Consultation outcome

Creating a smokefree generation and tackling youth vaping consultation: government response

Updated 12 February 2024

Executive summary

Why we held this consultation

Tobacco is responsible for 80,000 preventable deaths in the UK each year and is a major cause of ill health (including cancer, stroke and heart failure) and disability. No other consumer product kills up to two-thirds of its long-term users, and it significantly reduces the life expectancy of those that consume it. Over 80% of smokers started before they turned 20, many as children. Further still, smoking costs the economy and wider society in England £17 billion a year, equivalent to 6.9p in every £1 of income tax received. Whereas the tax raised in excise duty revenue is only approximately £10.2 billion a year.

The government and public health sector recognise that vapes can be an effective tool in supporting smoking cessation, but the number of children using vapes has tripled in the past 3 years. Due to nicotine content and the unknown long-term harms, vaping carries risk of harm and addiction for children. We need to protect our children and future generations from the harmful effects of smoking as well as the potential harms of youth vaping.

That is why on 4 October 2023 we published Stopping the start: our new plan to create a smokefree generation which also included our proposals to tackle youth vaping and enforce our rules. Following this we published a UK-wide consultation on 12 October and received nearly 28,000 responses.

This document sets out the consultation outcomes and the subsequent measures that we will now be taking forward.

Summary of consultation outcomes

The consultation asked questions in 3 areas:

• creating a smokefree generation
• tackling youth vaping
• enforcement

The large majority of responses supported the government proposal to create a smokefree generation.

Respondents were mostly in favour of the proposed measures to tackle youth vaping, particularly restricting point of sale displays and restricting packaging. Although there were mixed views on how best to do this.

There was also support for extending these regulations to cover non-nicotine vapes as well as to other consumer nicotine products, such as nicotine pouches, to avoid loopholes and support stronger enforcement.

Respondents were strongly in favour of introducing a ban on the sale and supply of disposable vaping products.

There was significant support for enforcement across the tobacco and vaping measures including introducing new fixed penalty notices (FPNs) in England.

The government will now bring forward legislation at the earliest opportunity that will take measures to:

• change the age of sale for all tobacco products, cigarette papers and herbal smoking products whereby anyone born on or after 1 January 2009 will never legally be sold tobacco products alongside prohibiting proxy sales, and change warning notices
• introduce regulation making powers to restrict flavours, point of sale and packaging for vaping products (nicotine and non-nicotine) as well as other consumer nicotine products
• introduce new FPNs for England and Wales with a penalty of £100 where it is believed an offence has been committed in relation to age of sale and free distribution legislation for tobacco and vapes (nicotine and non-nicotine) and regulate to extend these provisions to other consumer nicotine products

Separately, the UK Government, the Scottish Government and the Welsh Government intend to introduce legislation to implement a ban on the sale and supply of disposable vapes. The UK Government will work with the devolved administrations to explore an import ban. Northern Ireland officials acknowledge the issues raised during the consultation and will consider potential legislation in future.

The UK Government thinks there is a strong case to take action to reduce the affordability of vapes and is continuing to consider options, including a new duty, to achieve this.

The UK Government and devolved administrations will work together to ensure as far as possible that recommendations are adopted in a consistent manner across the UK, to ensure regulatory alignment.

We are grateful to all those who have taken the time to complete the consultation, which has informed and strengthened the government’s policy decision.

Introduction

Background

Smoking is the single most important entirely preventable cause of ill health, disability and death in this country, responsible for 80,000 deaths in the UK a year and 1 in 4 of all UK cancer deaths. Smokers lose an average of 10 years of life expectancy, or around one year for every 4 smoking years. Smoking is also a major cause of premature heart disease, stroke and heart failure and increases the risk of dementia in the elderly.

Most smokers know about these risks and, because of them, want to quit, but the addictive nature of tobacco means they cannot. Three-quarters of current smokers would never have started if they had the choice again and on average it takes around 30 quit attempts to succeed. Four in 5 smokers start before the age of 20 and are then addicted for life. Non-smokers are exposed to second-hand smoke (passive smoking) which means that through no choice of their own many people come to harm - in particular children and babies - as a result of smoking in pregnancy.

Smoking costs the economy and wider society in England £17 billion a year, equivalent to 6.9p in every £1 of income tax received. Whereas the tax raised in excise duty revenue is only approximately £10.2 billion a year. Almost every minute of every day someone is admitted to hospital because of smoking, and up to 75,000 GP appointments could be attributed to smoking each month – over 100 appointments every hour. Reducing the prevalence of smoking will reduce those costs, lower pressures on the NHS and help our economy become more productive.

There is strong public support for action: according to an Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) and YouGov poll, 75% of adults in England support the government’s smokefree ambition.

Since vaping carries the risk of potential future harm and addiction it is never recommended for children. Not all the risks from vapes have been fully investigated, including inhaling additives for flavours, and the long-term effects of vaping are yet unknown, although further evidence will emerge in the future. However, there has been a recent surge in the number of children vaping, which is highly concerning. The ASH report Use of e-cigarettes among young people in Great Britain shows that the number of 11 to 17 year olds using vapes has tripled in the past 3 years and 20.5% of children in Great Britain had tried vaping in 2023. According to the Northern Ireland Young persons behaviour and attitudes survey 2022, 21% of 11 to 16 year olds in Northern Ireland reported having ever used a vape. While selling nicotine vapes to under 18s is illegal, vapes are routinely promoted and marketed to children and young people. Vaping can have a role to play in supporting adult smokers to quit smoking, but the health advice has always been clear that if you don’t smoke you should not vape.

As well as support for action to limit smoking, the ASH and YouGov poll shows there is strong support for action on youth vaping. 75% of adults in Great Britain support banning names of sweets, cartoons and bright colours on vape packaging and 74% of adults in Great Britain support restricting the point-of-sale promotion of vapes.

On 4 October 2023, the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) published the command paper Stopping the start: our new plan to create a smokefree generation. It sets out proposed action to protect future generations from the harms of smoking by creating the first smokefree generation and a range of measures to tackle youth vaping.

Shortly after this, on 12 October, the UK Government and devolved administrations launched the public consultation Creating a smokefree generation and tackling youth vaping, seeking feedback on the proposed legislative action which would be needed to deliver the commitments in the command paper.

In the King’s Speech on 7 November 2023, His Majesty King Charles III set out plans for the UK Government to introduce legislation in this parliamentary session. This will introduce measures which respond to most of the proposals set out in the public consultation.

The consultation

The consultation was split into 3 areas:

• creating a smokefree generation
• tackling youth vaping
• enforcement

On creating a smokefree generation, we asked whether respondents agreed or disagreed with the overall proposal and specific elements, including:

• if the age of sale for tobacco products should be changed
• if proxy sales should be prohibited alongside this
• which tobacco products and accessories should be within scope
• if warning notices in retail premises should be changed

On youth vaping, we asked for views on a range of measures that will work together to reduce the various ways that vapes appeal to children, while also ensuring vapes can continue to be made available to adult smokers as a quit aid. This includes:

• restricting vape flavours
• regulating point of sale displays
• regulating vape packaging and product presentation
• exploring further restrictions for non-nicotine vapes and other nicotine consumer products such as nicotine pouches
• restricting the supply and sale of disposable vapes
• action on the affordability of vapes

On enforcement, we asked respondents if they agreed or disagreed that FPNs should be issued to enforce age of sale legislation of tobacco and vapes, and what they thought the level of the penalty should be.

This report sets out what we received in response to the consultation and, as a result, what measures the UK Government and devolved administrations intend to bring forward to protect future generations from the dangers of tobacco, tackle youth vaping and enforce our new rules. A restored Northern Ireland Executive and Assembly will need to make decisions on any policies within devolved competence.

Respondent demographics

The consultation was open for 8 weeks from 12 October to 6 December 2023. In total, we received 118,756 responses to the consultation. Of these, 90,835 were unambiguously identified as having been submitted by automated programmes, commonly known as bots, and so deemed to be fraudulent. So, we analysed 27,921 responses. We provide more detail on our approach to identifying fraudulent responses in the methodology section below.

Of the 27,921 responses, we heard from 896 organisations, and 27,025 individuals in both personal and professional capacities. Of the organisations or individuals in professional capacities, 148 also submitted further evidence as attachments.

The consultation was UK-wide and table 1 below shows the breakdown of where individuals responding said they lived in the UK. For a breakdown of responses for each of the 4 parts of the UK, see annex 1.

In tables 1 to 3, population estimates are taken from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) mid-year estimates, 2021. Also, due to rounding, not all percentages add up to 100%.

Table 1: breakdown of individuals responding by the area of the UK they live in

Location	Number of respondents	Percentage of respondents	Percentage of population who live in that area of the UK
England	21,697	80.3%	84.3%
Scotland	3,089	11.4%	8.2%
Wales	1,018	3.8%	4.6%
Northern Ireland	1,221	4.5%	2.8%

For those who said they lived in England, we have also broken down the data by regions which is shown in Table 2.

Table 2: breakdown of those responding as individuals in England by region

Region	Number of respondents	Percentage of respondents	Percentage of population who live in that region
South East	4,607	21.4%	16.4%
South West	3,456	16%	10.1%
London	2,779	12.9%	15.6%
North West	2,372	11%	13.1%
Yorkshire and the Humber	1,842	8.5%	9.7%
West Midlands	1,811	8.4%	10.5%
East Midlands	1,689	7.8%	8.6%
East of England	1,684	7.8%	11.2%
North East	1,014	4.7%	4.7%
Prefer not to say	324	1.5%	Not applicable

We also heard from individuals across a variety of ages as shown in Table 3.

Table 3: breakdown of those responding as individuals by age

Age	Number of respondents	Percentage of respondents	Percentage of population in that age group
13 to 14	45	0.2%	2.4%
15 to 17	203	0.8%	3.4%
18 to 24	1694	6.3%	8.3%
25 to 34	5025	18.6%	13.5%
35 to 44	6305	23.4%	13.0%
45 to 54	6537	24.3%	13.2%
55 to 64	4077	15.1%	12.7%
65 to 74	2178	8.1%	10.0%
75 or above	657	2.4%	8.7%
Prefer not to say	231	0.9%	Not applicable

Methodology

Across the 3 areas, the consultation included closed tick-box-style questions, as well as open-ended questions where respondents could write detailed comments. There were 27 free text boxes, each of which had a limit of 300 words. Organisations or individuals sharing a professional view were also able to upload documents to support their responses.

Respondents could choose whether to answer each question, and the open-ended questions were not mandatory.

We analysed the responses from individuals to the open-ended questions using a topic modelling and tagging system. Topic modelling grouped similar responses for each question according to the words that best characterise their similarity. Then at least 2 DHSC officials reviewed these groups of words for each of the 27 questions, alongside a sample of representative quotes, to determine an appropriate theme for each group of words. Multiple themes were tagged to capture nuanced and multi-faceted responses.

