US Import Block on Disposable Vapes Could Slash Illegal Sales by One-Third, BAT Warns

Date: February 12, 2026

British American Tobacco (BAT) says a potential U.S. move to block imports of certain disposable vapes could reduce illegal and unregulated e-cigarette sales by as much as one-third. But the company also cautions that even if regulators approve the plan, the real-world impact may not show up in a big way until 2027, because of inventory already inside the country and the long, complex supply chain behind mass-market vaping products.

The remarks come as major tobacco and nicotine companies continue a multi-year battle against a wave of mostly Chinese-made disposable vapes that, according to industry estimates, are widely sold in the U.S. without the authorizations required under federal law. BAT argues that this “shadow” market has become so large that it now dominates the world’s biggest market for smoke-free alternatives—hurting both legitimate vaping brands and traditional cigarette businesses.

Why This Matters: The Unregulated Vape Market Has Become the Main Market

In BAT’s view, the U.S. e-cigarette market is no longer driven primarily by products that have cleared the government’s official pathway. The company estimates that around 70% of U.S. e-cigarette sales come from unregulated devices—many of them disposable vapes that are imported and then distributed through a sprawling network of wholesalers, convenience stores, vape shops, and online sellers.

That estimate matters for two reasons:

Competition and pricing: If a large share of the market is made up of products that do not follow the same regulatory rules, pay the same compliance costs, or face the same enforcement risk, legal products can struggle to compete on price, marketing reach, and flavor variety.
Public health and enforcement: Regulators and health groups have long warned that unauthorized products—especially flavored disposables—can be harder to track, harder to test, and more likely to end up in youth hands, depending on retail practices.

BAT’s leadership argues that if imports of certain infringing disposable vapes are blocked at the border, the effect could be significant: the illegal market share could fall below 50% of industry sales, which BAT framed as roughly a one-third reduction in the unregulated segment.

BAT’s Strategy: Use the International Trade Commission to Stop Imports

Rather than relying only on traditional health and drug regulators to police the market, BAT is also pursuing a trade and intellectual-property strategy through the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC). The ITC is a federal agency that can investigate unfair trade practices, including the importation of products that allegedly infringe U.S. patents or violate other trade rules. When the ITC finds a violation, it can recommend an exclusion order—a powerful remedy that can direct U.S. Customs to block certain imports from entering the country.

BAT currently has two active cases at the ITC focused on disposable vapes it says are unregulated and should not be allowed into the U.S. market. The logic is straightforward:

If products can’t enter the U.S. legally through ports of entry, it becomes much harder for large volumes to supply the mainstream retail market.

For years, the enforcement picture has been complicated. Even when a product is considered unauthorized under U.S. nicotine rules, it may still appear on store shelves if import channels, labeling practices, or distribution networks are difficult to police at scale. BAT believes ITC action can deliver a faster, more direct choke point: the border.

For more background on how the ITC’s Section 337 investigations and exclusion orders work, you can review the ITC’s official information pages here: U.S. International Trade Commission (official site).

A Key Patent Ruling Already Went BAT’s Way

In one of BAT’s ITC disputes, an administrative law judge previously ruled in BAT’s favor in a patent infringement case involving disposable vapes. That judge recommended a general exclusion order, a remedy that can be broader than blocking only named respondents. In practice, such an order can allow U.S. Customs and Border Protection to stop a wider range of products that match the description of infringing goods, even if they come from companies not specifically listed in the original complaint.

BAT has indicated that it expects a full ITC determination in March 2026. After that, there is typically a 60-day presidential review period during which the U.S. president (through delegated authority) can approve or disapprove the remedy on policy grounds.

BAT’s CEO, Tadeu Marroco, told Reuters that an import block could meaningfully shrink the illegal segment, but also emphasized that the outcome is hard to predict. Markets often respond strongly to headlines about “bans,” yet the real-world impact depends on details: what products are covered, how enforcement is carried out, how quickly retailers switch inventory, and whether alternative products fill the gap.

Why the Impact Might Take Until 2027

One reason BAT is setting expectations for a delayed effect is practical logistics. Disposable vapes are not like a digital service that can be shut off overnight. They are physical products sitting in warehouses, store backrooms, and distribution pipelines.

