessing and processing PMTAs – though it is hard to see where new staff with the requisite expertise will suddenly materialize from. Similarly, much will be implied about the administration’s opinion of, and the potential future of, nicotine alternatives by what is done with the former activities of the OSH. For example, maintaining the collection and publication of smoking-related datasets but dropping things like preferential access to data or provision of OSH opinions on issues could create a more vaping-amenable atmosphere in the U.S..

    Setting that aside, more immediately, the action taken through executive orders that has had the most impact on vaping and other nicotine alternatives has been the imposition of tariffs on goods imported into the U.S. from China. Primarily this has affected vaping hardware – though has also had an impact on other product which rely on specialist or mass-produced items that are hard to find from other sources at economically viable prices.

    Theoretically this activity could be considered taking action against the proliferation of illicit Chinese vaping products on the market – as promised by Kennedy Jr and Makary. There is some evidence this is happening with reports of limits placed on maximum purchase numbers for disposable vaping products from wholesalers and decreases in registered imports of vaping products from China.

    Data from the FDA showed only 71 shipments this May, compared to 996 in January 2025, before the additional new Trump tariffs started to be announced. It also compares to the 1158 shipments recorded last May.

    But without a viable domestic vaping manufacturing sector in the U.S., the move risks worsening public health. There previously was little evidence of other nicotine alternatives leaching numbers away from vaping. There is perhaps a little more of that – primarily through dual use driven by situational advantages. This, for example, could be using pouches in scenarios where more discretion is required. But primarily the trend appears to still be for dual or poly use of products rather than switching entirely.

    If vaping products continue to be limited by supply constraints brought about by tariffs, this trend may increase, or people may instead choose to move back to conventional cigarettes. There is little evidence domestic vaping will be able to spring up to fulfil the need. A couple of companies have announced they were transferring manufacturing capacity to the U.S. Many more are moving capacity out of China to third-party countries partly at least to get around U.S. tariffs.

    But there will be no major transference of vaping capacity to the US simply because of the continuing PMTA situation. No company will take the time, effort, and capital it would require setting up manufacturing in the U.S. with no guarantee the product would ever be approved to be sold on the domestic market.

    Meanwhile it is also unclear whether there has definitely been a reduction in Chinese vaping imports. Several manufacturers were already in the process of moving vaping manufacturing capacity out of the Shenzhen region in China due to rising costs driven by competition. Tariffs will have accelerated that trend – though President Trump’s “Liberation Day” spread of tariffs will have gone some way to reducing the advantage such a move would gain in terms of exports to the USA.

    But it has been noted that imports of vaping products from countries such as Indonesia have already outstripped their totals for the entirety of last year (3,139 thus far this year compared to 3,102 for all of 2024). And there remains significant speculation that the vast majority of Chinese vaping imports – particularly for disposable vaping products – do not enter the U.S. under the proper registration. U.S. officials have alleged that they are often deliberately labelled as products such as shoes to get around restraints. Though this claim has been repeated many more times than evidence backing it has been produced.

    One potential support of vaping products entering the U.S. market through some means aside from in registered shipments is the 90% discrepancy between the reported value of Chinese vaping exports to the U.S. ($3.6bn for 2024) and Chinese vaping imports registered with U.S. authorities ($333m for the same time period).

    So thus far there has not been much help for vaping in the first six months of the second Trump administration. But there is the potential of future promise. Appointments and reassignments for the OSH and – primarily – the CTP could theoretically change the approach to vaping regulation in America. Further policing of illicit vaping products entering the market could lead to domestic uptake – if PMTA conditions were first sorted. So not much for vaping or wider nicotine alternatives in the first six months. But perhaps the groundwork for something more to be built later.

  • Thoughts on FDA Reform

    Thoughts on FDA Reform

    Prioritizing Education on Smoke-Free Alternatives

    By Dr. Tom Price

    The recent marketing authorization by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of 20 Zyn nicotine pouch products is a good step forward in building a more robust market for smoke-free nicotine and tobacco products. This critical decision, coupled with the Trump administration, U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and expected FDA Commissioner Marty Makary’s stated priority to “Make America Healthy Again,” foretells an emerging regulatory landscape in the U.S. that presents a meaningful opportunity to expand access to smoke-free products that can help adults who smoke make the switch away from cigarettes.

    This paradigm shift has been a long time coming, and I am thrilled to see it happening in real time. Now, it is time for the FDA to step up its education efforts—with both consumers as well as the medical community—to raise awareness of these products and how, although not risk free, they are a better choice than continuing to smoke or using other traditional tobacco products.

    In clearing the FDA’s extensive premarket tobacco product application (PMTA) process, which includes years of scientific review, ZYN became the first and only FDA-authorized nicotine pouch in the U.S. In the FDA’s announcement, the Director of the Office of Science at the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products (CTP), Matthew Farrelly, Ph.D., noted that these “products offer greater benefits to population health than they do risks,” and the data shows that ZYN nicotine pouches “meet that bar by benefitting adults who use cigarettes and/or smokeless tobacco products and completely switch to these products.”

