As of September 15, 2026, the Philippines has not adopted a new, unified vape-tax regime for 2026. Multiple House bills remain under deliberation, while the Department of Finance (DOF) is still consulting stakeholders on the proposed ProGRESS Bill, so businesses should distinguish today’s enforceable rates from policy options that could still change.
The current framework uses two official categories: “Nicotine Salt or Salt Nicotine” and “Conventional Freebase or Classic Nicotine.” The Bureau of Customs’ 2026 excise-tax memo lists nicotine salt at ₱60.20 per milliliter and freebase nicotine at ₱69.46 per 10 milliliters. These are current rates, not proposal figures.
Republic Act No. 11346 introduced the excise-tax framework for vapor products. Republic Act No. 11467 later amended Section 144 and established separate tax schedules for the two categories. Beginning January 1, 2024, the rates under both schedules increase by 5% each year through revenue regulations. At the published 2026 rates, 10 milliliters would incur ₱602.00 (10 × ₱60.20) in excise tax for nicotine salt versus ₱69.46 for freebase nicotine. This illustrates the current tax gap; it is not a product-price forecast.
The House Committee on Ways and Means agenda shows that lawmakers are considering a family of bills rather than one agreed replacement. The as-filed text of HB 2618 proposes a unitary excise tax of ₱66.15 per milliliter for nicotine salt and freebase nicotine. It also proposes ₱120 per vapor product device, including disposable, refillable or other similar devices. These figures and definitions belong to HB 2618; they are not final law.
Other bills on the committee agenda take different approaches. HBs 5364 and 10289 propose abolishing the excise-tax distinction and revising the minimum-price calculation, while HB 6993 proposes differentiated rates. For businesses, those differences matter: a unitary liquid rate would change the relative tax treatment of the two nicotine categories, while a separate device levy would add another cost variable beyond liquid volume.
The DOF’s ProGRESS consultation update confirms that stakeholder input is still being gathered and will be considered as the proposed legislation is refined. Until a final text completes the legislative process and its effectivity and implementing arrangements are clear, there is no single proposed replacement rate that businesses should apply to future shipments.
Timing is another unresolved variable. Even if a bill specifies a future effectivity date, businesses would still need to check how final rules treat inventory already imported, tax-paid stock, product records and documentation changes. Assuming immediate application would be as risky as assuming no change.
Any pricing effect would depend on the enacted rate, product classification, device treatment and how much of the additional cost each part of the channel absorbs or passes on. A higher or differently structured tax does not, by itself, establish a specific retail-price increase.
Importers and brands may need to reassess salt and freebase portfolios if their relative tax treatment changes. If devices are taxed separately, kits, bundled products and liquid-only SKUs may require different cost treatment. Wholesalers and retailers would also need to align inventory records and channel documentation with the final definitions and transition rules. These possible outcomes remain unsettled while the proposals are under review.
Businesses can prepare without pricing against an unpassed bill. Maintain a SKU-level record of nicotine category, liquid volume, device type and the tax classification currently used. Build separate cost scenarios for the existing framework, a unitary liquid rate, a differentiated-rate structure and a possible device levy, but label every proposed input clearly.
Review which import, tax, registration and channel documents would need updating under each scenario. Set decision triggers around an approved bill text, enactment, an official effectivity date, and subsequent BIR or BOC implementation guidance. This keeps purchasing, inventory and pricing teams ready without making irreversible changes too early. For the wider regulatory context, monitor other Philippines vape policy developments separately from the tax debate.
Leave A Comment
Your email address will not be published.