ObjectivesComprehensive tobacco control policies with minimal exemptions can reduce tobacco use and sales. Many states and localities have adopted flavoured tobacco product (FTP) sales restrictions. This study describes the development and application of a schema to characterise the comprehensiveness of these FTP sales restrictions.DesignWe coded state and local FTP sales restrictions enacted June 2007–March 2021 for retailer, tobacco product, and flavour inclusions and exemptions. Guided by FTP literature, legal resources and meetings with FTP policy experts, we developed a six-level classification scheme to characterise coded FTP policies from least to most comprehensive. We present descriptive statistics of FTP policy features and comprehensiveness.ResultsAs of 31 March 2021, 7 state-level and 327 local-level FTP sales restrictions were enacted in the USA. Most state-level policies (71.4%) were categorised in the second lowest comprehensiveness category; local policies most commonly fell within the lowest (48.9%) or highest (26.0%) comprehensiveness categories. Across jurisdictions, adult-only retailers were most frequently exempted from the FTP sales restrictions (state: n=1, 14.3%; local: n=184, 56.3%); and most jurisdictions included electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) as a banned product (state: n=6, 87.5%; local: n=227, 100%). While just over half of state (n=4, 57.1%) and local (n=169, 51.7%) sales restrictions included menthol e-cigarettes, most excluded menthol cigarettes and/or menthol smokeless tobacco.ConclusionsComprehensiveness of FTP sales restrictions in the USA varies widely. Current and future FTP policies would be strengthened by including all flavours and all tobacco products—particularly menthol cigarettes—and by avoiding exemptions for certain retailers, particularly adult-only retailers.

In 2009, flavored cigarettes (except menthol) were banned in the United States, but other flavored tobacco products (FTPs) were allowed. Women, populations of color, youth, sexual minority, and low-socioeconomic status populations disproportionately use FTPs. Localities have passed sales restrictions on FTPs that may reduce disparities if vulnerable populations are reached. This study assessed the extent to which FTP restrictions reached these subgroups ("reach equity"). We identified 189 U.S. jurisdictions with FTP policies as of December 31, 2018. We linked jurisdictions with demographics of race/ethnicity, gender, age, partnered same-sex households and household poverty, and stratified by policy strength. We calculated Reach Ratios (ReRas) to assess reach equity among subgroups covered by FTP policies relative to their U.S. population representation. Flavor policies covered 6.3% of the U.S. population (20 million individuals) across seven states; 0.9% were covered by strong policies (12.7% of policies). ReRas indicated favorable reach equity to young adults, women, Hispanics, African Americans, Asians, partnered same-sex households, and those living below poverty. Youth, American Indians/Alaska Natives 879928H PPXXX10.1177/1524839919879928Health Promotion PracticeRose et al. / SHORT TITLE research-article2019 Rose et al. / REACH EQUITY OF LOCAL FLAVOR POLICIES 45S(AIAN) and Native Hawaiians/Pacific Islanders (NHPI) were underrepresented. Strong policies had favorable reach equity to young adults, those living below poverty, Asians, NHPIs, individuals of 2+ races, and partnered same-sex households, but unfavorable reach equity to women, youth, Hispanic, AIAN, and African American populations. U.S. flavor policies have greater reach to many, but not all, subgroups at risk of FTP use. Increased enactment of strong policies to populations not covered by flavor policies is warranted to ensure at-risk subgroups sufficiently benefit.

Objectives. To describe how US states and the District of Columbia regulate e-cigarette sales by examining e-cigarette–specific tobacco retail licensing (TRL) laws. Methods. We coded 25 state-level e-cigarette TRL laws (effective as of January 1, 2020) for provisions we labeled as either “core” (e.g., presence of license terms, fees, and penalties) or “descriptive” (e.g., license fee amount and term length). Results. Overall, 23 laws clearly defined a license term, 23 laws required a license fee, and 19 laws identified penalties for violations that included both license suspension and revocation. Fees widely ranged ($5–$1000 annually), and 8 laws did not explicitly direct fees toward TRL administration or enforcement. No law required that retailers comply with all local, state, and federal tobacco or e-cigarette laws. Conclusions. Most laws contained core TRL provisions. Several laws, however, had minimal license fees and did not direct fees toward administration or enforcement. As youth e-cigarette use increases, more states should consider establishing e-cigarette TRL laws or incorporating provisions into existing TRL laws. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print July 16, 2020: e1–e6. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2020.305771)

Context: Flavored tobacco products contribute significantly to youth tobacco initiation and tobacco use disparities. In the last decade, 362 jurisdictions have enacted policies restricting the sale of flavored tobacco products; however, many policies are not fully comprehensive due to menthol and adult-only retailer exemptions. Although several of these restrictions have been amended since their original passage, to date, little is known about how amendments have affected policy comprehensiveness. Objective: To describe how amendments to flavored tobacco product sales restrictions affect policy comprehensiveness. Design: We identified flavored tobacco product sales restrictions that had been amended at least once using an internal database of US state and local flavored tobacco product sales restrictions. To characterize policy comprehensiveness, we applied a 6-level flavored tobacco policy classification scheme—level 6 being most comprehensive—to amended restrictions. We conducted a descriptive analysis of each initial policy and its most recent amendment to identify changes in retailer, product, and flavor inclusions, as well as overall comprehensiveness. Main Outcome Measure(s): Comprehensiveness of amended flavored tobacco product sales restrictions. Results: As of March 31, 2022, no states and 50 localities had amended their flavored tobacco product sales restriction. Amendments largely increased policy comprehensiveness; most laws prior to amendment were categorized as level 1 (n = 28, 56.0%), while after amendment, the plurality were categorized as level 6 (n = 25, 50.0%). Most commonly, amendments removed menthol exemptions (n ≥ 30, 60.0%) and adult-only retailer exemptions (n = 12, 24.0%). Conclusions: Several local flavored tobacco product sales restrictions have been amended. Nearly all amendments increased policy comprehensiveness, primarily by removing exemptions for menthol products and exemptions for adult-only retailers. While policy advocates remain focused on passing comprehensive policies at initial passage, amendments have served as a tool to strengthen existing sales restrictions. This study along with ongoing flavored tobacco product sales restriction surveillance can inform policy advocacy and evaluation efforts.