    While this should be good news for the 45 million American nicotine consumers, there is still more work for the FDA to do to clearly illustrate the potential benefits of nicotine pouches and other smoke-free products to consumers and medical experts alike. However, that will require clearing up a long history of misinformation.

    According to the FDA, it is not nicotine but a toxic mix of chemicals contained in tobacco and tobacco smoke that drives the serious health threats facing tobacco users. Despite the science proving that smoke-free products represent a better option compared to smoking, various groups, such as the American Lung Association (ALA), continue to spread misinformation about the potential benefits of Zyn nicotine pouches for smokers and other tobacco users, directly contradicting the FDA and scientific evidence.

    Even America’s medical community seems flummoxed by what should be a clear distinction between nicotine consumption and the serious side effects tied to cigarette smoking. According to one study, 60 percent of nurses mistakenly believe that nicotine causes cancer. Another one found that more than 80 percent of physicians “strongly agreed” that nicotine “directly contributes to the development of cardiovascular disease (83.2 percent), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (80.9 percent), and cancer (80.5 percent).”

    Of course, none of this is true, underscoring the dire need for the FDA and CTP to prioritize educating the public and medical community with accurate information about the vital role smoke-free products could play in helping Americans who smoke to reduce their exposure to harm.

    CTP Director Brian King, Ph.D., M.P.H., recently acknowledged as much, saying that “misperceptions among physicians and other healthcare professionals” may result in advising patients in a manner that is “not consistent with existing scientific evidence.” Moreover, he continued, these “misperceptions are associated with lower odds of completely transitioning from cigarettes” to a noncombustible product.

    While misinformation abounds, there is still some hope. Even passionate anti-smoking groups, such as the Truth Initiative, have—to some degree—begun to acknowledge the benefits of nicotine pouches, noting that the FDA’s authorization of ZYN nicotine pouch products “addresses an ongoing need to provide adults who smoke with access to less harmful alternatives to combustible cigarettes.”

    The FDA and CTP may be well aware of the misperceptions behind smoke-free products. Still, neither has taken meaningful action to counter the spread of misinformation with proper, accurate education for healthcare providers and adults who smoke. That must change, and it must change soon.

    The FDA has a responsibility to not only help provide adults who smoke with more smoke-free options, but also to ensure the medical community and public at large understand the benefits and risk these products provide—both in terms of personal and public health. Recent events have made me hopeful that, together, we can build a healthier country, but the FDA and CTP must lead the way there.

    Tom Price, M.D., was the 23rd Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and is a former member of Congress (GA06), and an advisor to PMI U.S. Corporate Services Inc.

  • Dem Lawsuit Wants HHS “Restructure” Undone

    Dem Lawsuit Wants HHS “Restructure” Undone

    A group of Democratic-led states filed a lawsuit today (May 5) to challenge the Trump administration’s decision to fire 10,000 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services employees. Filed in federal court in Providence, Rhode Island, attorneys general from 19 states and the District of Columbia said the job cuts and agency consolidations U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy announced in late March unconstitutionally stripped the department of the resources necessary to do its job.

    The layoffs, in addition to earlier buyout offers and firings of probationary employees, reduced the number of full-time HHS employees from 82,000 to 62,000 and left key offices unable to perform statutory functions, the lawsuit said.

    As part of the restructuring plan, HHS said it was also collapsing 28 divisions into 15 and closing half of its 10 regional offices.

    The states argue that Kennedy lacked the authority to launch the widespread layoffs and restructuring and that the administration violated the U.S. Constitution by usurping Congress’ authority to create and fund agencies’ operations. The states asked a judge to block HHS from implementing Kennedy’s plan announced on March 27, prevent the department from being dismantled, and force the administration to restore health

    HHS declined to comment on the lawsuit. It previously said the restructuring was necessary to streamline its functions and that the layoffs would save taxpayers $1.8 billion annually.

  • Robert Kennedy, Jr. Tapped to Lead Trump’s HHS

    Robert Kennedy, Jr. Tapped to Lead Trump’s HHS

    President-elect Donald Trump has nominated Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. to serve as the new secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The effects Kennedy will have on the nicotine market remain unclear. Kennedy must still be confirmed by Congress.

    “For too long, Americans have been crushed by the industrial food complex and drug companies who have engaged in deception, misinformation, and disinformation when it comes to Public Health,” Trump posted. “The Safety and Health of all Americans is the most important role of any Administration, and HHS will play a big role in helping ensure that everybody will be protected from harmful chemicals, pollutants, pesticides, pharmaceutical products, and food additives that have contributed to the overwhelming Health Crisis in this Country.”

    As the leader of HHS, Kennedy will oversee the FDA, which regulates vaping, nicotine pouches, and all other nicotine and tobacco products through its Center for Tobacco Products.

    Kennedy’s position on vaping, nicotine, and tobacco harm reduction (THR) remains an unknown. During the presidential campaign, Trump promised that, if elected, he would “save vaping” after meeting with Tony Abboud of the Vapor Technology Association.

    “I saved Flavored Vaping in 2019, and it greatly helped people get off smoking,” Trump said on his Truth Social platform in September. “I raised the age to 21, keeping it away from the ‘kids.’ Kamala and Joe want everything banned, killing small businesses all over the country. I’ll save Vaping again!”