中銀文化
客戶至上、專業合作、勤勉盡責、優質高效
研究 | 禁止電子煙雙清包賠
時間：2024.09.09 作者：北京中銀（深圳）律師事務所 鄭明偉、蔣玉彬
分享到：
禁止電子煙雙清包賠
Prohibition of Double Customs Clearance and Full Compensation for E-cigarettes
前言
Introduction
2024年8月11日，在國家煙草專賣局修訂印發的《電子煙物流管理細則》中，新增第十六條第二款明確禁止電子煙物流服務供應商提供任何旨在繞開境內外監管體系的服務。這一新增條款不僅關系到物流服務供應商的責任邊界，還直接影響到境內外客戶的切身利益，同時也反映了國內電子煙監管部門對電子煙行業規范化管理的堅定立場。筆者將在本文詳細解讀這一條款的立法背景、目的及其對行業的影響。
In the revised "Electronic Cigarette Logistics Management Regulations" issued by the State Tobacco Monopoly Administration of China on August 11, 2024, a new provision, Paragraph 2 of Article 16, has been added, which explicitly prohibits e-cigarette logistics service providers from offering any services aimed at bypassing domestic and international regulatory systems. This new provision not only pertains to the responsibilities of logistics service providers but also directly affects the interests of both domestic and international customers. It also reflects the determination of China’s e-cigarette regulatory authorities on ensuring compliance in the e-cigarette industry. This article will provide a detailed interpretation of the legislative background, purpose, and impact of this provision on the industry.
一、條款背景及制定目的
1.Background and Purpose of the Provision
《電子煙物流管理細則》第十六條第二款的出臺，主要針對的是國內電子煙行業在國際市場，尤其是美國市場中存在的合規風險。近年來，美國食品藥品監督管理局（FDA）對多個中國電子煙品牌采取了嚴厲的監管措施，包括發出警告信和將產品列入進口警報紅名單。這些措施的主要原因之一是中國電子煙企業無視美國監管，持續通過瞞報等方式將電子煙產品非法輸入美國。FDA的監管措施直接導致相關產品實際上無法通過正常的報關程序進入美國市場。面對這種困境，一些國內電子煙企業采取了對應的規避措施，其中最為常見的就是要求電子煙物流服務供應商提供"雙清包賠"服務，即要求物流公司承擔中美兩國的報關、清關責任，并在貨物被海關扣押或沒收時賠償全額貨值。這種做法雖然在短期內可能幫助電子煙企業維持出口量，增加創匯，但實際上是一種極具風險的灰色操作。它不僅將電子煙企業的經營風險不當轉嫁給了物流公司，更是在本質上反復觸碰境外監管的底線，從而可能引發更為嚴厲的反制措施。正如美國的雷諾煙草公司（R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company）以及雷諾電子煙公司（R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company）于2023年10月13日向美國國際貿易委員會（United States International Trade Commission，ITC）提出“337調查”申請，指控多個中國品牌的一次性電子煙產品在進口貿易中存在美國《1930年關稅法》第337條中的不正當競爭方式和不公平行為，因此請求ITC發布普遍排除令和永久性禁令，從而限制所有中國一次性電子煙進入美國境內。
The introduction of Paragraph 2 of Article 16 in the "Electronic Cigarette Logistics Management Regulations" primarily targets the compliance risks faced by the domestic e-cigarette industry in international markets, especially in the United States. In recent years, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has taken strict regulatory measures against several Chinese e-cigarette brands, including issuing warning letters and placing products on the Import Alert. One of the main reasons for these actions is that Chinese e-cigarette companies have ignored U.S. regulations and continued to illegally import e-cigarette products into the U.S. through false declarations. The FDA's regulatory measures have made it impossible for these products to pass through the regular customs clearance process into the U.S.. In response to this predicament, some domestic e-cigarette companies have taken corresponding measures to evade regulation, the most common of which is requiring e-cigarette logistics service providers to offer "Double Customs Clearance with Full Compensation" services. This means that logistics companies take responsibility for customs clearance in both China and the U.S. and compensate the full value of goods if they are seized or confiscated by customs. While this approach may temporarily help e-cigarette companies maintain export volumes and increase foreign exchange earnings, it is essentially a highly risky operation. It not only shifts the business risks of e-cigarette companies to logistics companies but also repeatedly challenges overseas regulatory policies, which could potentially trigger more severe measures. For instance, on October 13, 2023, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company filed a "Section 337 investigation" with the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), accusing several Chinese brands of engaging in unfair competition and unfair practices under Section 337 of the U.S. Tariff Act of 1930 in their import trade, and requesting the ITC to issue a general exclusion order and a permanent injunction to restrict all Chinese disposable e-cigarettes from entering the U.S. market.