We analysed the responses from organisations to the open-ended questions using a manual process to theme the responses. We determined the strength of the themes identified in the organisation responses by counting the number of times a theme came up in the responses to a question.

Identifying fraudulent responses

We identified fraudulent responses where the data submitted was incompatible with the survey flow followed by genuine respondents who completed the consultation form manually. Responses were often duplicated many times and sent at high frequency from a small number of IP addresses, which is consistent with a mass automated campaign, or ‘bots’. In total, 90,835 responses were identified as fraudulent.

Tobacco industry declaration

The UK is a party to the World Health Organization (WHO) Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) and so has an obligation to protect the development of public health policy from the vested interests of the tobacco industry.

To meet this obligation, there was a mandatory question where we asked all respondents to disclose whether they have any direct or indirect links to, or receive funding from, the tobacco industry.

In total, we received 307 responses from respondents who disclosed links to the tobacco industry. We analysed these alongside other responses using the methodology above.

In line with the requirements of article 5.3 of the FCTC, throughout this consultation response we summarise the views of respondents with disclosed links to the tobacco industry. But we have not considered these views when determining our policy response due to the vested interests of the tobacco industry.

We did not ask directly if respondents were affiliated with the vaping industry. However, we have received a number of responses from the vaping industry, including vape retailers.

Territorial extent

Health is a devolved matter, so there are different regulatory regimes across the UK. The UK Government and devolved administrations will work together to ensure as far as possible that recommendations and actions are adopted in a consistent manner across the UK to ensure regulatory alignment. A restored Northern Ireland Executive and Assembly will need to make decisions on any policies which are matters of devolved competence.

Legislating to create a smokefree generation

Sales of tobacco products to individuals under 18 are currently prohibited. Under this proposal, sales to anyone born on or after 1 January 2009 would be prohibited.

The proposal also included changing the age of sale for proxy sales, which are prohibited under existing tobacco age of sale legislation. This would mean that anyone born before 1 January 2009 would be prohibited from purchasing tobacco products on behalf of anyone born on or after 1 January 2009.

On product scope, we proposed to include products that are currently included in age of sale legislation in England and Wales. These include:

• cigarettes
• cigarette papers
• hand rolled tobacco
• cigars
• cigarillos
• pipe tobacco
• waterpipe tobacco products (for example, shisha)
• chewing tobacco
• heated tobacco
• nasal tobacco (snuff)
• herbal smoking products

Existing age of sale legislation in Scotland is set out in the Tobacco and Primary Medical Services (Scotland) Act 2010 and does not include herbal smoking products. Under this proposal, the Scottish Government would expand the legislation to include herbal smoking products to ensure regulatory alignment across the UK.

Also, across the UK, it is currently a legal requirement for retail premises to display the following statement: “it is illegal to sell tobacco products to anyone under 18”. Under this proposal, the requirement would need to be changed to align with the new age of sale.

Consultation feedback

Change in age of sale legislation

Question

Do you agree or disagree that the age of sale for tobacco products should be changed so that anyone born on or after 1 January 2009 will never be legally sold tobacco products?

Of all respondents who answered this question about raising the age of sale of tobacco products:

• 63.2% agreed with the proposal
• 32.2% disagreed with the proposal
• 4.6% said they don’t know

For respondents who agreed, the main themes raised were supportive of the policy intent and the impact that it would have on:

• protecting people’s health, particularly the health of future generations, with many respondents providing statistics on smoking-related diseases and deaths
• reducing the burden and pressure on the NHS and social care services from illnesses caused by smoking
• helping to reduce health disparities, since smoking is one of its biggest causes
• reducing smoking rates and preventing addiction
• reducing the financial impact of smoking on the economy

For respondents who disagreed, the main themes included:

• government overreach, specifically that the government is trying to control people’s lives, that adults should be able to make an informed choice, and that this policy could lead to a wider ban on what they see as other unhealthy products
• that the policy would lead to a rise in the illicit tobacco market and wider concerns about how the policy will be enforced
• concerns that prohibition does not work and that this law would be ineffective in reducing smoking rates

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, 56% disagreed with the change to the age of sale legislation. These respondents had similar concerns as those listed above.

Proxy sales

Question

Do you think that proxy sales should also be prohibited?

Of all respondents who answered this question about prohibiting proxy sales:

• 73.7% agreed that they should be prohibited
• 20% did not agree
• 6.3% said they don’t know

For respondents who agreed, the main themes included:

• maintaining consistency with the smoking age of sale policy change, saying that if the law on proxy sales was not changed to align with the age of sale change it would dilute and undermine the overall policy and create loopholes
• maintaining consistency with other age of sale legislation, for instance on alcohol and solvents
• enforcement being easier if proxy sales were also included, although there were also general concerns among those who agreed about the overall enforcement challenge

For respondents who disagreed, the main themes included:

• that it will be difficult to enforce
• doubting its effectiveness in stopping proxy sales
• repeating further disagreement to the change in age of sale policy such as the points set out under the previous question, including limiting freedom of choice

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, 53% agreed with prohibiting proxy sales. However, for respondents that disagreed, the main themes were that proxy sales are unenforceable and not workable. Another common theme reiterated was that the change in the age of sale policy was an example of government overreach.

Warning notices

Question

Do you agree or disagree that warning notices in retail premises will need to be changed to read ‘it is illegal to sell tobacco products to anyone born on or after 1 January 2009’ when the law comes into effect?

Of all respondents who answered this question about warning notices in retail premises:

• 71.8% agreed that they would need to be changed
• 22.6% disagreed that they would need to be changed
• 5.6% said they did not know

For respondents who agreed, the themes arising included:

• noting how the change to warning notices is needed to provide clear and consistent messaging on the policy and to help the public understand the changes
• providing ideas on how they should be designed and suggestions for the content, for instance referencing the prohibition of proxy sales, mirroring existing wording and ensuring accessibility

Those who responded on behalf of organisations echoed the themes above. Another common suggestion was that trading standards should be engaged.

Some respondents used the free text box to say that while they agreed that warning notices would need to change if the policy to change the age of sale is implemented, they disagreed with the intention to change the age of sale.

For respondents who disagreed with updating warning notices, the themes arising were:

• statements expressing further disagreement with the age of sale legislation
• concerns about the messaging being unclear and confusing

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, 50% agreed and 41% disagreed with the question and responses expressed general disagreement with the age of sale policy itself.

Product scope

Question

Do you agree or disagree that all tobacco products, cigarette papers and herbal smoking products should be covered in the new legislation?

Of all respondents who answered this question about the proposed product scope:

• 63.8% agreed with the scope
• 30.7% disagreed with the scope
• 5.5% said they don’t know

For respondents who agreed, the main themes were that:

• all tobacco products should be in scope because all tobacco products are harmful
• enforcement would be easier if all tobacco products were included, and it would be clear to the public what the legislation includes
• it will avoid any loopholes in the legislation

Also, some of those that agreed suggested that the scope could go further with suggestions to include all smoking paraphernalia, all nicotine products and vape products.

For respondents who disagreed, the main theme was related to calls to exempt certain tobacco products. This included exempting:

• shisha, due to its cultural importance for some groups
• cigars and heated tobacco, based on the perception from some respondents that these are less harmful

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, 53% disagreed with the scope. The products that they thought should be exempt were other tobacco products, including:

• cigars
• piping tobacco
• snuff
• shisha
• heated tobacco

Many gave the reason that these are a small proportion of the market.

Government response

Smoking is the single most important entirely preventable cause of ill health, disability and death in this country. The consultation feedback shows widespread support for the proposal to change the age of sale whereby anyone born on or after 1 January 2009 will never legally be sold tobacco products. It showed strong support for prohibiting proxy sales, the proposed product scope and the need to change warning notices.

The scope of the measures will be any legal product containing tobacco (smoked and smokeless), herbal smoking products and cigarette papers. The evidence is clear that there is no safe level of tobacco consumption. When smoked, tobacco kills up to two-thirds of its long-term users, and all smoked tobacco, including shisha and cigars, is harmful. Tobacco smoke has been classified as a group 1 carcinogen, and tobacco smoke from shisha and cigars lead to the same types of diseases as cigarette smoke.

There is also clear evidence of toxicity from heated tobacco in laboratory studies. The aerosol generated by heated tobacco also contains carcinogens, and there will be a risk to the health of anyone using these products (pdf, 232kb).

Cigarette papers are included in scope because burning cigarette papers with their bleaches and dyes adds to the volume of smoke and the range of toxicants in the smoke, contributing additional risks to smokers. The promotion of cigarette papers is also often targeted towards, and popular with, young people. As the majority of smokers start young, reducing access to cigarette papers will support our ambition to stop the start of smoking and to reduce harm. Likewise, herbal cigarettes are included in the restriction as they are harmful to health. Although their smoke does not contain nicotine or tobacco, it does contain cancer causing chemicals, tar and carbon monoxide, similar to a tobacco cigarette.

This policy will not criminalise smoking or prevent anyone who currently uses tobacco from doing so in the future. This is about protecting future generations from the addictive nature of tobacco products and stopping our children from ever starting smoking in the first place.

We are also mindful of the impacts and burden on business and local authorities and so have no plans to introduce a licencing scheme for retailers. We already have a track and trace system in place, which tracks tobacco products from manufacture to retail. As well as increasing efficiency for on-the-ground checks, this system also enables HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) to track wider trends in tobacco smuggling and tobacco distribution.

We know that legislation has been an important driver of declines in smoking rates, from 46% in the 1970s to 12.9% in 2022. For instance when we raised the age of sale for smoking from 16 to 18 in 2007, research on changes in smoking prevalence in this age group found it reduced by 30%. Our modelling assumptions in the command paper suggests that this policy could further reduce smoking rates in England among 14 to 30 year olds to nearly 0% as early as 2040.

Concerns were raised over whether this policy would lead to an increase in illicit sales of tobacco. Firstly, as outlined above, this policy will not stop anyone being sold tobacco who can be sold it today. Therefore, there is no immediate prohibition of behaviour that is legal today which could lead to an increase in illicit sales. The purpose of the policy is to stop children from starting to smoke. If this generation are never sold cigarettes, they will not become addicted in the first place, so are less likely to seek out tobacco products illegally. This means that both the legal and illicit market will be reduced.

Furthermore, when implemented alongside strong enforcement, evidence shows that previous tobacco control measures have been followed by a decline in illicit tobacco. Overall, consumption of illegal tobacco has reduced from 17 billion cigarettes in 2000 to 2001 to 3 billion cigarettes in 2022 to 2023. And when the age of sale was increased from 16 to 18, the number of illicit cigarettes consumed decreased by 25% from 10 billion in 2005 to 2006 to 7.5 billion in 2007 to 2008. In the long run, less demand for tobacco products means less use of illicit tobacco.

