The encyclopedia · Advertising & PR · Marketing decision · 2024
FLARE and SHFT claimed 'full compliance' online — DTI said neither had a license
Two vape brands posted they were 'fully compliant' in the Philippines. DTI: neither holds a PS license — only nine brands do — and named the ads misleading.
FLARE · SHFT · 2024-12-11
What happened
In December 2024, two vape brands took to social media to assert their regulatory standing in the Philippines. FLARE falsely claimed it was in full compliance with government regulations; SHFT shared unauthorized photos of DTI personnel, implying the department's endorsement. Neither brand held a valid Philippine Standard (PS) License, the authorisation required to sell vape products in the Philippine market.
The Department of Trade and Industry, through its Office for the Special Mandate on Vaporized Nicotine and Non-Nicotine Products (OSMV), firmly refuted both brands: the posts were misleading, misrepresented the department's role, and breached consumer protection law. DTI listed the nine brands that did hold valid PS licenses — DON BARS, KLIQ, ONE BAR, PHANTOM VAPE, RELX, TOMORO, TRUEZ, VAGEND and X-VAPE — and urged consumers to report errant retailers.
Cited were Republic Act 7394, the Consumer Act, which prohibits false, deceptive or misleading advertising, and Department Administrative Order No. 2 s.2007, which forbids disseminating false information or concealing material facts in ads. DTI warned that failing to secure and maintain PS licenses carries penalties or suspension of trading operations.
Why it happened
- Claiming compliance you don't hold is a false ad: FLARE posted 'full compliance' without the mandatory PS license.
- Borrowing a regulator's image implies endorsement: SHFT's unauthorized photos of DTI staff misrepresented the department's role.
- The refutation was public and specific: DTI didn't just deny — it published the list of nine brands that actually were licensed.
The lesson
Don't advertise compliance you lack: FLARE claimed 'full compliance', SHFT implied DTI endorsement — DTI published the nine brands that actually were licensed and cited both for misleading ads.
Aftermath
DTI's statement, reported 11 December 2024, said non-compliance with PS license requirements could bring penalties or suspension of trading operations, and urged consumers to report errant retailers. Only nine brands held valid PS licenses at the time.
Sources
- The PhilBizNews: DTI warns vs misleading claims by vape brands FLARE and SHFT (11 December 2024)
- Daily Tribune: DTI disputes misleading claims by vape companies, urges consumer vigilance (11 December 2024)
spotted an error? The club wants to know.
More like this
Oatside disguised an ad as a senior job — then told applicants its CMO was four years old
San Mig Coffee scrubbed its own campaign rather than pick a side in a breakup
A livestream sold ordinary food as a cure for joint pain and stomach bacteria
Somewhere, someone solved the problem this company failed at. 2nd Opinion →

Comments · 0
Sign in to join the comments.