ÃÛÌÒÓ°ÏñAV

House Bill 4001 includes restrictions on how these items can be packaged, with specific prohibitions on using cartoon characters and celebrity images to promote the products, and on how the devices can be designed.

There also is a first-time-ever requirement for state licensing and new penalties for those who are found to repeatedly sell not just vaping products but also tobacco to minors, including $10,000 fines and the suspension of licenses to sell vaping products.

Foes, however, said the measure doesn't go nearly far enough and doesn't provide resources to find offending retailers. They also point out that while the devices contain nicotine, the state is not imposing the same taxes it does on cigarettes, cigars, and other tobacco products with the same chemical.

Brian Hummell, who lobbies for the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, said he will urge Gov. Katie Hobbs to veto the measure when it comes to her desk. He said his fear is that lawmakers, thinking they've solved the problem of teen vaping, will conclude they've done enough and see no need for further revisions.

"Let's do something next year,'' Hummell said, saying it would be better to have no bill than this one.

But Rep. Jeff Weninger, who guided the package over a host of hurdles and compromises, called the legislation nothing short of "historic.'' The Chandler Republican said it was the first time in years that all sides, including tobacco companies, vape manufacturers and dealers, retailers and the Attorney General's Office agreed to sit down and get behind something they can support.

More to the point, he said nothing in HB 4001 precludes future lawmakers from making other changes.

"That's how you get things done in the Legislature,'' Weninger said, by beginning with incremental change that can get the necessary votes for approval.

He said that is something Hummell doesn't understand. "He doesn't negotiate,'' Weninger said.

Details of the measure

The legislation starts by providing, for the first time in Arizona law, a definition of "alternative nicotine products.'' That includes anything that contains nicotine, intended for human consumption in any form, but is not combustible.

That becomes the base for new regulations in the legislation, starting with advertising.

Off limits would be any "cartoon-like fictional character that mimics a character primarily aimed at entertaining.'' Also banned would be celebrity images or anything designed to look like products normally marketed to minors.

Vaping products also could not be sold if they are designed to look like something else, like school supplies, smartphones, backpacks, cosmetics, toys, or food or beverage products. The legislation allows offending products to be seized.

"It attacks the illicit vapes coming in from foreign countries that we don't know what's in it by providing licensing,'' said Weninger.

And then there are the fines.

There already are some penalties for the sale of tobacco products to minors. But these are petty offenses that usually result only in a fine.

HB 4001 not only expands the fines to include vaping products but establishes an entirely new penalty structure.

That starts at $500 for selling to minors. But it goes up to $10,000 for four or more violations within 24 months, a criminal conviction, and the loss of the ability to sell both tobacco and vaping products for a year.

Enforcement issue

Hummell was not impressed. "There are no additional resources that are put into the enforcement mechanism,'' he said.

He said the Attorney General's Office reports it currently does about 2,000 checks of retailers to ensure they are not selling tobacco to minors. But he said there are anywhere from 5,500 to 8,000 retailers.

What that means, Hummell said, is that on average, there would be just one compliance check every 36 months. That makes the ultimate penalty "pretty far-fetched,'' he said, because no one would get inspected four or more times in that 24-month period.

No tax on vaping products

There's one more big objection to HB 4001. Unlike with tobacco products, there would be no levy on vaping products even though they, too, contain nicotine.

The levy on cigarettes is now $2 a pack, with similar levies on chewing tobacco and cigars based on either number or weight. The revenues are earmarked for programs that fund early childhood development, health care, research and prevention programs.

Rep. Cesar Aguilar said one benefit of the higher taxes, aside from the programs they fund, is to deter people from starting to smoke in the first place.

"The tax did such a good job that people stopped smoking,'' said the Phoenix Democrat.

But now that has made vaping a more affordable option, particularly for children. Aguilar told colleagues he thinks he knows the reason behind opposition to similar levies on vaping.

"Because there is money to be made,'' he said. "And 'Big Vapes' and alternative nicotine don't want to deter children from smoking.''

The lack of a new tax also means no new money for the programs that have been funded by the now-diminishing revenues from tobacco taxes.

One of the programs affected has been First Things First, which uses a 2006 voter-approved tax on tobacco to pay for  programs for early childhood education and development.

In the 2008 budget year, taxes generated $164.8 million. For the 2025 budget year, that was down to $88.6 million.

Weninger, however, said putting a tax hike into the legislation would have just killed the entire package.

"And then we're just back at the status quo,'' he said, with no change at all.

Anyway, Weninger said, if groups want more money for their programs, they can do what they did in 2006: put the issue to voters. In fact, he suggested, they might even add a new levy on marijuana to raise a lot more money.

"I think it would actually pass,'' he said.

'A piece of the puzzle'

That political reality of having to compromise to get the necessary votes — versus ending up with nothing — was brought home by Rep. Kevin Volk.

The Tucson Democrat said he sees the issue from the perspective of a business owner, recognizing that higher prices drive down demand. So he crafted his own regulatory proposal, one that would have imposed a tax on vaping products equal to 50% of the retail price.

Projections from the Seidman Research Institute at Arizona State University said that kind of levy would raise anywhere from $45.5 million to $64.4 million a year.

His bill, however, did not get a hearing. But Volk voted for Weninger's measure, saying he recognized that any advance in regulation was going to take time and compromise.

"This is a piece of the puzzle,'' Volk said, with the possibility to do "so much more'' in the future.