To further tackle the illicit tobacco market, HMRC has published Stubbing out the problem: A new strategy to tackle illicit tobacco.

In October, we also committed to increasing investment for our enforcement agencies by £30 million per year. This additional funding in England will boost agencies such as local trading standards to enforce the new age of sale and vaping measures. It will also scale up HMRC and Border Force activity to stamp out opportunities for criminals in the illicit tobacco trade.

The allocation of funding in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is the responsibility of relevant devolved ministers.

The requirement to change warning notices in retail premises will also support enforcement and provide clear messaging to the public. This is a requirement under the current age of sale legislation (Children and Young Persons (Protection from Tobacco) Act 1991). So, this is something that retailers and enforcement officers are already familiar with. We will continue to support businesses and work closely with local trading standards to provide guidance to industry on implementing and enforcing this policy, including on how we can ensure the warning notices are accessible.

We have committed £5 million this year, and then £15 million per year thereafter, to fund national marketing campaigns in England, which will support understanding and implementation. The allocation of funding in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is the responsibility of relevant devolved ministers. In addition, we are clear that violent and abusive behaviour towards any public-facing worker is never acceptable and in October 2023, we launched a Retail Crime Action Plan to address this.

Some respondents also suggested that this change in age of sale legislation should go even further and apply to vape products. Given vapes are an effective tool in supporting smoking cessation and in the short and medium term, vaping is less harmful than smoking, the UK Government will not be changing the age of sale of vapes. However, the next chapter sets out measures we will seek to take forward to tackle the rise in youth vaping.

Tackling the rise in youth vaping

Vaping is never recommended for children and carries risk of future harm and addiction. The health advice is clear: young people and those who have never smoked should not vape or be encouraged to vape.

The active ingredient in most vapes (apart from nicotine-free vapes) is nicotine which, when inhaled, is a highly addictive drug. The addictive nature of nicotine means that a user can become dependent on vapes, especially if they use them regularly. 

Giving up nicotine can be very difficult because the body has to get used to functioning without it. Withdrawal symptoms can include:

• cravings
• irritability
• anxiety
• trouble concentrating
• headaches
• other mental and physical symptoms

Nearly half of nicotine users want to quit but cannot. Evidence suggests that in adolescence, the brain is more sensitive to the effects of nicotine, so there could be additional risks for young people than for adults.

There are also some health risks associated with the other ingredients in vapes. For example, propylene glycol and glycerine (components of e-liquids) can produce toxic compounds if they are overheated. The long-term health harms of colours and flavours when inhaled are unknown, but they are certainly very unlikely to be beneficial.

While the majority of vapes are manufactured in compliance with current legal requirements, research on illicit vapes by the Chartered Trading Standards Institute shows that some vapes on sale are illegal and do not meet the UK’s quality and safety regulations. These illegal products can often be dangerous and harmful and carry much greater risk than legal vapes. Recent news reports on unsafe and illegal vapes have shown that they can contain dangerous chemicals like lead and nickel. High levels of inhaled lead damages children’s central nervous system and brain development.

Despite these risks and our recommendation that children should never vape, responses to England’s Youth vaping: call for evidence (published in April 2023) showed that vaping products are regularly promoted in a way that appeals to children. This included through:

• flavours and descriptions
• cheap convenient products
• in-store marketing

In recent years, the number of young people vaping has risen significantly, as reported by ASH for Great Britain and through the Young persons’ behaviour and attitudes survey in Northern Ireland. The ASH report Use of e-cigarettes among young people in Great Britain found that of the 11 to 17 year olds who currently vape, 81% reported their device always or sometimes contained nicotine.

Youth vaping is also becoming a global issue, with countries around the world experiencing increases in vaping use among their younger populations. As stated in the command paper, many countries are in the process of strengthening their measures to combat the surge in youth vaping and we risk becoming an international outlier if we do not keep pace.

Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands and other EU member states have prohibited certain flavours of e-liquids. France, Germany, Belgium and many other countries have made commitments to ban disposable vapes. Canada has prohibited visible product display in shops. Australia has prohibited vapes unless they have been prescribed by a GP. New Zealand has introduced restrictions on flavour descriptions and vape packaging. The USA has raised the age of sale of vapes to 21 years old. Annex 2 compares vaping restrictions across several countries.

In our consultation, we asked questions about policies that have the potential to reduce the appeal, availability and affordability of vaping to children. While doing this, we want to ensure that vapes remain available as a useful smoking cessation tool for adult smokers given the lesser harms posed to smokers from vaping. Policies included:

• restricting vape flavours
• regulating point of sale displays
• regulating vape packaging and product presentation
• exploring further restrictions for non-nicotine vapes and other nicotine consumer products such as nicotine pouches
• restricting the supply and sale of disposable vapes
• action on the affordability of vapes

Reducing the appeal and availability of vapes to children (flavours, displays and packaging)

As set out in the command paper, the youth vaping call for evidence showed us that flavours are one of the main reasons that vapes appeal to children. There are a vast and diverse variety of flavours on the UK market, many with attractive wording (descriptor names) that may entice children to try vaping.

The evidence documented in our command paper shows that children are attracted to the fruit and sweet flavours of vapes, both in their taste and smell, as well as how they are described. However, research on e-cigarette support for smoking cessation by London South Bank University has found that there is evidence that flavoured vaping products can also help adults quit smoking.

Unlike tobacco products, vapes are currently allowed to be displayed at the point of sale. Because of this, children can see and pick up vapes in retail outlets easily due to them being displayed within aisles, close to sweets and confectionary products and on accessible shelves. Analysis on sources of tobacco and e-cigarettes from Imperial College London found increases in the likelihood of children aged 11 to 18 noticing vapes on display in supermarkets from 57.4% in 2018 to 66.5% in 2022. By contrast, tobacco point of sale restrictions in England reduced the exposure of cigarettes in shops to children. The likelihood of children aged 11 to 18 noticing cigarettes on display decreased from 67% in 2018 to 59% in 2022 in supermarkets. This also coincided with a decrease in cigarette purchases. 

Unlike tobacco packaging, vape packaging can come in different colours, styles, and shapes. They can include brand names and different types of images and formatting. The products themselves can be designed and displayed differently, in ways that can entice children to start and continue vaping. This includes using brightly coloured products and imagery such as cartoons. While mod or tank devices are often wrapped in more neutral packaging, vape liquids and disposable vapes are regularly sold and marketed in a range of brightly coloured designs. Research on marketing e-cigarettes found these packaging and design features appeal to children. 

Consultation feedback

Restricting vape flavours

Question

Do you agree or disagree that the UK Government and devolved administrations should restrict vape flavours?

Of all respondents who answered this question about restricting vape flavours:

• 47% agreed with restricting vape flavours
• 51% disagreed
• 2% said they don’t know

For respondents who agreed, the main themes included:

• flavours make vapes appealing and attractive to children or non-smokers
• sweet and fruit flavours could encourage non-smokers to vape, normalise vaping and may act as a gateway to smoking
• the importance of the smell being appealing
• concerns on the impact that vapes have on health and the risk of children becoming addicted to nicotine

For respondents who disagreed, the themes arising were:

• concerns about the restrictions on flavours impacting smoking cessation and leading to fewer successful quit attempts
• that restricting vape flavours would be government overreach

It should be noted that for respondents that agreed with the restrictions, many highlighted the impact that flavour restrictions may have on smoking cessation. This included highlighting that if flavours that appeal to adult smokers are not available then they may continue, or return to, smoking. Conversely, many of those who disagreed with the restrictions also acknowledged that some vape flavours appeal to children.

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, 65% disagreed and the majority of responses focused on the negative impact of restricting flavours on smoking cessation.

Implementing restrictions on vape flavours

Question

Which option or options do you think would be the most effective way for the UK Government and devolved administrations to implement restrictions on flavours?

• Option 1: limiting how the vape is described
• Option 2: limiting the ingredients in vapes
• Option 3: limiting the characterising flavours (the taste and smell) of vapes

For this question, respondents could select more than one answer. Of all respondents who answered this question, the most common response (30.7%) was from those who selected just ‘option 1: limiting how the vape is described’. This was followed by 23.1% of respondents who thought that all 3 options together would be the most effective approach. Table 4 provides a breakdown of the feedback to this question.

Table 4: detail on options selected for how to restrict vape flavours

Options selected	Percentage of respondents
Option 1: limiting how the vape is described only	30.7%
Option 1, Option 2	2.6%
Option 1, Option 2, Option 3	23.1%
Option 1, Option 2, Option 3, Don’t know	0.1%
Option 1, Option 2, Don’t know	0.0%
Option 1, Option 3	5.6%
Option 1, Option 3, Don’t know	0.0%
Option 1, Don’t know	0.8%
Option 2: limiting the ingredients in vapes only	3.4%
Option 2, Option 3	3.9%
Option 2, Option 3, Don’t know	0.0%
Option 2, Don’t know	0.1%
Option 3: limiting the characterising flavours (the taste and smell) of vapes only	10.2%
Option 3, Don’t know	0.1%
Don’t know	19.4%

Respondents who agreed with the question above on restricting vape flavours tended to want stronger ways to implement restrictions on flavours. For example, for those that:

• agreed with introducing restrictions to vape flavours, 19.3% chose ‘option 3: limiting the characterising flavours (the taste and smell) of vapes’, and 48.1% chose all 3 options combined
• disagreed with introducing restrictions to vape flavours, 53.8% chose ‘option 1: limiting how the vape is described’

In the free text box following the closed question, respondents mainly reiterated and justified their selection, with many also repeating their response to the previous questions. The main themes were that:

• vape flavours appeal to children
• there should be marketing and advertising restrictions relating to vape flavours, for example each flavour should only have one name and not variations which could appeal to children
• restrictions on flavours could impact smoking cessation, with respondents suggesting that flavours encourage and enable quit attempts

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, the most popular option was ‘option 1: limiting how the vape is described’ with 61% of these respondents favouring this option. The main themes included expressing further disagreement to restricting flavours and the negative impact this could have on smoking cessation.

Flavour limitations

Question

Which option do you think would be the most effective way for the UK Government and devolved administrations to restrict vape flavours to children and young people?

• Option A: flavours limited to tobacco only
• Option B: flavours limited to tobacco, mint and menthol only
• Option C: flavours limited to tobacco, mint, menthol and fruits only

Of the respondents that answered this question:

• 40.6% of respondents selected ‘option A: flavours limited to tobacco only’
• 16.8% of respondents selected ‘option B: flavours limited to tobacco, mint and menthol only’
• 42.6% of respondents selected ‘option C: flavours limited to tobacco, mint, menthol and fruits only’

The way respondents answered this question was closely linked to how they answered the previous question on whether they agreed or disagreed with restricting vape flavours. Table 5 shows the breakdown of this.

