The United States’ First Statewide Vape Ban
- WULR Team
- 1 day ago
- 4 min read
An exploration into the ban and its consequences
Published December 14th, 2025
Written by Nathan May
Altria Client Services LLC is a tobacco lobbyist firm with clients such as Philip Morris and NJOY. According to the Wisconsin Ethics Committee, on September 5th, 2023, Altria stated its official position on Wisconsin Senate Bill 268, containing vape, tobacco, and tax evasion measures, as neutral. However, a spokesperson for Altria told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that the company did, in fact, support the legislation. The bill eventually passed on November 14th, 2023, with only one provision that Altria was focused on — statute 995.15 — a “vape ban” in the entire state of Wisconsin. While there have been local bans on vapes and statewide bans on flavored nicotine products, this was the first attempt at a total vape ban statewide in the United States.
Since 2013, the United States has experienced a dramatic rise in youth vaping, which the FDA has labeled an epidemic. Vaping was initially marketed as a safer alternative to traditional cigarettes and tobacco, with no combustion byproducts that come from burning tobacco and releasing thousands of harmful chemicals into the lungs. Vaping was even seen as a method to help people quit smoking. But, with fruit flavors and the addictive nature of nicotine, youth vaping took the country by storm. This led to the FDA increasing crackdowns on unauthorized vapes. One proposed solution to stop this epidemic is banning vapes altogether, as Wisconsin has elected to do. A ban would effectively stop vapes from being sold in Wisconsin, cutting off access for kids and preventing older users’ access as well — reducing addiction and the adverse health effects associated with vaping. On the other hand, the language of the statute does not actually ban vapes in the state. The legislation is flawed and ultimately hurts consumers with higher costs and less competition within the market.
Wisconsin’s vape ban by lawmakers was altruistic in nature, aiming to prevent kids from acquiring vapes and using nicotine at an early age. The legislation that passed was only a “vape ban” in name, not in practice, however. According to the Wisconsin legislature, the language of the law explicitly says, “The electronic vaping device was marketed in the United States as of August 8, 2016,” meaning those vapes can be sold. In addition, “The manufacturer submitted a pre-market tobacco product application for the electronic vaping device… on or before September 9, 2020,” meaning those companies’ vapes can also be sold. Vapes that meet one of these qualifications, either marketed before August 8, 2016, or submitted a pre-market tobacco product application on or before September 9, 2020, can be listed on a Department of Revenue directory of products that can be legally sold in Wisconsin.
This goes back to Altria’s support for the ban through its lobbying arm. Their client, NJOY, has seventeen vapes listed on this registry, according to the State of Wisconsin Department of Revenue. In total, two hundred and five vapes are allowed to be sold in Wisconsin since the statute was enacted. While the bill was enacted to prevent access to vapes in Wisconsin, the directory shows hundreds of products can be sold.
A complete vape ban, such as the one in San Francisco, has reduced the number of vape users. While localized bans have other flaws, Wisconsin’s legislation does not completely ban vapes within the state. This ban hurts consumers and newer manufacturers attempting to enter the vape market. Legacy vape manufacturers that supported the bill, like NJOY, already meet the qualifications for the directory, while newer vape manufacturers cannot meet the requirements to access the Wisconsin market.
This legislation has also raised prices for vapes that can be sold in Wisconsin. Speaking to two locally owned convenience stores in Madison, Wisconsin — Pinkus Market and Stop and Shop — both clerks said that the flavor ban has impacted their prices. Both have said that the new brands they carry are priced upwards of $35, compared to before the ban, which they said was around $25. The second clerk explained that, especially right after the ban, the supply was drastically low, leading to him needing to up his prices. This makes sense economically — with less competition, manufacturers can raise prices without worrying about new competitors entering the market to undercut them. But, while the price rise might make some consumers quit vaping, it also harms those who continue to purchase vapes at these elevated prices. Gauging consumers with a “sin tax” shouldn’t be the purpose of a vape ban. The purpose should be to stop youth addiction and unwanted health problems from vaping.
Additionally, the Wisconsin Association of Local Health Departments and Boards, as well as the Wisconsin Public Health Association, were neutral on the bill. According to their comments, they state that the bill limits local governments from attempting to strengthen health regulations for their constituents and increase retail licensing fees. Moreover, they claim that this law will unevenly affect low-income and minority groups with higher tax evasion fines because these groups are already disproportionately affected by higher nicotine usage.
There are numerous loopholes in the legislation that lawmakers cannot stop, such as buying from another state and consumers buying from markets that aren’t regulated. This sends tax revenue away from Wisconsin, and consumers are forced to buy unsafe vapes. Ultimately, this law does nothing but harm consumers with elevated prices and less selection, in addition to new manufacturers wanting to sell vapes in Wisconsin. With 284 vapes still allowed to be sold, it’s hard to see a benefit in arbitrarily restricting access to newer vapes and letting legacy manufacturers still be allowed to sell vapes in the state. Having tobacco lobbying firms lobbying for a ban and health advocates against a ban. This paints a clear picture — this ban does not work in its current form.
