On December 20, 2019, the federal government passed a law (“Federal T-21 Law”) that raised the minimum age to purchase tobacco from 18 to 21 years old. The Federal T-21 Law’s goal was to decrease the number of high school and middle school students that smoked tobacco or nicotine.

For many reasons, doctors, parents, and those concerned with the well-being of children have long advocated for the Federal T-21 Law. In the last decade, there has been an alarming increase in young people smoking tobacco or nicotine. From 2011-2015, e-cigarette use among high school and middle school students increased by 900%.[i] Importantly, young people developing an addiction to tobacco is an issue since most adult smokers start their addiction before the age of 18. Despite the Federal T-21 Law attempting to solve this major tobacco crisis amongst young people, it has not done enough to remedy the problem.

Granted, the Federal T-21 Law is a step in the right direction. A study conducted before the Federal T-21 Law took effect showed that “53.3% of high school students . . . and 24.3% of middle school students . . . reported having ever tried a tobacco product,”[ii] While, a study conducted after the Federal T-21 Law found that “34.0% of high school students . . . and 11.3% of middle school students . . . reported ever using a tobacco product.”[iii] It seems evident that the Federal T-21 Law has led to a significant decrease in high school and middle school students consuming tobacco, however, under the Federal T-21 Law, only retailers who sell tobacco to individuals under 21 can be penalized.

Yet, for an issue of this magnitude, the federal government must take more comprehensive measures to address broader issues. Inspiration for legislation can come from the states that have passed their own versions of T-21 laws, many of which attack the issue from multiple angles.

One route is for the federal government to adopt licensing and zoning strategies that would “restrict the density, type, and location of tobacco retailers.”[iv] Licensing laws would require businesses to hold a license to sell tobacco. Zoning laws would control the location of tobacco retailers. If the federal government set licensing and zoning requirements, it would help states with weaker tobacco laws combat young people smoking. For example, zoning laws could cap the number of retailers in each area or stop retailers from locating near schools. At the same time, licensing laws could prevent the sale of tobacco at pharmacies and other similar retailers. With the implementation of licensing and zoning regulations, smoking rates would decline due to a decrease in people’s proximity to tobacco products, a reduction of social norms about tobacco use, and lower tobacco brand recognition.

Another viable option is to remove all flavored tobacco products from the marketplace. Youth smokers gravitate towards flavored tobacco because of its appealing taste and addictiveness. In 2020, over 80% of high school students who smoked e-cigarettes were using flavored e-cigarettes.[v] Moreover, most youth smokers began using tobacco by consuming flavored products. In November 2019, Massachusetts became the first state to prohibit the sale of flavored e-cigarettes.[vi] Several states have followed suit in banning the sale of flavored e-cigarettes, such as New York, New Jersey, and Rhode Island.[vii] A 2022 study found that there was a reduction in e-cigarette sales in states which banned flavored e-cigarettes.[viii] Evidently, these states have found success in reducing smoking among young people. If the federal government were to adopt similar policies to those applied by the states, it would likely cause a significant decrease in youth smokers across the United States.

Lastly, a federally regulated tax on e-cigarettes could be another alternative for curbing young people’s use of e-cigarettes. In theory, a tax on e-cigarettes would raise the overall price, dissuading young people from buying their first e-cigarette or continuing to purchase e-cigarettes. As of June 30, 2022, thirty states had placed a tax on e-cigarettes; however, the federal government taxes only cigarettes.[ix] When crafting their tax, the states considered a multitude of factors to ensure the tax reduced e-cigarette use amongst young people. For instance, the e-cigarette tax could be based on the amount of nicotine in the e-cigarette, the price of the e-cigarette, or whether the e-cigarette is refillable.[x]Additionally, several states tax the wholesaler rather than the retailer. If the federal government levied a tax on e-cigarettes, it would benefit from evaluating various state policies on taxing e-cigarettes. In summary, the federal tax would protect young people in states that do not currently have a tax on e-cigarettes and reduce young people’s consumption of e-cigarettes by financially disincentivizing the purchase of e-cigarettes.

Overall, the Federal T-21 Law has scratched the surface of the policies needed to stop America’s youth from developing lifelong and devastating addictions to tobacco. The problem, coupled with a fast-changing tobacco market, creates an issue that the notoriously slow federal government cannot solve quickly or easily. For now, the public must urge the federal government and state governments to adopt more thorough, evidence-based, and forward-thinking laws.

[i] Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Surgeon General’s Advisory on E-cigarette Use Among Youth, Ctr. for Disease Control and Prevention (Dec. 2018), https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/basic_information/e-cigarettes/surgeon-general-advisory/index.html.

[ii] Teresa W. Wang, PhD, et al., Tobacco Product Use and Associated Factors Among Middle and High School Students — United States, 2019, Ctr. for Disease Control and Prevention (Dec. 6, 2019), https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/68/ss/ss6812a1.htm?s_cid=ss6812a1_w.

[iii] Andrea S. Gentzke, PhD, et al., Tobacco Product Use and Associated Factors Among Middle and High School Students — National Youth Tobacco Survey, United States, 2021, Ctr. for Disease Control and Prevention (Mar. 11, 2022), https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/ss/ss7105a1.htm.

[iv] CounterTobacco.org, Licensing, Zoning, and Retailer Density, CounterTobacco.org, https://countertobacco.org/policy/licensing-and-zoning/ (last visited Sept. 22, 2022).

[v] American Lung Association, Federal Priorities for the 117th Congress: Tobacco, Am. Lung Ass’n https://www.lung.org/policy-advocacy/federal-action-plan/tobacco-priorities (last updated May 23, 2022).

[vi] Tobacco Free Kids, U.S. State and Local Issues Ending the Sale of Flavored Tobacco Products, Tobacco Free Kidshttps://www.tobaccofreekids.org/what-we-do/us/flavored-tobacco-products (last updated Apr. 11, 2022).

[vii] Id.

[viii] Fatma Romeh M. Ali, PhD, et al., Evaluation of Statewide Restrictions on Flavored e-Cigarette Sales in the US From 2014 to 2020, Jama Network (Feb. 10, 2022), https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2788925.

[ix] Center for Disease Control and Prevention, STATE System E-Cigarette Fact Sheet, Ctr. for Disease Control and Preventionhttps://www.cdc.gov/statesystem/factsheets/ecigarette/ECigarette.html (last updated July 22, 2022).

[x] Id.