Table 5: link between agreeing and disagreeing with restricting vape flavours and how these flavours should be limited

Agree or disagree	Options	Percentage of respondents
Agree	Option A: flavours limited to tobacco only	63.2%
Agree	Option B: flavours limited to tobacco, mint and menthol only	24.3%
Agree	Option C: flavours limited to tobacco, mint, menthol and fruits only	12.5%
Disagree	Option A: flavours limited to tobacco only	7.6%
Disagree	Option B: flavours limited to tobacco, mint and menthol only	5.4%
Disagree	Option C: flavours limited to tobacco, mint, menthol and fruits only	87%

Note: those responding ‘don’t know’ to whether they agree with restricting vape flavours are not shown.

For respondents who selected ‘option A: flavours limited to tobacco only’, the free text box was mainly used to reiterate this position and highlight the appeal of other flavours to children, with many respondents citing that vapes should only be used as a quit aid.

For respondents who selected ‘option B: tobacco, mint and menthol’, responses focused on the appeal of vape flavours to children, including fruits, and the need for the flavours to be limited. Some said that the addition of mint and menthol is useful for smoking cessation.

For respondents who selected ‘option C: tobacco, mint and menthol and fruits’, responses mainly focused on the impact of restricting flavours on smoking cessation given they may encourage adult smokers to switch to vapes. However, many respondents who selected option C did say that vapes do appeal to children and suggested that limiting descriptions of vapes and further restrictions on packaging and advertising could help mitigate this.

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, the most popular option was ‘option C: tobacco, mint, menthol and fruits’, with 68% of these respondents favouring this option. The main theme was the impact these limitations could have on smoking cessation. However, they also mentioned how restricting vape flavours would still reduce appeal to children.

Alternative flavour options

Question

Do you think there are any alternative flavour options the UK Government and devolved administrations should consider?

Of all respondents who answered this question about alternative flavour options:

• 18.4% said yes
• 53.6% said no
• 28% said they don’t know

Most respondents used the free text box to reiterate their views on whether flavours should be restricted, including discussing the impact on smoking cessation and how flavours appeal to children. However, there were some suggestions on alternatives, for instance introducing flavourless and odourless vapes, or unappetising flavours.

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, 48% said they thought there were no alternative flavour options that should be considered, while 27% said there were. Further explanations of flavour alternatives were not provided.

Point of sale displays

Question

Which option do you think would be the most effective way to restrict vapes to children and young people?

• Option 1: vapes must be kept behind the counter and cannot be on display, like tobacco products
• Option 2: vapes must be kept behind the counter but can be on display

Of all respondents who answered this question:

• 68.3% selected ‘option 1: vapes must be kept behind the counter and cannot be on display, like tobacco products’
• 31.7% selected ‘option 2: vapes must be kept behind the counter but can be on display’

For those who selected ‘option 1: vapes must be kept behind the counter and cannot be on display, like tobacco products’, the main themes arising in the free text box were:

• vape displays can be attractive and appealing to children and non-smokers, with some respondents suggesting that these displays can make it seem okay to vape
• concerns that due to the addictive nature of nicotine, vapes should not be promoted
• further reiteration that vapes should not be on display, with the out of sight, out of mind argument often used
• that those who use vapes will know what to ask for so there is no need to have them on display

For respondents who selected ‘option 2: vapes must be kept behind the counter but can be on display’, the main themes arising were:

• similarly to above, concerns about current displays being attractive and further reiteration that vapes should be behind the counter
• the impact that it may have on smoking cessation

On this last theme, many respondents said that vapes still needed to be visible and accessible to adult buyers wanting to use vapes as a quit aid. They also said that vapes should not be subject to the same rules as tobacco products as it makes them seem equally harmful rather than a less harmful product.

As well as the above themes, a common theme from organisations who submitted responses was that regardless of which option was selected, having vapes behind the counter will make it easier for retailers to check the customer’s age.

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, the most popular option was ‘option 2: vapes must be kept behind the counter, but can be on display’, with 64% of these respondents favouring this option. The main themes included restrictions to keep behind the counter will be useful for limiting access to children, but they still need to be accessible to adults as a quit aid and having them not on display may make vapes seem as harmful as tobacco.

Alternative measures to regulating point of sale displays

Question

If you disagree with regulating point of sale displays, what alternative measures do you think the UK Government and devolved administrations should consider?

This free text box was left blank by many individual and organisation respondents. Many other respondents reiterated that they supported regulating point of sale displays. However, of those that did offer alternatives, the main suggestions were:

• to introduce a registration or licensing scheme for retailers selling vapes
• only sell e-liquids in vape shops
• restricting the marketing of vapes so they are not visible to children

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, only a small percentage completed this question. The main themes in these responses included suggesting a retail licencing scheme and age restrictions for entry.

Exemptions for specialist vape shops

Question

Do you think exemptions should be made for specialist vape shops?

Of all respondents who answered this question about making exemptions for specialist vape shops:

• 48.5% said yes
• 46.1% said no
• 5.5% said they don’t know

For respondents who thought there should be exemptions, the main themes arising were that:

• while respondents agreed with exemptions, many highlighted that there should be age restrictions and ID checks for entering specialist vape stores to make them less accessible for children
• specialist vape shops should be licensed
• there should be marketing restrictions for the exempt specialist vape stores, so they do not appeal to children and non-smokers, for instance limitations on shop fronts and on-street marketing boards

For respondents who said no, their responses in the free text box did not specifically explain why they thought this, instead they used it to suggest further restrictions to reduce the appeal of vapes to children. This included:

• citing the need for marketing and advertising restrictions so children are not exposed to vapes and nicotine products are not promoted
• suggesting ways to decrease access to vape shops, for instance through age restrictions and requiring licenses

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, 57% thought there should be exemptions for specialist vape stores. The main themes included suggesting that there should be age restrictions for entering them to reduce access for children.

Restricting vape packaging and presentation

Question

Which option do you think would be the most effective way for the UK Government and devolved administrations to restrict the way vapes can be packaged and presented to reduce youth vaping?

• Option 1: prohibiting the use of cartoons, characters, animals, inanimate objects, and other child friendly imagery, on both the vape packaging and vape device. This would still allow for colouring and tailored brand design
• Option 2: prohibiting the use of all imagery and colouring on both the vape packaging and vape device but still allow branding such as logos and names
• Option 3: prohibiting the use of all imagery and colouring and branding (standardised packaging) for both the vape packaging and vape device

The most popular option for all respondents who answered this question was Option 3: prohibiting the use of all imagery and colouring and branding (standardised packaging) for both the vape packaging and vape device. Table 6 shows a breakdown of the feedback received to this question.

Table 6: restricting vape packaging and presentation feedback

Option selected	Percentage of respondents
Option 1: prohibiting the use of cartoons, characters, animals, inanimate objects, and other child friendly imagery, on both the vape packaging and vape device. This would still allow for colouring and tailored brand design	35.8%
Option 2: prohibiting the use of all imagery and colouring on both the vape packaging and vape device but still allowing branding such as logos and names	18.2%
Option 3: prohibiting the use of all imagery and colouring and branding (standardised packaging) for both the vape packaging and vape device	46.1%

Regardless of which option the respondent selected, a common theme across all free text boxes was that the current packaging of vapes appeals to children and action needs to be taken to reduce this attractiveness.

For respondents who selected option 1, respondents highlighted the appeal of cartoons to children and the need for these designs to be removed.

For respondents who selected option 2, as well as the points noted above, respondents called for standardised colours to be used on packaging. Some highlighted that the current colours are too eye-catching for children and removing them will decrease the perception of vapes as a fashion accessory. Respondents also highlighted that allowing some branding could help adults choose which vapes to use when quitting smoking.

For those who selected option 3, the main themes highlighted how current packaging appeals to children and the need for standardised packaging to address this, with many citing that packaging should be consistent with tobacco products.

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, the most popular option was option 1, with 63% of these respondents favouring this option. The main themes included:

• the importance of choice for adults using vapes as a cessation tool, including expressing support for maintaining logos and branding
• highlighting that the packaging should be made less attractive or appealing to children and non-smokers

Alternative measures to regulating vape packaging

Question

If you disagree with regulating vape packaging, what alternative measures do you think the UK Government and devolved administrations should consider?

The main themes from all respondents who answered this question included:

• restrictions on advertising and marketing aimed at children or young people
• introducing a licencing scheme for retailers to be able to sell vapes
• providing further information and support to young people
• banning disposable vapes
• improved enforcement of current regulations
• limiting sales to specialist vape shops with an age restriction to enter

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, the main themes included:

• improved enforcement of current regulations
• limiting where vapes are sold to specialist vape stores or introducing a licencing scheme
• banning disposable vapes

Government response

The UK Government and the devolved administrations are committed to having the biggest impact possible in reducing youth vaping. The feedback from the consultation shows support for policies to regulate vape flavours, point of sale displays, and packaging and product presentation.

So, the UK Government intends to bring forward legislation, working with the devolved administrations, that would enable the regulation of vape flavours, packaging and point of sale displays across the UK.

For each of the measures, respondents to the consultation frequently talked about a risk of increasing the illicit market and we will work closely with enforcement agencies to mitigate this risk. They also raised the need for a licencing scheme, however, we are mindful of the impacts and burden on business and local authorities and therefore have no plans to introduce a licencing scheme for retailers.

In England, we are already providing support to enforcement agencies by providing an additional £30 million a year for enforcement and introducing on the spot fines for underage sales of tobacco products and vapes. The allocation of funding in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is the responsibility of relevant devolved ministers.

There are of course risks that by introducing regulations to restrict vapes, the harms of vaping are seen as equal to the harms of smoking. However, these new vape restrictions will be made alongside even tougher measures on tobacco, which will eventually lead to the phasing out of tobacco products altogether.

Some respondents proposed that the government ensure vapes are prescription only. There are no current plans to do this, but the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is ready to support a future medicinally-licensed vaping product, if the industry comes forward with a successful candidate. The MHRA continues to provide technical and scientific advice to companies interested in developing medicinal vapes.

Further legal requirements would be made via statutory instruments, subject to passage of the legislation. Before making regulations under the legislation, we would undertake further consultation and a full impact assessment for any measures.

Regulating non-nicotine vapes and other nicotine consumer products

The majority of vapes sold in the UK contain nicotine. All nicotine containing vapes in the UK fall under the Tobacco and Related Products Regulations 2016 (TRPR). Non-nicotine vapes are covered by the General Products Safety Regulations 2005 (GPSR). The GPSR requires providers to ensure only safe products are placed on the market, together with any necessary warnings for safe use of the product.

There is very little information publicly available on the full market share of non-nicotine vapes. However, data provided by the market measurement company Nielsen shows that the total coverage of zero-nicotine in Great Britain in the 26 weeks up to 1 July 2023 in supermarkets and convenience stores had sales of £575,000. This data does not include dedicated vape shops or online where, according to the Independent British Vape Trade Association, most shortfill non-nicotine vapes are sold.

