Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tobacco Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel moves distributor-licensing bill for alternative nicotine products to the floor after contested debate
Summary
HB1220E would create distributor and wholesaler licensing for alternative nicotine products, set higher license fees, and allow limited direct-to-consumer shipment under age-verification conditions; the committee approved a due-pass motion after proponents and opponents clashed over fiscal, regulatory, and definitional issues.
Representative Brian Moulder introduced HB1220E as a companion to Senate measures addressing retail licensing: the House bill would license distributors and wholesalers of alternative nicotine products to provide state oversight and traceability in an industry that proponents say is currently unregulated.
Jennifer Stally (South Dakota Nurses Association) described the amendment’s changes, including adjusted definitions separating alternative nicotine products and vapor products, a licensing fund for enforcement, and an increase in the wholesaler license fee to $1,000 (from $150). Stally said the fee increase accounts for decades without adjustment and that the bill’s intent is to create a basic regulatory framework before addressing retail licensing under a separate Senate bill.
Industry witnesses including the Vapor Technology Association supported a framework to ensure adult access and limit youth access. Opponents — including Jordan Mason (retail trade representative) and Nancy Gilbertson (Vape Depot owner) — urged the committee to reconsider, arguing the bill creates a new regulatory layer under the Department of Revenue, risks unfunded mandates, raises litigation exposure through per-shipment penalties, and contains definition confusion affecting accessories and direct-shipment rules.
Mason asked for a fiscal note and cautioned that increased fees could push out small distributors; Gilbertson urged sending the bill to a later day for more work, saying the measure ‘‘creates carveouts’’ and contains sections that still leave retailers and wholesalers uncertain which definitions apply.
In rebuttal the sponsor said industry participants have requested regulation and that the $1,000 fee would generate funds to support enforcement; proponents said the department had been engaged in the drafting. Committee members pressed on shipping and carrier licensing, comparison to cigar-shipping statutes, and whether the Department of Revenue was prepared to administer the new program.
Senator Smith moved a due-pass motion; Senator Davis seconded. The roll call showed five yays and two nays, so the committee moved HB1220E to the Senate floor with a due-pass motion. The committee adjourned following the vote.
