Cannot get business License due to Temporary Moratorium, help please.

[Premier Vape]

Hello everyone, my name is Steve aka Xeo and I am the Manager / Owner of Premier Vape. Due to the Temp Moratorium - we were thinking of changing the name to "Premier Cessation Solutions" and claiming that we are not selling tobacco products, however that's where it gets tricky... we could say our juice is made with a synthetic tobacco.

The term "tobacco product" means any product made or derived from tobacco that is intended for human consumption, including any component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product. This includes, among other products, cigarettes, cigarette tobacco, roll-your-own tobacco, and smokeless tobacco.

-FDA.GOVs Website​

I read the Moratorium and it is full of propaganda and ties the advanced mod's to those garbage Blu / Vuse e-cigarettes. Also, we as a community are smart enough to not carry products with diacetyl. It's also saying that nicotine above 20mg is toxic where as my store would not stock anything above 12.

I was thinking of telling them we are a Smoking Cessation store.. we had a bar laid out but it looks like we will just have to stick to the regular cases.

I was thinking about getting an attorney that would write a letter saying that the Moratorium they have does not apply to us, but we have "Vape" in our LLC name.

Please, any suggestions so we can open our doors and sell or should we just look into another town? This location is perfect, highway traffic is very thick in commute hours. The landlord said he would give the money back if we couldn't open our doors. I am just wondering if anyone else out there has dealt with this.

Read the Temporary Moratorium here

 

[Barbara E.]

I don't see how you can say that this moratorium doesn't apply to you. And, no, you can't claim you are a 'smoking cessation' store because you have no 'proof' of that. The FDA will definitely come after you. Probably your best bet is to investigate whether or not they have the right to make such a moratorium at such short notice.

 

[smacksy]

What state are you located in? Just curious, thx

Sent from my QTAQZ3 using Tapatalk

 

[smacksy]

I'm in San Diego and we have several premier shops in the area and they're doing fine so that's why I was curious and thanks for your reply!

Sent from my QTAQZ3 using Tapatalk

 

[leaningtreewoodmods]

I'm in San Diego and we have several premier shops in the area and they're doing fine so that's why I was curious and thanks for your reply!

Sent from my QTAQZ3 using Tapatalk

We only sell custom mods online and some face to face. We have had our LLC since Feb 2016. We are still subject to FDA regs because we offer "Vape related products". We considered offering them as a novelty item to surpass the FDA. We will find out soon enough won't we!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[outwest]

It's also saying that nicotine above 20mg is toxic

That would be laughable if it wasn't so messed up. I used 36mg for a very long time, then eventually 24mg, now 18mg-20mg. The mg level needed to satisfy the smoker varies depending not only on the person, but also on the hardware being used. If it's cig-a-likes, such as Blu, and if the person is a heavy smoker, they're going to need 24mg-36mg to get the same satisfaction. Using the hardware that was available at the time (a 901-DSE cig-a-like) I would have never been able to switch to vaping without 36mg.

Regarding "I was thinking of telling them we are a Smoking Cessation store" - like @Barbara E. posted, you cannot make that sort of claim unless you have performed scientific studies with clinical trials, performed safety studies, etc. (the same sort of studies that have to be performed for pharmaceuticals) and have gotten FDA approval to market the item (again, like pharmaceuticals). The reason is that once you make that claim, it becomes a medical drug delivery device.

 

[JuicyLucy]

This thread is 10 months old

 

[outwest]

This thread is 10 months old

Oops, didn't notice that someone bumped an old thread. Thanks

 

[JuicyLucy]

Oops, didn't notice that someone bumped an old thread. Thanks

I know - I actually wrote out about 200 words in a reply post before editing

Then I got to thinking - what kind of a dummy is worried about a local ordinance when California and the FDA are beating vaping over the head with a spiked truncheon???

 

[outwest]

I know - I actually wrote out about 200 words in a reply post before editing

Then I got to thinking - what kind of a dummy is worried about a local ordinance when California and the FDA are beating vaping over the head with a spiked truncheon???

I didn't even open the link, figured it was a link to the FDA deeming regulations thing. Opened it just now and wow! They reference anti-freeze two different times, include an attachment that does the same thing, and cite a paper (which is the attachment) written by the non-profit group ChangeLab Solutions (who works to direct lawmakers) that's entitled, "Regulating Toxic Vapor", which also uses the chromium, formaldehyde, etc argument and the children argument. They then follow with an attachment from the Surgeon General's office that only discusses tobacco use, but of course they're trying to equate the two. *sigh*

That paper by ChangeLab (which starts on page 101) is worth a read because those are the people that are lobbying state legislators across the country and are who we are fighting.