So, in the UK, non-nicotine vapes are not subject to the same product standards as non-nicotine containing vapes and, except for Scotland, are not subject to the same age restrictions. Scotland’s age restrictions for non-nicotine vapes are applied under the Health (Tobacco, Nicotine etc. and Care) (Scotland) Act 2016.

ASH report Use of e-cigarettes among young people in Great Britain clearly shows that young people use non-nicotine vapes in Great Britain. Internationally, around 30 countries have prohibited the sale of non-nicotine vapes, and another 50 countries allow them to be sold but with age restrictions. In May 2023, the Prime Minister laid out the government’s commitment to review the rules on selling nicotine-free vapes to under 18s to ensure our rules keep pace with how vapes are being used. Under these proposals, non-nicotine vapes would be regulated under a similar framework as nicotine vapes.

There are other consumer nicotine products in the UK market such as nicotine pouches. Like with non-nicotine vapes, they are also not regulated under the TRPR but under GPSR. There are also no age of sale restrictions in the UK, but the UK Government, Northern Ireland Executive and Welsh Government do have existing regulatory making powers to introduce these and this is something the Scottish Government would like to introduce.

A recent study on nicotine pouches suggests that, although nicotine pouch use is low among adults (0.26% or 1 in 400 users in Great Britain), it is increasingly popular with younger men. The youth vaping call for evidence included comments about children using nicotine pouches but there is limited data about children using them. Under these proposals, we would regulate other consumer nicotine products under a similar framework as nicotine vapes.

Consultation feedback

Non-nicotine e-liquid flavour restrictions

Question

Do you think non-nicotine e-liquid, for example shortfills, should also be included in restrictions on vape flavours?

Of all respondents who answered this question about restricting non-nicotine e-liquid:

• 40.9% said yes
• 47.2% said no
• 11.8% said they don’t know

For respondents who said yes, the main themes arising included:

• reiterating their belief that consistency with nicotine vapes is needed, with many citing that it would make enforcement simpler and avoid confusion over regulations
• highlighting how this consistency would avoid loopholes both in marketing and advertising regulations, and stop the possibility of adding nicotine manually to flavoured e-liquids
• concerns around the impact that non-nicotine e-liquid may have on health

For respondents who said no, the main theme arising was concerns about the impact this may have on smoking cessation. Many respondents said that vapes are a helpful quit aid and that people could go back to smoking if vapes are restricted. This included that options for adult smokers who wish to quit should not be limited.

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, 61% thought that non-nicotine e-liquids should not be included in vape flavour restrictions. The free text box was used to reiterate this position and highlight concerns about the negative impact it may have on smoking cessation.

Evidence on the harms or use of non-nicotine vapes

Question

Do you have any evidence that the UK Government and devolved administrations should consider related to the harms or use of non-nicotine vapes?

Of all respondents who answered this question about whether they had evidence relating to the harms or use of non-nicotine vapes that the UK Government and devolved administrations should consider:

• 17.8% said they had
• 62.4% said they did not
• 19.8% said they don’t know

It is important to note that this question was about gathering evidence and the figures should not be interpreted as representing whether respondents thought non-nicotine vapes were harmful.

For respondents who said that they did have evidence, the main themes arising were:

• the impact of non-nicotine vapes on health, particularly the impact the chemicals have on respiratory health and highlighting the unknown long-term effects
• the role of vapes in smoking cessation and the negative impact that banning non-nicotine vapes may have on this, with some respondents highlighting that vapes are less harmful than cigarettes and sharing personal experiences of improved health since moving from smoking to vaping
• the appeal of vapes to children and non-smokers, with a call made for further restrictions on non-nicotine vapes to ensure that they are not accessed by children

For respondents who said they did not have evidence, some used the free text box to express their general views on non-nicotine vapes rather than evidence. This included their opinion on the impact of non-nicotine vapes on health and smoking cessation.

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, the responses were mixed. The main themes raised included the impact on health, their role in smoking cessation, their appeal to children and non-smokers and government overreach.

Regulating non-nicotine vapes

Question

Do you think the UK Government and devolved administrations should regulate non-nicotine vapes under a similar regulatory framework as nicotine vapes?

Of all respondents who answered this question about whether we should regulate non-nicotine vapes under a similar regulatory framework as nicotine vapes:

• 59.6% said yes
• 32.7% said no
• 7.8% said they don’t know

For respondents who said yes, the main themes included:

• non-nicotine vapes appeal to children and non-smokers
• non-nicotine vapes can still have a negative impact on health due to the inhalation of substances
• a need for consistency with policies for other substances as this would aid public understanding
• remove the possibility of creating exemptions as vaping manufacturers and traders could use these as a loophole, for example when promoting vapes

For respondents who said no, the main themes included:

• the important role non-nicotine vapes play in smoking cessation, especially in breaking the ‘hand to mouth’ habit without consuming nicotine, and the positive impact on the health of smokers trying to quit
• suggestions that these restrictions would be government overreach, and that restrictions may affect the uptake of smokers looking to quit

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, 56% answered yes to this question. The responses provided were mixed with the main themes including:

• non-nicotine vapes appeal to children and non-smokers
• non-nicotine vapes impact on health
• a need for policies consistent with other substances
• possible exemptions
• government overreach

Evidence on the harms or use of other consumer nicotine products

Question

Do you have any evidence that the UK Government and devolved administrations should consider on the harms or use of other consumer nicotine products such as nicotine pouches?

Of all respondents who answered this question on whether they had evidence relating to the harms or use of other consumer nicotine products:

• 21.9% said they had evidence
• 58.4% did not provide any evidence
• 19.7% said they don’t know

The main themes from respondents who said they had evidence included:

• highlighting that nicotine pouches are increasingly being marketed at children
• concerns about the health harms of nicotine, including its addictive nature and the possible link between some products and oral health
• evidence on the importance of other nicotine consumer products in smoking cessation

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, only a small number of respondents added information to the free text box. The main suggestions focused on other consumer nicotine products being less harmful than cigarettes and useful for smoking cessation.

Regulating consumer nicotine products

Question

Do you think the UK Government and devolved administrations should regulate other consumer nicotine products such as nicotine pouches under a similar regulatory framework as nicotine vapes?

Of all respondents who answered this question about regulating other consumer nicotine products under a similar regulatory framework as nicotine vapes:

• 52.9% said yes
• 29.4% said no
• 17.7% said they don’t know

For respondents who said yes, the main themes arising were:

• reiterating support that regulation is needed on all nicotine products, including novel nicotine products, and ensuring that the regulation is future proof if new nicotine products enter the market
• the impact of nicotine on health due to it still being harmful and addictive
• while agreeing there should be regulations, some respondents still highlighted that they were useful for smoking cessation

For respondents who said no, the main themes included:

• concerns that these restrictions would impact smoking cessation since these other consumer products can be a useful quit aid
• suggestions that these restrictions would be government overreach, limiting an individual’s free choice

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, 47% thought other consumer nicotine products should be regulated under a similar framework to nicotine vapes, with 42% answering no to this question. The main themes included:

• discussions around the harm of other consumer nicotine products
• the importance of other consumer nicotine products in smoking cessation
• the idea of government overreach

Government response

While the market for non-nicotine vapes is currently a fraction of the overall vape market, the use of non-nicotine vapes and other consumer nicotine products is increasing among young people and younger men. This consultation feedback shows widespread support for regulating non-nicotine vapes and other consumer nicotine products under a similar regulatory framework as nicotine vapes. The UK Government will seek to introduce a range of regulatory making powers to protect young people from these products.

For non-nicotine vapes, the UK Government will impose age of sale restrictions to those aged 18 or above, ban the purchase of these products by others for those who are under 18 and ban the free distribution of these products (for example, samples). The UK Government also intends to bring forward regulations which will extend all these restrictions to other nicotine products (for example, pouches).

The UK Government also intends to include non-nicotine vapes and other consumer nicotine products in the scope of future regulations to:

• restrict flavours
• restrict point of sale display and packaging and product presentation
• enable FPNs to be issued as part of enforcement
• close the potential for loopholes that could undermine our wider mission to reduce the appeal and accessibility of vapes to children

This will mean all consumer nicotine products and non-nicotine vapes are covered under a similar regulatory framework. Before any regulations are made, there would be an assessment of the impact of the proposed legislation and further consultation.

Restricting the supply and sale of disposable vaping products

The use of disposable vaping products (sometimes referred to as single use vapes) has increased substantially in recent years. The ASH report Use of e-cigarettes among adults in Great Britain found that 31% of adult vape users were mainly using disposables in 2023 compared with 2.3% in 2021.

Disposable vapes are neither rechargeable nor refillable and are discarded when they run out of charge or e-liquid. They contain:

• plastic
• copper
• rubber
• lithium batteries

You can recycle some parts of a disposable vape if they are separated and treated correctly, such as the battery. But other parts are not easily recyclable, such as any rubber pieces. Under these proposals, the sale and supply of disposable vapes could be restricted.

When littered, disposable vapes introduce plastic, nicotine salts, heavy metals, lead, mercury and flammable lithium-ion batteries into the natural environment. This contaminates waterways and soil, posing a risk to the environment and animal health.

Disposable vapes pose a fire risk when not separately collected for specialist recycling, as lithium-ion batteries can ignite when crushed in a refuse vehicle or at waste-processing plants.

Also, disposable vapes have been linked to a rapid increase in the number of young people vaping, particularly due to their low price.

The consultation asked questions on the sale and supply of disposable vapes and whether they should be restricted.

Consultation feedback

Restrictions on the sale and supply of disposable vapes

Question

Do you agree or disagree that there should be restrictions on the sale and supply of disposable vapes?

Of all respondents who answered this question about restricting disposable vapes:

• 79.6% agreed that there should be restrictions
• 18% disagreed
• 2.4% said they don’t know

Regardless of how respondents answered the closed question, common themes arising in the free text boxes were concerns for the environmental impact of disposable vapes or that there should be improvements to the recycling of vapes.

For responses who agreed, the main themes included:

• a ban on all disposable vapes
• disposable vapes are cheaper and more appealing to children and young people
• vapes should only be sold in specialist stores with a licence
• imports should also be banned

For responses that disagreed, the main themes included:

• vapes should still be available as a smoking cessation tool
• that there should be improved enforcement of current regulations

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, 64% thought there should be restrictions on disposable vapes. The main themes suggested that vape sales should be limited to specialist vape stores or stores with a licence to sell vapes. This group also emphasised the use of disposables as a smoking cessation tool and the need to increase enforcement of existing regulations.

Prohibiting the sale and supply of disposable vapes

Question

Do you agree or disagree that restrictions on disposable vapes should take the form of prohibiting their sale and supply?