1) The “Long Tail” of Inventory

Even if an exclusion order is issued and Customs begins blocking new shipments, existing inventory already in the U.S. can continue to circulate. Retailers may sell through what they have, wholesalers may redistribute stock to different regions, and some sellers may try to stockpile before enforcement intensifies.

2) A Long Supply Chain

Marroco pointed to the length of the U.S. supply chain for such devices. That means product flows are planned in advance: manufacturing lead times, shipping schedules, freight consolidation, and distribution contracts can keep goods moving for months. As a result, a legal victory at the ITC might not translate into a sudden “cliff” in store availability.

3) Workarounds and Product Substitution

When a certain model is blocked, sellers sometimes pivot to close substitutes—different device designs, different brands, or slight modifications. That can blunt the impact unless enforcement definitions are broad and clearly applied.

For those reasons, BAT suggested it might be early 2027 before the effects are clearly visible across the national market, even if the ITC supports the company’s position sooner.

Where the FDA Fits In: Authorization, Flavors, and a Possible “New Approach”

Although BAT’s ITC strategy focuses on imports and patents, the core question—what vapes can be legally sold in the U.S.—still centers on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Under current rules, companies generally need to obtain authorization before marketing new tobacco products, including most e-cigarettes.

For years, the FDA has rejected many applications for new nicotine products, and companies have criticized the system as slow and uncertain. In this context, Marroco said he would not be surprised if the FDA launched a program to test a different approach to vapes, potentially including flavored vapes. That idea matters because flavor is widely seen as a major driver of consumer demand, especially for disposables, but it is also a major point of controversy due to youth-vaping concerns.

In recent years, the FDA has also indicated it wants to improve and streamline certain review processes. BAT’s comments suggest the company believes the regulatory environment could evolve—possibly toward clearer categories, faster determinations, or pilots that balance harm reduction for adult smokers with stricter guardrails against youth access.

Put simply:

The ITC path is about stopping imports and addressing alleged IP violations.
The FDA path is about deciding what products can be marketed legally, how they are labeled, and under what conditions they can be sold.

What Big Tobacco Wants: A “Level Playing Field” in Smoke-Free Products

BAT and other large nicotine companies have spent heavily to develop smoke-free alternatives—vapes, heated tobacco, oral nicotine pouches—and to build compliance systems around regulation, quality controls, and retail standards. They argue that when unauthorized products dominate the market, it creates an uneven playing field where the “rules-followers” lose share.

BAT also notes that the growth of unregulated vapes affects its business in two directions:

It hurts BAT’s vape sales because adult nicotine consumers often choose cheaper, highly flavored disposable products that are widely available.
It can also hurt cigarette sales in a different way, because some smokers shift to these alternatives—yet that shift doesn’t necessarily benefit companies that are investing in regulated, authorized products.

From a market-structure point of view, this is the key tension: smoke-free growth is happening, but much of that growth is taking place in channels and product lines that traditional public companies say they cannot fully participate in under current enforcement conditions.

What Could Happen Next: A Timeline to Watch

Based on BAT’s expectations and the usual ITC process, here is the sequence that matters most:

March 2026: The ITC is expected to issue a full determination in the case where a judge previously ruled in BAT’s favor.
Following that: A 60-day presidential review period typically applies before remedies become final.
Late 2026 to early 2027: If an exclusion order is implemented and enforced, the market may begin to feel the effect as new supply tightens and older inventory is sold through.
2027: BAT suggests this is when the impact could become “material” across the broader market, depending on enforcement and substitution dynamics.

Of course, legal and regulatory outcomes can be influenced by appeals, settlement talks, scope changes, or parallel enforcement actions by other agencies.

Broader Implications: Consumers, Retailers, and Public Health

Beyond corporate competition, a crackdown on imported disposable vapes could reshape what consumers see at the counter and what retailers are willing to stock. If enforcement tightens and import supplies shrink:

Consumers might face fewer low-cost disposable options, potentially shifting demand toward rechargeable devices, tobacco-flavored products, nicotine pouches, or other alternatives.
Retailers could become more cautious about sourcing, especially if they fear seizures, penalties, or supply disruptions.
Public health stakeholders may debate trade-offs: reducing youth access and unauthorized products, while ensuring adult smokers still have access to regulated harm-reduction options.