正是在這樣的背景下，國家煙草專賣局認真考慮了這一新的條款。其制定目的主要體現在兩個方面：首先，監管機構旨在督促電子煙公司樹立更強的合規意識。面對日益嚴格的國際監管環境，尤其是美國等主要市場的法律要求，電子煙企業需要摒棄僥幸心理，積極應對合規挑戰，從根本上提升電子煙行業的規范性和競爭力。其次，通過明確禁止繞開監管的行為，國內監管機構向國際社會展示了中國在規范電子煙出口的決心，有助于改善中國電子煙產品在國際市場的形象，為行業的長遠發展創造有利條件。第十六條第二款的設立還與《關于推動出口電子煙產品質量保證體系建設的指引》第十四條的規定相呼應。后者要求，當出口電子煙產品因質量安全問題被國際組織或境外政府機構通報時，企業應當立即向所在地煙草專賣局報告，并接受依法相關核查處理。這兩項規定共同構建了一個鼓勵主動合規、及時糾錯的監管框架，進一步推動電子煙行業的規范化發展。
In this context, the State Tobacco Monopoly Administration carefully considered this new provision. The main objectives of its formulation are reflected in two aspects: First, regulatory authorities aim to encourage e-cigarette companies to develop a stronger sense of compliance. Facing increasingly stringent international regulatory environments, particularly the legal requirements of major markets like the U.S., e-cigarette companies need to abandon the mindset of relying on luck, actively respond to compliance challenges, and fundamentally improve the compliance and competitiveness of the e-cigarette industry. Second, by clearly prohibiting regulatory evasion behaviors, domestic regulatory authorities are signaling to the international community China's determination to regulate e-cigarette exports, which will help improve the image of Chinese e-cigarette products in the international market and create favorable conditions for the long-term development of the industry. The establishment of Paragraph 2 of Article 16 also coordinates with the provision of Article 14 of the "Guidelines for Promoting the Building of Quality Assurance Systems for Exported Electronic Cigarette Products"， which states that "Where a notice of criticism regarding exported e-cigarette products is issued by international organizations and overseas government agencies due to any quality or safety problem, the enterprise shall immediately report to the local Tobacco Monopoly Administration, and the relevant enterprise shall accept the verification and disposition organized by the Tobacco Monopoly Administration in accordance with the law". These two regulations together form a regulatory framework that encourages proactive compliance and timely correction, further promoting the well- regulated development of the e-cigarette industry.
二、“雙清包賠”條款可能無效
2.The Possible Invalidity of "Double Customs Clearance with Full Compensation" Clauses
《電子煙物流管理細則》第十六條第二款的實施，可能會對法院在審理物流公司與電子煙企業之間的合同糾紛時產生影響，尤其是在涉及規避監管的合同條款的效力認定方面。就像當年證券市場的“場外配資”，從一開始證監會通過發布《關于加強證券公司信息系統外部接入管理的通知》（證監辦發[2015]35號）、《關于清理整頓違法從事證券業務活動的意見》（證監會公告[2015]19號）等文件，明確要求清理整頓場外配資業務，到最終最高人民法院在2019年出臺的《全國法院民商事審判工作會議紀要》（九民紀要）中認定場外配資合同認定因規避金融監管而無效，法院不再支持用資人和配資方基于場外配資合同主張利益或賠償。類似于“場外配資”的處理邏輯可能會也會在電子煙行業中得到應用。
The implementation of Paragraph 2 of Article 16 of the "Electronic Cigarette Logistics Management Regulations" may influence how courts handle contractual disputes between logistics companies and e-cigarette enterprises, especially regarding the validity of contractual clauses that involve regulatory evasion. Similar to the handling of "Shadow Margin Financing" in the securities market, where the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) initially issued documents such as the "Notice on Strengthening the Administration of External Access of Information Systems of Securities Companies" (No. 35 [2015], CSRC) and the "Opinions on an Overhaul regarding Illegal Securities Business Activities " (No. 19 [2015], CSRC), explicitly requiring the cleanup and rectification of shadow margin financing activities, the Supreme People's Court ultimately determined in its 2019 "Notice by the Supreme People's Court on Issuing the Minutes of the National Court Work Conference for Civil and Commercial Trials 2019 " (2019 Ninth Conference Minutes) that shadow margin financing contracts are invalid due to evasion of financial regulations. As a result, courts no longer support claims from capital providers or financing parties based on such contracts. A similar logic may also be applied in the e-cigarette industry.
具體而言，第十六條第二款的實施可能使法院對“雙清包賠”等條款性質的認定從單純地規避行業監管的層面上升至違背公序良俗的層面，從而認定這些條款無效。根據《民法典》第一百五十三條第二款規定，違背公序良俗的民事法律行為無效。如果電子煙企業與物流公司簽訂的合同中包含“包賠”或其他形式的規避監管的條款，未來法院在審理相關糾紛時，可能會基于這些條款存在破壞市場秩序、違背公序良俗之情形，判定其無效，電子煙企業將喪失依據這些無效條款向物流公司主張賠償的權利。
Specifically, the implementation of Paragraph 2 of Article 16 may lead courts to elevate the nature of "Double Customs Clearance with Full Compensation" clauses from merely evading industry regulation to offending public order and good morals, thereby rendering these clauses invalid. According to Article 153, Paragraph 2, of the Civil Code,a civil juristic act that offends the public order and good morals is invalid. If contracts between e-cigarette companies and logistics companies contain "Double Customs Clearance with Full Compensation" or other forms of regulatory evasion clauses, courts may, in future disputes, determine that these clauses are invalid based on their potential to disrupt market order and offend public order and good morals, thereby depriving e-cigarette companies of the right to claim compensation from logistics companies based on these invalid clauses.