Of all respondents who answered this question about prohibiting the sale and supply of disposables:

• 69% agreed
• 26.2% disagreed
• 4.9% said they don’t know

For respondents that agreed, the main themes included:

• environmental harms, including the need to reduce plastic and battery waste
• concerns that disposable vapes are appealing to children
• reusable vapes should be sold instead of disposable vapes with the latter considered not necessary for smoking cessation

From those who disagreed, the main themes included:

• suggestions that disposable vapes should only be sold in specialist stores
• calls for increased recycling facilities, incentives and information
• highlighting that smokers should still have access to vapes as a smoking cessation tool

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, 54% thought that restrictions should take the form of prohibiting their sale and supply. The main themes arising were very broad and went beyond the scope of the question. The main themes included:

• limiting the access of vapes, including through selling only in specialist vape stores
• concerns about the environmental impact of disposable vapes, including suggestions that there should be increased recycling facilities
• the need for vapes to remain available as a tool to help with smoking cessation, especially rechargeable or reusable vapes
• concerns for the growth of illicit markets

Other product or descriptions of products

Question

Are there any other types of product or descriptions of products that you think should be included in these restrictions?

The main themes from respondents who answered this question included:

• ensuring consistency by restricting all or other tobacco and nicotine products, for example banning single use tobacco products
• banning disposable vapes

While not directly related to this question, respondents also used the free text box to raise issues of environmental harms of disposable vapes and the impact on health.

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, the main themes were around:

• banning disposable vapes
• increasing action taken on illicit products
• support for increasing the availability of alternative nicotine-containing products
• the standardisation of single-use products

Respondents with links to the tobacco industry also used the free text box to raise issues about enforcement of existing regulations.

Implementation period

Question

Do you agree or disagree that an implementation period for restrictions on disposable vapes should be no less than 6 months after the law is introduced?

Of all respondents who answered this question that any implementation period should be no less than 6 months:

• 59.5% agreed
• 25.8% disagreed
• 14.7% said they don’t know

For respondents that agreed, the main theme in responses was that manufacturers, businesses, retailers and consumers all need time to adjust to the changes so it should not be less than 6 months.  

For respondents that disagreed, they mainly called for the restrictions to come into force as soon as possible or with immediate effect, with many thinking 6 months is plenty of time to prepare for implementation. However, some called for significantly longer than 6 months suggesting they had not understood the question. Others reiterated that they disagreed with prohibiting the sale and supply of disposable vapes.

While not directly related to this question and regardless of whether people agreed or disagreed with the implementation period, a common theme throughout was the need to close the loophole in our laws which allow retailers to give free samples of vapes.

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, 58% agreed that the implementation period should be no less than 6 months. The main themes were:

• calls for an implementation period longer than 6 months
• the need to sell existing stock
• time to allow products to align with other potential changing product standards
• time for a public awareness campaign about the restrictions

Other measures

Question

Are there other measures that would be required, alongside restrictions on supply and sale of disposable vapes, to ensure the policy is effective in improving environmental outcomes?

The main themes from respondents to this question included suggestions around recycling and disposal, for example:

• the tobacco industry should pay to dispose of tobacco waste products
• industry should pay for recycling of vapes
• greater promotion of recycling schemes or more recycling sites
• safe disposal bins for batteries

There were also suggestions around enforcement of the restrictions, for instance larger fines and penalties for littering, imports, illegal sales and illicit trade.

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, the main themes included:

• greater promotion of recycling schemes
• redesign of products for ease of recycling
• education and communication campaigns
• enforcement of existing regulations on littering and the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Regulations 2013 requirements
• a duty on single-use devices

Government response

The consultation feedback shows widespread support for prohibiting the sale and supply of disposable vapes.

The UK Government, the Scottish Government and the Welsh Government intend to introduce legislation to implement a ban on the sale and supply of disposable vapes. This includes both nicotine and non-nicotine containing products since the environmental concerns exist for both types of products. The UK Government will work with the devolved administrations to explore an import ban.

Any legislation taken forward will allow for an implementation period of at least 6 months, which takes into consideration concerns that industry will require time to adapt.

Northern Ireland officials acknowledge the issues raised during the consultation and will consider potential legislation in future.

The UK Government and devolved administrations will work together as far as possible to ensure it is consistently implemented.

Some respondents highlighted a need to focus on improving waste management and recycling systems for vape products. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is considering this as part of a consultation on reforming the producer responsibility system for waste electrical and electronic equipment published on 28 December 2023. The government will publish that response in due course.

We recognise arguments raised in the consultation that disposable vapes are both a quit aid for adults and also appealing to children. The case for action is therefore finely balanced. However, we are persuaded that action is necessary in respect of disposable vapes, due to not only environmental issues but also the low price and convenience of these products. Adults will still have access to non-disposable vapes to support smoking cessation, but banning disposables will impact the affordability and access for children.

Affordability of vaping products

There is currently a significant difference in price between vapes and tobacco products, partly because vapes are only subject to VAT, whereas tobacco has VAT and excise duty. Guidance on rates and allowances for the Tobacco Products Duty estimates at least a £8.46 excise duty on a packet of 20 cigarettes. This price differential is important because it can encourage smokers to switch from cigarettes to vapes. However, this also means that vapes are more readily accessible to young people and other non-smokers, especially disposable and refillable devices.

The consultation explored if a change in price would reduce the number of children using vape products.

Consultation feedback

Question

Do you think that an increase in the price of vapes would reduce the number of young people who vape?

Of all respondents who answered this question about whether increasing the price of vapes would reduce the number of young people who vape:

• 42.2% said yes
• 50.4% said no
• 7.4% said they don’t know

Cutting the data by age group, 70.2% of 15 to 17 year olds and 73.5% of 13 to 14 year olds responding to this question think an increase in price would make a difference.

For respondents who said yes, the main themes included:

• increasing prices would make vapes less affordable to young people and reduce access to vapes - suggestions included a price increase for disposable vapes, as these products appeal to young people and this could incentivise them to use reusable vapes
• the need to balance a price increase that acts as a deterrent, with ensuring that vaping remains a more affordable option than smoking, to encourage adult smokers to switch
• while respondents agreed increasing prices would make a difference, there were concerns about the effectiveness of raising prices and suggestions that other measures, alone or in combination, would be more effective at reducing youth vaping

For respondents who said no, the main themes that arose were:

• doubting the effectiveness that increasing prices would be a significant deterrent to young people vaping - respondents said the main reason to start vaping is influence from peers and once young people become addicted, they will prioritise spending on vapes regardless of the price
• the potential negative impact on smoking cessation - respondents thought that vapes should remain as a tool to quit smoking and that increasing prices would penalise adults who vape and could have the unintended consequence of driving ex-smokers back to using tobacco products
• increasing prices would decrease access to vapes as they would not be affordable

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, 58% said no and thought that an increase in the price of vapes would not reduce the number of young people who vape. The main themes were similar to those above.

Government response

This response shows mixed support for increasing the price of vapes to reduce the number of young people who vape. Increases in the price of tobacco has helped reduce the number of young children smoking, so we know this type of policy is effective. High prices can deter children from smoking, since young people do not have a large disposable income. However, we are mindful of the need to balance a price increase that deters young people vaping with ensuring that vaping remains a more affordable option than smoking, to encourage adult smokers to quit.

The UK Government thinks there is a strong case to take action to reduce the affordability of vapes and are continuing to consider options, including a new duty, to achieve this.

Enforcement

The enforcement measures included in the legislation, alongside the extra funding in England announced in our command paper, will guarantee that the health benefits will not be undermined by underage and illicit sales of tobacco and vapes. The allocation of funding in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is the responsibility of relevant devolved ministers.

Under section 7 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, local authority trading standards officers in England, on conviction in a magistrate’s court, are able to impose a fine of up to £2,500 for an underage sale of a tobacco product or cigarette papers.

Local authorities can also use powers under the Children and Young Persons Act to apply to a court for a restricted sale or premises order where a business has persistently sold tobacco products to under 18s. Such an order prohibits the sale of tobacco products from that business or a named individual for a specified amount of time.

Local authorities can already issue an FPN of £90 to individuals making proxy purchases, where it is the adult making the purchase who commits the offence, not the retailer. 

The consultation asked whether we should introduce FPNs for breaches of age of sale legislation for tobacco products and vapes and what level these FPNs should be set. Any new FPNs will complement other existing sanctions as outlined above, allowing local trading standards to issue on-the-spot fines to retailers instead of escalating to a court process. These questions were only open to respondents from England and Wales, since Scotland and Northern Ireland have already introduced FPNs for underage tobacco and vape sales.

Consultation feedback

Issuing fixed penalty notices for age of sale breaches

Question

Do you think that fixed penalty notices should be issued for breaches of age of sale legislation for tobacco products and vapes?

Of all the respondents who answered this question about if FPNs should be issued for age of sale breaches for tobacco products and vapes

• 88.3% said yes
• 8.8% said no
• 2.8% said they don’t know

For respondents who said yes, the main themes included:

• support for FPNs as an effective mechanism to enforce age of sale restrictions and resourcing local authorities effectively so FPNs are enforced
• agreement that FPNs would be an effective deterrent for reducing underage sales

The views of National Trading Standards colleagues and a selection of trading standards officers have been collected alongside the consultation. There was a consensus that introducing FPNs for underage vape sales would help trading standards officers work more effectively and quickly to tackle underage sales, and be a less resource intensive option than a court procedure.

For respondents who said no, the main themes included:

• concerns that FPNs would be too difficult to enforce due to a lack of local authority resourcing and funding constraints, placing a disproportionate burden on retailers and local authorities
• suggestions that stronger deterrents are required to prevent age of sale breaches

Of those who responded to this question with links to the tobacco industry, 80% said yes and thought that FPNs should be issued for breaches of age of sale legislation for tobacco products and vapes. The main themes included the need for enforcement to be effective.

Level of fixed penalty notices for underage tobacco sales

Question

What level of fixed penalty notice should be given for an underage tobacco sale?

• £100
• £200
• Other

Of all the respondents who answered this question about what level of FPN should be given for underage tobacco sale:

• 44% said £200
• 17.8% said £100
• 38.3% said ‘other’

Suggestions from respondents in the ‘other’ category included:

• under £100
• £500
• £1,000
• £5,000
• £10,000

The main themes from respondents included suggestions that the fine should be:

• enough to act as a deterrent
• a variable amount which rises with repeat offences

Respondents also used the free text box to raise doubts that fines would be an effective enforcement mechanism.

For respondents to this question with links to the tobacco industry, the most common level of FPN selected was £200, with 37% choosing this, followed by £100 with 22% choosing this. The main themes were similar to those outlined above.

Level of fixed penalty notices for underage vape sales

Question

What level of fixed penalty notice should be given for an underage vape sale?