Supporters of stronger enforcement often argue that an orderly market—with authorized products and consistent manufacturing standards—is safer and easier to supervise. Critics sometimes counter that if legal options are too limited or too slow to get approved, demand will simply move to new unauthorized suppliers. That tension is one reason BAT’s CEO pointed to the possibility of the FDA experimenting with a different regulatory approach.

Industry Reaction: Why This Isn’t Just a BAT Story

BAT is not alone in lobbying for tougher action against unauthorized vapes. Other major tobacco companies and some U.S. stakeholders have raised concerns about illegal imports, youth vaping, and the difficulty of enforcement. Meanwhile, many smaller vape brands and independent retailers argue that the marketplace is diverse, consumer-driven, and often ahead of regulation—especially when adult smokers are seeking alternatives that satisfy their preferences.

That means the next phase of the U.S. vaping story is likely to be shaped by multiple forces at once:

Trade enforcement (ITC actions and Customs enforcement)
Regulatory approvals (FDA authorizations and compliance expectations)
State and local rules (taxes, flavor restrictions, retail licensing)
Market innovation (new device formats, new nicotine delivery methods)

BAT’s message is that import controls could quickly reduce supply. But its caution about timing signals a key reality: in a fast-moving consumer product market, enforcement is as much about practical implementation as it is about legal authority.

FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions)

1) What does “unregulated” or “unauthorized” vape mean in this context?

It generally refers to vaping products being sold in the U.S. without the required federal authorization for marketing. These products may still appear in stores due to enforcement challenges, distribution complexity, or ongoing legal disputes.

2) What is the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), and why is it involved?

The ITC is a federal agency that can investigate unfair trade practices, including imported goods that allegedly infringe U.S. patents. If the ITC finds a violation, it can recommend exclusion orders that help block certain imports at the border.

3) What is an “exclusion order”?

An exclusion order is a legal remedy that can direct U.S. Customs to stop certain products from entering the country. BAT is seeking this type of remedy against disposable vapes it says infringe its patents and contribute to an unregulated market.

4) When could a U.S. import block actually change what’s in stores?

Even if the ITC issues a favorable decision soon, BAT says large inventories and long supply chains mean the impact could be delayed. The company suggested the biggest market shift might not be felt until 2027.

5) Why are disposable vapes at the center of the dispute?

Disposable vapes are popular because they’re convenient, often flavored, and sometimes cheaper. BAT and other companies say many of these products are imported without authorization and have become a major part of the U.S. market.

6) Could the FDA change its approach to flavored vapes?

BAT’s CEO said he wouldn’t be surprised if the FDA tested a different approach to vapes, potentially including flavored products. Any change would likely aim to balance adult harm-reduction goals with youth-protection concerns.

Conclusion: A Legal Tool Aimed at the Border—But the Market Won’t Shift Overnight

BAT’s claim that a U.S. import block could reduce illegal disposable vape sales by up to one-third shows how high the stakes have become in the world’s largest market for smoking alternatives. The company is betting that ITC enforcement—paired with patent rulings and border controls—can do what traditional regulatory enforcement has struggled to do at scale: limit the flow of unauthorized disposables into mainstream retail channels.

Still, BAT is also being realistic about timing. Warehouses don’t empty instantly, and supply chains don’t stop on a dime. If U.S. regulators move forward with import restrictions, the biggest changes could unfold over months, not days—potentially becoming truly visible across the market only by 2027.

In the meantime, the bigger question remains: will the U.S. create a clearer, faster, and more workable system for legal vaping products—one that supports adult smokers looking for alternatives while sharply reducing youth access and unauthorized imports? The next round of decisions at the ITC and the FDA will help define that answer.

#VapingNews #USRegulation #BAT #IllegalVapes #SlimScan #GrowthStocks #CANSLIM