三、扭轉局勢：擊退劣幣，守護良幣
3.Reversing the Situation: Protecting Good Currency and Eliminating Bad Currency
第十六條第二款無疑將推動中國電子煙行業向更加規范、合法的方向發展，也有望扭轉目前電子煙市場“劣幣驅逐良幣”的局面。以悅刻RELX為例，為了合規經營幾乎要退出美國市場，然而那些不合規、繞開監管的品牌卻在美國市場上風生水起，整體市場環境對合規企業不公平。實施第十六條第二款后，那些始終堅持合規經營、注重產品質量的企業將獲得更多發展機會，而依賴灰色地帶操作的企業則可能面臨淘汰，從而促進行業整體的優勝劣汰。此外，通過主動規范電子煙出口行為，也有利于改善國內與主要進口國的貿易關系，減少貿易摩擦，為電子煙產業創造更加有利的國際環境。這不僅有利于電子煙行業本身，也將為其他出口導向型產業樹立良好典范。
Paragraph 2 of Article 16 will undoubtedly push China's e-cigarette industry to develop toward a more regulated direction and is expected to reverse the current situation where "bad currency drives out good currency" in the e-cigarette market. Take RELX as an example: the company almost exited the U.S. market to comply with regulations, while non-compliant brands that circumvent regulations have thrived in the U.S. market, creating an unfair market environment for compliant companies. After the implementation of Paragraph 2 of Article 16, companies that have consistently adhered to compliance and focused on product quality will have more opportunities for development, while those relying on illegal practices may face elimination, thereby promoting the survival of the fittest in the industry. Moreover, by actively regulating e-cigarette export behavior, it will help improve domestic trade relations with major importing countries, reduce trade friction, and create a more favorable international environment for the e-cigarette industry. This is not only beneficial to the e-cigarette industry itself but will also set a good example for other export-oriented industries.
總的來說，《電子煙物流管理細則》第十六條第二款的設立，體現了監管部門對電子煙行業規范化、國際化發展的決心。需要指出的是，盡管合規的過程看似復雜，但實際上并不是不可克服的困難。例如，在美國，電子煙企業提交PMTA（Pre-Market Tobacco Application）后，FDA會進行形式審查并分配STN代碼（Submission Tracking Number）。相關電子煙產品即可憑借STN代碼合規地進入美國市場。因此，盡管合規要求嚴格，但通過正確的申請和審核流程，電子煙企業完全可以合規進入市場。盡管短期內可能帶來一些陣痛，但從長遠來看，這將有利于中國電子煙行業的健康可持續發展，提升中國電子煙產品在國際市場的競爭力和聲譽。面對電子煙物流管理的這一新規，電子煙企業應當積極調整經營策略，主動適應合規要求，畢竟“雙清包賠”已經被規則否定，這條路會越走越難。
In conclusion, the establishment of Paragraph 2 of Article 16 of the "Electronic Cigarette Logistics Management Regulations" reflects the regulatory authorities' determination to ensure the industry’s compliance and promote its international development. It is worth noting that although the compliance process may seem complex, it is not an insurmountable challenge. For example, in the U.S., after e-cigarette companies submit a Pre-Market Tobacco Application (PMTA), the FDA conducts a formal review and assigns an STN(Submission Tracking Number). Related e-cigarette products can then enter the U.S. market compliantly using the STN. Therefore, although compliance requirements are stringent, e-cigarette companies can fully comply with market entry requirements through proper application and review processes. While this may cause some short-term difficulties, it will ultimately benefit the healthy and sustainable development of China’s e-cigarette industry, boosting the competitiveness and reputation of Chinese e-cigarette products in the international market. In response to this new regulation on e-cigarette logistics management, e-cigarette companies should actively adjust their business strategies and proactively adapt to compliance requirements, as "Double Customs Clearance with Full Compensation" has already been negated by the regulations, the path of non-compliance will become increasingly difficult.
中銀深圳其他電子煙相關文章推薦：
解讀 | 美國電子煙法律監管體系與中國電子煙企業合規
解讀 | 從手機這十年展望電子煙出海征途
解讀 | 雷諾“337調查”簡析之一：指控電子煙企業虛假廣告和宣傳
解讀 | 雷諾“337調查”簡析之二：指控電子煙企業違反PACT Act
解讀 | 電子煙企業的美國FDA進口警報及移除申請指引（三）
解讀 | 三問FDA“電子煙警告信”：為什么發？發給誰？如何應對？
解讀 | 美國經銷商違規銷售被起訴，中國電子煙企業應如何應對？
律師介紹