• £100
• £200
• Other

Of all the respondents who answered this question about what level of FPN should be given for underage vape sale:

• 42.7% said £200
• 19.0% said £100
• 38.3% said ‘other’

Other suggestions from respondents in the ‘other’ category were:

• £500
• £1,000
• £5,000
• amounts over £5,000

The main themes from respondents included suggestions that the:

• fine should be enough to act as a deterrent
• approach should be consistent with other substances that have age restrictions, such as tobacco or alcohol
• fine should be a variable amount which rises with repeat offences

For respondents to this question with links to the tobacco industry, the most common level of FPN selected was £200, with 36% choosing this, followed by £100 with 24% choosing this. The main themes were mirrored those outlined above, with a few doubts raised about the effectiveness of this enforcement mechanism.

Government response

The following section only applies to England and Wales since Scotland and Northern Ireland have already introduced FPNs for underage tobacco and vape sales.

These responses show widespread support for issuing FPNs for breaches of age of sale legislation for tobacco products and vapes. There is a mix of support for the different levels these could be set at.

The UK Government will introduce a £100 FPN for the underage sale, proxy purchase and free distribution of tobacco products, vapes (nicotine and non-nicotine) and regulate to extend these provisions to other consumer nicotine products. This will enable trading standards officers to take quicker and more proportionate enforcement action against the irresponsible retailers who allow underage sales.

Local trading standards should determine which person in the retailer business is liable for the fine.

Setting the fine at £100 aligns with the UK Government’s approach to limit any new burdens to businesses, while allowing for appropriate enforcement action to be taken. Local trading standards must comply with the Office for Product Safety and Standards’ Regulators’ Code and take a proportionate approach to enforcement action on underage sales that reflects the level of offence committed.

Setting the fine at £100 meant it is a similar level to the current FPN for a number of offences, including:

• selling alcohol to those who are underage (£90 FPN)
• theft from a shop, where goods are under £200 in value (£90 FPN)
• driving offences such as failing to comply with a traffic sign (£100 FPN)

The introduction of variable fines with increases for repeat offences would not be in line with similar offences, so will not be included in our legislation.

However, as outlined above, powers to issue FPNs would be in addition to existing powers local authorities have to enforce age of sale legislation. They can escalate penalties, starting with a warning through to a maximum fine of £2,500. Or in the case of the most serious or repeat offences, they can apply for a court order to prevent the offending retailer from opening for a period. FPNs are specifically designed for in-person enforcement. They allow trading standards officers to issue fines directly to individuals on-the-spot.

The UK Government is exploring how we can enhance online age verification separately, to make sure that young people under the legal age of sale cannot buy tobacco products and vapes online.

The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology is creating a framework of standards and governance, underpinned by legislation, to enable the widespread use of trusted digital identity services. This will make it possible for people to prove things about themselves in a secure way without using paper documents. Digital identity services could be used to provide a robust method of age verification for online transactions, including the sale of tobacco products and vapes.

As a first step, the UK Government will work with retailers that sell tobacco products and vapes to produce good practice guidance that helps retailers adopt online age verification to prevent underage sales.

DHSC will complete a new burdens assessment for the introduction of these FPNs and we have committed to increasing investment for our enforcement agencies by £30 million per year.

Summary of next steps

After considering the responses to this consultation, the UK Government will work with the devolved administrations to bring forward legislation.

The UK Government and devolved administrations will work together to ensure as far as possible that recommendations and actions are adopted in a consistent manner across the UK, to ensure regulatory alignment. A restored Northern Ireland Executive and Assembly will need to make decisions on any policies within devolved competence.

To create the first smokefree generation, the UK Government will legislate to:

• make it an offence for anyone born on or after 1 January 2009 to be sold tobacco products
• prohibit proxy sales in line with the change in age of sale legislation
• include all tobacco products, herbal smoking products and cigarette papers, in scope
• require warning notices in retail premises to read “it is illegal to sell tobacco products to anyone born on or after 1 January 2009” when the smokefree legislation comes into effect

To tackle the rise in youth vaping, the UK Government will take powers to make regulations to:

• restrict vape flavours
• restrict how vapes are displayed in stores
• restrict packaging and product presentation for vapes
• apply the above restrictions to non-nicotine vapes and other consumer nicotine products such as nicotine pouches

The UK Government intends these measures to be taken forward in secondary legislation which will be subject to further consultation.

The UK Government thinks there is a strong case to take action to reduce the affordability of vapes and is continuing to consider options, including a new duty, to achieve this.

To assist in enforcement, the UK Government will introduce new FPNs for England and Wales set at £100 for breaches of age of sale and free distribution legislation for tobacco and vapes (nicotine and non-nicotine) and regulate to extend these provisions to other consumer nicotine products.

The UK Government, the Scottish Government and the Welsh Government intend to introduce legislation to implement a ban on the sale and supply of disposable vapes. The UK Government will work with the devolved administrations to explore an import ban.

Annex 1: breakdown of responses by location

Notes

The tables in this annex show the breakdown of responses to the closed questions by where individuals said they lived and where organisations said they operate.

Where a question has fewer than 5 responses, these have been labelled ‘c’ to prevent possible identification.

Respondents from organisations could select multiple options, so for the breakdown of responses by where the organisation operates, not all option combinations are shown.

Questions and breakdown of responses

Legislating to create a smokefree generation

Do you agree or disagree that the age of sale for tobacco products should be changed so that anyone born on or after 1 January 2009 will never be legally sold tobacco products?

Table 7: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales	Scotland	Northern Ireland	UK
Agree	61.6	51.4	65.5	79.0	62.5
Disagree	33.8	43.2	29.6	17.9	32.9
Don’t know	4.6	5.4	4.9	3.1	4.6

Table 8: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Scotland only	Northern Ireland only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
Agree	87.9	c	80.6	91.8	71.4	46.9
Disagree	8.3	c	19.4	8.2	20.9	31.2
Don’t know	3.8	c	0	0	7.7	21.9

Do you think that proxy sales should also be prohibited?

Table 9: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales	Scotland	Northern Ireland	UK
Agree	72.6	64.6	76.8	82.5	73.3
Disagree	21.0	27.0	17.5	12.5	20.4
Don’t know	6.4	8.4	5.7	5.1	6.3

Table 10: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Scotland only	Northern Ireland only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
Agree	92.7	c	83.3	c	73.3	59.4
Disagree	4.0	c	0	c	18.9	c
Don’t know	3.2	c	16.7	c	7.8	c

Do you agree or disagree that all tobacco products, cigarette papers and herbal smoking products should be covered in the new legislation?

Table 11: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales	Scotland	Northern Ireland	UK
Agree	62.4	50.5	65.6	78.8	63.1
Disagree	32.1	42.6	29.1	17.4	31.4
Don’t know	5.6	6.9	5.3	3.8	5.5

Table 12: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Scotland only	Northern Ireland only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
Agree	90.3	c	c	c	70	53.1
Disagree	6.5	c	c	c	23.3	c
Don’t know	3.2	c	c	c	6.7	c

Do you agree or disagree that warning notices in retail premises will need to be changed to read ‘it is illegal to sell tobacco products to anyone born on or after 1 January 2009’ when the law comes into effect?

Table 13: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales	Scotland	Northern Ireland	UK
Agree	70.8	60.7	73.4	82.2	71.3
Disagree	23.6	31.7	21.1	13.7	23.1
Don’t know	5.6	7.6	5.5	4.1	5.6

Table 14: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Scotland only	Northern Ireland only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
Agree	93.3	c	80	91.7	82.2	64.5
Disagree	4.8	c	c	c	12.2	c
Don’t know	1.8	c	c	c	5.6	c

Tackling the rise in youth vaping

Do you agree or disagree that the UK Government and devolved administrations should restrict vape flavours?

Table 15: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales	Scotland	Northern Ireland	UK
Agree	44.5	30.1	49.6	75.6	46.0
Disagree	53.5	67.6	48.7	22.0	52.0
Don’t know	1.9	2.3	1.7	2.4	1.9

Table 16: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Scotland only	Northern Ireland only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
Agree	81.1	c	c	90.5	64.8	c
Disagree	15.1	c	c	c	c	58.6
Don’t know	3.9	c	c	c	c	c

Which option or options do you think would be the most effective way for the UK Government and devolved administrations to implement restrictions on flavours?

Option 1: limiting how the vape is described only.

Option 2: limiting the ingredients in vapes only.

Option 3: limiting the characterising flavours (the taste and smell) of vapes only.

For this question, respondents could select multiple options, not all option combinations are shown.

Table 17: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales	Scotland	Northern Ireland	UK
Option 1	31.6	38.1	28.1	13.9	30.6
Option 2	3.4	4.2	3.2	3.3	3.4
Option 3	9.7	7.6	11.5	17.0	10.2
Option 1, Option 2 and Option 3	22.1	13.8	24.2	39.7	22.9
Don’t know	19.9	25.9	20.1	10.4	19.7

Table 18: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Scotland only	Northern Ireland only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
Option 1	37.1	31.6	0	0	32.2	51.7
Option 2	c	0	0	0	0	0
Option 3	9.3	0	0	22.6	6.9	0
Option 1, Option 2 and Option 3	27.5	36.8	50.0	51.6	23.0	24.1
Don’t know	7.2	0	0	9.7	24.1	c

Which option do you think would be the most effective way for the UK Government and devolved administrations to restrict vape flavours to children and young people?

Option A: flavours limited to tobacco only.

Option B: flavours limited to tobacco, mint and menthol only.

Option C: flavours limited to tobacco, mint, menthol and fruits only.

Table 19: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales	Scotland	Northern Ireland	UK
Option A	39.0	29.7	44.8	64.7	40.7
Option B	17.1	16.4	16.7	15.8	17.0
Option C	43.9	53.9	38.5	19.6	42.3

Table 20: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Scotland only	Northern Ireland only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
Option A	33.1	c	46.7	69.5	c	c
Option B	15.0	c	30	8.5	c	c
Option C	51.9	70.6	23.3	22.0	51.6	68.2

Do you think there are any alternative flavour options the UK Government and devolved administrations should consider?

Table 21: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales	Scotland	Northern Ireland	UK
Yes	18.6	23.7	15.8	10.1	18.1
No	53.5	48.9	54.3	62.0	53.8
Don’t know	27.9	27.4	29.8	27.9	28.1

Table 22: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Scotland only	Northern Ireland only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
Yes	31.7	c	c	c	27.3	37.9
No	45.6	73.7	47.2	74.2	35.2	34.5
Don’t know	22.8	c	c	c	37.5	27.6

Do you think non-nicotine e-liquid, for example shortfills, should also be included in restrictions on vape flavours?

