Montana committee hears wide-ranging debate on separating alternative nicotine products from tobacco

Representative Ron Marshall opened the hearing on House Bill 149 by telling the House Business and Labor Committee the bill separates "alternative nicotine products" from tobacco in state law, creating a parallel licensing and regulatory scheme while keeping many existing consumer protections in place.

Marshall said the sponsors' intent is to create a separate licensing path for vaping and similar products so they are sold through age-restricted venues such as vape shops, bars with restricted entry, and tobacco-only retailers. "We took the alternative nicotine products and peeled them out and like literally separated them from the tobacco products," Marshall said. He told the committee the bill preserves age restrictions, licensing, inspections and penalties but would remove alternative nicotine products from the statutory definition of tobacco.

Proponents in the room included numerous Montana vape shop owners who said limiting sales to age-restricted venues would reduce youth access. "If you limit the sales to only age restricted venues, this helps further the protection of illicit sales," testified Tommy Dobbs, co-owner of Liberty Vapor in Missoula. Other small business owners, including Greg Troutman (online) who represents industry legal interests nationally, said federal regulatory uncertainty following litigation over FDA premarket review supports a state-level carve-out as a model for Congress.

Opponents included the American Heart Association, the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, Confluence Public Health Alliance and other public-health groups that urged rejection. Kalli Wicks of the American Heart Association said the bill would "muddy the waters" by creating different categories for nicotine products and could reduce state or federal protections; the association also warned that the bill would effectively lower the purchase age to 18 if federal age-21 restrictions were removed in future federal action. Lisa Dworak of Confluence and Amanda Cahill of the American Cancer Society cited concerns about preemption of local authority in section 8 of the bill, and argued that local governments need flexibility to combat youth vaping in their communities.

Department of Public Health and Human Services staff provided Montana-specific youth-use data: most Montana high-school students who used e-cigarettes in the past 30 days reported getting them from friends or family (58%); 12% bought them in vape or tobacco shops. DPHHS staff also reported Montana compliance data for 2024: 19 e-cigarette sales-to-minors violations out of 1,003 inspections.

Legal and policy issues threaded the hearing. Sponsor Marshall and industry lawyer Greg Troutman discussed federal litigation over FDA's premarket-tobacco-application (PMTA) process and cited a Fifth Circuit decision vacating some FDA denials; the outcome in the U.S. Supreme Court could change federal enforcement. Public-health opponents emphasized that in Montana current tobacco statutes and local-regulation authority were deliberate, tested ways to limit youth access and that separating categories could create regulatory gaps.

The committee closed the hearing after testimony and questions but no committee vote was recorded in the transcript.