Table 14: Comparison of options for regulating product safety for smokeless tobacco and nicotine-delivery products Options Option 1: status quo Option 2: Option 3(a): Option 3(b): No specific product safety controls Adopt existing product safety Make regulations/notices/ guidelines Make regulations/notices/guidelines, standards under the Fair Trading Act etc. under the SFEA without product etc under the SFEA with product (Commerce Commission enforces) registration (Ministry of Health registration (Ministry of Health regulates) regulates) Pros No costs to manufacturers, importers Risks to health mitigated Risks to health mitigated As for Option 3(a) or retailers to implement and comply Smokers have access to products they Smokers have access to products they Self-certification associated with No cost to government to enforce can have confidence in, which may can have confidence in, may product registration facilitate encourage them to switch encourage them to switch compliance Ministry of Health is government Regulator has register of products by agency with the best understanding of manufacturer/importer to facilitate regulating products to reduce risks to post-market activity (eg, recall of health (eg, medicines, psychoactive products to be causing harm) substances) Consistent with decisions for SFEA has some provisions already to and e-liquid allow product safety requirements to be set by regulation Cons Nicotine, which has addictive and toxic Costs to industry to implement, which Costs to industry to implement, which As for Option 3(a) but greater costs to properties, is unregulated except may be passed on to consumers may be passed on to consumers industry associated with more active where it is regulated as a medicine or regulation Costs to government to implement and Costs to government to implement and HSNO thresholds are met enforce enforce Other constituents of products, some Difficulty in identifying international of which may be harmful, are best standards to adopt unregulated Enforcement is passive, in response to Uneven playing for industry – complaints and product failures some businesses will meet practice standards; others will sell cheaper, lower-quality products Experience suggests it is unlikely consumers would seek redress under the Consumer Guarantees Act
Table 14: Comparison of options for regulating product safety for smokeless tobacco and nicotine-delivery products Options Option 1: status quo No specific product safety controls Option 2: Adopt existing product safety standards under the Fair Trading Act (Commerce Commission enforces) Option 3(a): Make regulations/notices/ guidelines etc. under the SFEA without product registration (Ministry of Health regulates) Option 3(b): Make regulations/notices/guidelines, etc under the SFEA with product registration (Ministry of Health regulates) Pros No costs to manufacturers, importers or retailers to implement and comply No cost to government to enforce Risks to health mitigated Smokers have access to products they can have confidence in, which may encourage them to switch Risks to health mitigated Smokers have access to products they can have confidence in, may encourage them to switch Ministry of Health is government agency with the best understanding of regulating products to reduce risks to health (eg, medicines, psychoactive substances) SFEA has some provisions already to allow product safety requirements to be set by regulation As for Option 3(a) Self-certification associated with product registration facilitate compliance Regulator has register of products by manufacturer/importer to facilitate post-market activity (eg, recall of products to be causing harm) Consistent with decisions for and e-liquid Cons Nicotine, which has addictive and toxic properties, is unregulated except where it is regulated as a medicine or HSNO thresholds are met Other constituents of products, some of which may be harmful, are unregulated Uneven playing for industry – some businesses will meet standards; others will sell cheaper, lower-quality products Experience suggests it is unlikely consumers would seek redress under the Consumer Guarantees Act Costs to industry to implement, which may be passed on to consumers Costs to government to implement and enforce Difficulty in identifying international best practice standards to adopt Enforcement is passive, in response to complaints and product failures Costs to industry to implement, which may be passed on to consumers Costs to government to implement and enforce As for Option 3(a) but greater costs to industry associated with more active regulation
ris-regulation-smokeless-tobacco-and-nicotine-delivery-products.docx