Table 23: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales	Scotland	Northern Ireland	UK
Yes	38.7	26.9	42.5	63.7	39.9
No	49.5	62.5	44.5	25.8	48.3
Don’t know	11.8	10.6	13.1	10.5	11.9

Table 24: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Scotland only	Northern Ireland only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
Yes	78.6	73.7	83.3	80.6	53.4	51.7
No	12.9	c	c	c	28.4	c
Don’t know	8.5	c	c	c	18.2	c

Which option do you think would be the most effective way to restrict vapes to children and young people?

Option 1: vapes must be kept behind the counter and cannot be on display, like tobacco products.

Option 2: vapes must be kept behind the counter but can be on display.

Table 25: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales	Scotland	Northern Ireland	UK
Option 1	67.4	59.8	71.5	85.3	68.5
Option 2	32.6	40.2	28.5	14.7	31.5

Table 26: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Scotland only	Northern Ireland only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
Option 1	60.4	c	69.7	c	46.8	33.3
Option 2	39.6	c	30.3	c	53.2	66.7

Do you think exemptions should be made for specialist vape shops?

Table 27: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales	Scotland	Northern Ireland	UK
Yes	49.4	61.7	47.3	22.7	48.6
No	45.4	31.4	46.9	66.4	46.1
Don’t know	5.2	6.9	5.8	5.9	5.4

Table 28: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Scotland only	Northern Ireland only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
Yes	48.2	c	47.1	20	44.4	67.9
No	46.4	55.6	35.3	68.3	41.1	c
Don’t know	5.3	c	17.6	11.7	14.4	c

Which option do you think would be the most effective way for the UK Government and devolved administrations to restrict the way vapes can be packaged and presented to reduce youth vaping?

Option 1: prohibiting the use of cartoons, characters, animals, inanimate objects, and other child friendly imagery, on both the vape packaging and vape device. This would still allow for colouring and tailored brand design.

Option 2: prohibiting the use of all imagery and colouring on both the vape packaging and vape device but still allow branding such as logos and names.

Option 3: prohibiting the use of all imagery and colouring and branding (standardised packaging) for both the vape packaging and vape device.

Table 29: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales	Scotland	Northern Ireland	UK
Option 1	37.2	45.3	34.4	21.8	36.4
Option 2	18.1	22.4	16.8	12.2	17.8
Option 3	44.8	32.3	48.8	66.0	45.8

Table 30: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Scotland only	Northern Ireland only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
Option 1	14.5	c	c	c	33.3	61.5
Option 2	36.1	c	c	c	21.8	c
Option 3	49.4	c	76.5	82	44.9	c

Do you have any evidence that the UK Government and devolved administrations should consider related to the harms or use of non-nicotine vapes?

Table 31: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales	Scotland	Northern Ireland	UK
Yes	16.3	14	16.7	20.3	16.5
No	64.2	68.4	61.9	54.0	63.6
Don’t know	19.5	17.6	21.3	25.7	20.0

Table 32: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Scotland only	Northern Ireland only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
Yes	57.0	c	64.7	19.2	47.4	40.7
No	29.3	c	14.7	51.9	34.2	40.7
Don’t know	13.7	c	20.6	28.8	18.4	18.5

Do you think the UK Government and devolved administrations should regulate non-nicotine vapes under a similar regulatory framework as nicotine vapes?

Table 33: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales	Scotland	Northern Ireland	UK
Yes	58.1	45.6	59.6	73.6	58.6
No	34.4	46.3	30.3	19.1	33.6
Don’t know	7.5	8.1	10.1	7.3	7.8

Table 34: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Scotland only	Northern Ireland only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
Yes	87.6	c	c	82.7	77.6	77.8
No	6.5	c	c	c	10.5	c
Don’t know	5.9	c	c	c	11.8	c

Do you have any evidence that the UK Government and devolved administrations should consider related to the harms or use of other consumer nicotine products such as nicotine pouches?

Table 35: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales	Scotland	Northern Ireland	UK
Yes	18.4	16.2	20.3	21.8	18.7
No	60.2	62.9	56.2	51.2	59.4
Don’t know	21.4	20.9	23.5	27.0	21.9

Table 36: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Scotland only	Northern Ireland only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
Yes	51.8	c	47.1	21.2	50	c
No	29.7	c	26.5	55.8	28.9	c
Don’t know	18.5	c	26.5	23.1	21.1	c

Do you think the UK Government and devolved administrations should regulate other consumer nicotine products such as nicotine pouches under a similar regulatory framework as nicotine vapes?

Table 37: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales	Scotland	Northern Ireland	UK
Yes	50.8	43.3	55.6	66.8	51.9
No	31.2	38.5	26.4	17.8	30.2
Don’t know	18.0	18.2	18.0	15.4	17.9

Table 38: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Scotland only	Northern Ireland only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
Yes	81.8	c	76.5	80.8	71.4	74.1
No	6.1	c	0	c	13.0	c
Don’t know	12.2	c	23.5	c	15.6	c

Do you agree or disagree that there should be restrictions on the sale and supply of disposable vapes?

Table 39: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales	Scotland	Northern Ireland	UK
Agree	78.6	71	82.2	90.4	79.3
Disagree	19.1	26	15.2	8.1	18.4
Don’t know	2.4	3	2.6	1.5	2.4

Table 40: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Scotland only	Northern Ireland only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
Agree	92.2	c	c	c	64.0	61.3
Disagree	5.6	c	c	c	24.0	19.4
Don’t know	2.1	c	c	c	12.0	19.4

Do you agree or disagree that restrictions on disposable vapes should take the form of prohibiting their sale and supply?

Table 41: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales	Scotland	Northern Ireland	UK
Agree	68.1	60.4	73.4	84.9	69.2
Disagree	27.2	35	21.7	11.7	26.2
Don’t know	4.7	4.6	4.9	3.4	4.7

Table 42: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Scotland only	Northern Ireland only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
Agree	61.6	c	83.8	88.1	53.0	32.3
Disagree	29.3	c	c	11.9	32.0	41.9
Don’t know	9.1	c	c	0	15.0	25.8

Do you agree or disagree that an implementation period for restrictions on disposable vapes should be no less than 6 months after the law is introduced?

Table 43: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales	Scotland	Northern Ireland	UK
Agree	59.1	54	61.9	73.1	59.9
Disagree	26	29.9	23.1	16.1	25.4
Don’t know	14.9	16.2	15	10.7	14.8

Table 44: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Scotland only	Northern Ireland only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
Agree	42.7	72.2	56.8	74.1	50	58.1
Disagree	46	27.8	24.3	c	30	19.4
Don’t know	11.3	0	18.9	c	20	22.6

Do you think that an increase in the price of vapes would reduce the number of young people who vape?

Table 45: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales	Scotland	Northern Ireland	UK
Yes	40.2	28.8	42.7	60.8	41.1
No	52.5	65.5	49.1	31.1	51.5
Don’t know	7.3	5.7	8.2	8	7.4

Table 46: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Scotland only	Northern Ireland only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
Yes	78.5	c	c	76.8	55.1	53.6
No	15.7	c	c	c	29.5	c
Don’t know	5.9	c	c	c	15.4	c

Enforcement

The following questions were only shown to people who lived in England and Wales since the proposed policy will only apply to them.

Do you think that fixed penalty notices should be issued for breaches of age of sale legislation for tobacco products and vapes?

Table 47: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales
Yes	88.4	86.9
No	9	9.8
Don’t know	2.6	3.3

Table 48: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
Yes	92.4	76.2	74.1	77.1
No	2	0	7.4	c
Don’t know	5.5	23.8	18.5	c

What level of fixed penalty notice should be given for an underage tobacco sale?

Table 49: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales
£0	5.1	5.7
Less than £100	c	c
£100	17.7	23.9
£101 - £200	c	c
£200	44.1	39.4
£201 - £500	6.6	4.8
More than £500	24.8	23.6

Table 50: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
£0	c	c	18.8	c
Less than £100	c	c	c	c
£100	13.5	c	10.1	c
£101 - £200	c	c	c	c
£200	49.6	54.5	34.8	26.3
£201 - £500	9.2	c	c	c
More than £500	25.1	c	29	42.1

What level of fixed penalty notice should be given for an underage vape sale?

Table 51: percentage of those responding as individuals by where they live in the UK

Response	England	Wales
£0	5.0	5.8
Less than £100	c	c
£100	18.9	24.3
£101 - £200	c	c
£200	42.8	38.3
£201 - £500	6.6	5.9
More than £500	24.9	22.6

Table 52: percentage of organisations by where the organisations operate

Response	England only	Wales only	Across the whole of the UK	Across the whole of the UK and wider
£0	c	c	18.2	c
Less than £100	c	c	c	c
£100	13.9	c	c	c
£101 - £200	c	c	c	c
£200	48.3	50	30.3	33.3
£201 - £500	9.5	c	c	c
More than £500	25.1	c	30.3	33.3

Annex 2: international comparison of vaping restrictions

The following tables set out the differences in restrictions for nicotine vapes between the UK and other international partners.

In the USA and Canada, laws are mostly set at a state or provincial level. The tables reflect where the USA and Canada have laws at either a federal or state level.

To sell vapes in Scotland, the Scottish Government requires sellers to register on a public register. The Welsh Government has the same powers, but it has not brought them in yet.

Table 53a: comparison of international vaping restrictions

Policy	UK	USA	New Zealand	Australia	Canada
Age of sale for vapes	18	21	18	Not applicable	18, 19, 21
Restrictions on businesses that can sell vapes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Restrictions on where it is legal to vape	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Planned, but not in force
Warning labels on vape packaging	Yes	Yes	Yes	Planned, but not in force	Yes
Other packaging requirements to deter youth use	Yes	Yes	Yes	Planned, but not in force	Yes
Restrictions on nicotine strength in vapes	Yes	No	Yes	Planned, but not in force	Yes
Restrictions on advertising and promotion of vapes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes
Restrictions on vape flavours	Planned, but not in force	Yes	Yes	Planned, but not in force	Planned, but not in force
Ban on disposable vapes	Planned, but not in force	No	Yes	Planned, but not in force	No
Restrictions on point of sale display	Planned, but not in force	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
Plain packaging required	Planned, but not in force	No	No	Planned, but not in force	No

Table 53b: comparison of international vaping restrictions continued

Policy	France	Germany	Italy	Ireland
Age of sale for vapes	18	18	18	18
Restrictions on businesses that can sell vapes	No	No	No	Not yet in force
Restrictions on where it is legal to vape	Yes	No	Yes	No
Warning labels on vape packaging	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Other packaging requirements to deter youth use	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Restrictions on nicotine strength in vapes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Restrictions on advertising and promotion of vapes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Restrictions on vape flavours	No	No	No	No
Ban on disposable vapes	Planned, but not in force	Planned, but not in force	No	No
Restrictions on point of sale display	No	No	No	No
Plain packaging required	No	No	No	No