MANILA, Philippines — The Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) recently proposed a draft order that would require all companies selling vaping products to obtain permits before advertising or promoting their products. At first glance, the policy appears to be a responsible step toward regulating a booming industry and protecting consumers, especially minors. Companies would need a Sales Promotion Permit (SPP) or Advertising Permit (AP) from the DTI’s Office for Special Mandates on Vaping (OSMV), submitted at least 30 days prior to campaigns. Each promotional material, regardless of brand or model, would require its own permit, accompanied by fees, taxes, and costs for DTI representatives to witness and certify campaigns.

But beneath the regulatory rhetoric lies a potentially heavy burden for small businesses. Startups and independent sellers could find themselves overwhelmed by permit fees, bureaucratic processes, and extra costs, creating an uneven playing field that favors larger, well-funded corporations. While protecting public health is undeniably important, the policy risks unintentionally penalizing those trying to compete fairly in the marketplace.

Moreover, this proposal raises broader questions about the balance between regulation and economic freedom. At what point does oversight become overreach? Stricter rules and age-gating may curb irresponsible marketing, but if compliance costs are too high, the policy may effectively shut out small entrepreneurs rather than protect the public. As the draft remains open for revisions, it is crucial for policymakers to consider these unintended consequences. The challenge lies not just in regulating vaping ads, but in doing so in a way that safeguards both public health and the livelihood of small businesses—a balance that is easier said than done. (Larawan: https://blogs.bcm.edu/)