26 milligrams of menthol, zero CBD: why Europe's CBD vapes are disappearing

Two countries, two routes, the same outcome: in Czechia, vapes containing cannabinoids have been off the market since 1 July 2026, CBD included. In Germany, a draft regulation from the Federal Ministry of Agriculture would ban cannabidiol in e-cigarettes and refill containers outright. Both countries have to get past a test the European Court of Justice set out in 2020.

What Germany is planning

The instrument is the "Fifth Regulation amending the Tobacco Products Regulation" in the version of 5 October 2026. It introduces a new definition of "cannabinoids" in § 27a No. 1: substances that can bind to receptors of the endocannabinoid system. In parallel, Annex 2 No. 1 letter e is to be extended by "cannabinoids, including cannabidiol (CBD, CAS no. 13956-29-1), and preparations of the aforementioned substances" as prohibited ingredients. Together with § 28(1), that amounts to a complete ban on placing such e-cigarettes and refill containers on the market.

It would affect not only CBD but also other non-intoxicating natural cannabinoids. The German cannabis industry association BvCW, which says it represents more than 90 companies, submitted its comments on 27 October.

Important for reading this: a ministry draft is not law. It is the working state of a ministry. Sales of CBD liquids in Germany are therefore not prohibited at present.

The reasoning targets advertising, not toxicology

What the ban is justified with is notable. According to the association's submission, the draft rests on the growing confusion of product developments, on purchase incentives, on health-related communication patterns and on the so-called halo effect. It cites advertising claims such as "physically relaxing", "stress-relieving" and "calming", plus statements that CBD is used for pain relief and as a sleep aid.

What the reasoning lacks is evidence of a concrete inhalation-toxicological risk from CBD. The draft therefore primarily addresses how these products are talked about, and derives a ban on the substance from that.

The association's offer

The BvCW rejects the outright ban but backs the objective. Its proposal has six points, and one is unusual: the association suggests extending the advertising ban in § 21(1) No. 1 of the Tobacco Products Act to e-cigarettes and refill containers. That would capture statements creating the impression of a favourable influence on bodily functions, performance or wellbeing. It explicitly names "relaxing", "stress-relieving" and "BOOSTER".

An industry association voluntarily asking for stricter advertising rules for its own members is not an everyday event. The logic: if the problem is the advertising, regulate the advertising rather than make the substance disappear.

Further demands: targeted bans at most for specific synthetic cannabimimetics and for intoxicating or high-potency semi-synthetic cannabinoids; an EU-wide maximum level for CBD instead of a ban if the assessment warrants it; and clarification that medical cannabis and medicinal products remain untouched.

Three of four references lead nowhere

The most checkable objection concerns the drafting. The planned definition exempts cannabinoids "within the meaning of" four laws: the Consumer Cannabis Act, the Medical Cannabis Act, the Narcotics Act and the New Psychoactive Substances Act. But of those four, only the Consumer Cannabis Act actually defines the term at all, in § 1 No. 1. The Medical Cannabis Act defines only "cannabis for medical purposes" in § 2. The Narcotics Act does not use the term as a definition of its own. The New Psychoactive Substances Act knows only the structurally defined group of cannabimimetics.

So the reference leads nowhere in three of four cases. On top of that there is a contradiction inside the draft: on its wording, natural CBD can appear as a cannabinoid covered by the Consumer Cannabis Act and therefore exempt, while CBD at the same time appears expressly in Annex 2 as a prohibited substance. Whether CBD lawfully extracted from industrial hemp is now banned is not answered by the draft, on the association's reading.

The comparison the draft supplies itself

The European law section rests on the Kanavape judgment of the European Court of Justice of 19 November 2020 (C-663/18). Under it, a member state must demonstrate an actual risk to public health on the basis of the latest scientific knowledge in order to justify a marketing ban. The precautionary principle supports measures even under scientific uncertainty, but not on the basis of purely hypothetical considerations.

The sharpest point is coherence. The same draft grants menthol a maximum of 26 milligrams per millilitre, although menthol also carries a pronounced wellbeing image, while CBD is banned outright. The maximum-level model the draft chooses for eleven other substances in Annex 2a was, according to the association, never even examined for cannabinoids. Under "alternatives" the draft states "none", no sunset clause or evaluation is planned, and the compliance cost for business sits in the document as an unfilled placeholder.

There is also the legal basis. Nicotine-free e-cigarettes do not fall under Article 20 of the EU Tobacco Products Directive, which by its wording covers only nicotine-containing liquids. They fall under tobacco law solely through the national extension in § 1 of the Tobacco Products Act. A national substance ban on nicotine-free CBD liquids therefore measures directly against the free movement of goods under Articles 34 and 36 TFEU.

What already applies today

Perhaps the strongest objection is a precedent. § 13(1) No. 3 of the Tobacco Products Act already requires that liquids contain, besides nicotine, only ingredients that pose no risk to human health in heated and unheated form. On that basis the Düsseldorf Administrative Court confirmed on 21 February 2024 (26 K 1345/23) the seizure of liquids containing hexahydrocannabinol, back then before HHC came under the New Psychoactive Substances Act.

There is also a buffer few people have on their radar: manufacturers and importers must notify e-cigarettes and refill containers through the European EU-CEG portal at least six months before the planned placing on the market, including ingredient, quantity and toxicological data. Authorities therefore have a legally prescribed review period before a product reaches the market at all.

The European comparison: Czechia moved first

Germany is not alone in this, which makes it more interesting. In Czechia it has been prohibited since 1 July 2026 to place vapes, e-liquids and refill containers containing cannabinoids on the market, sell them or otherwise handle them. That expressly includes CBD, CBG and CBN. The decisive factor is the product form: the ban hits vape products, not automatically all cannabinoid-containing goods such as oils or cosmetics.

A pattern is emerging that is catching on in the EU. A country that goes very far on cannabis itself bans everything on vapes. Czechia has allowed adults since 2026 to grow up to three plants and possess defined quantities, while forgoing a regulated market. And it simultaneously closes the product form vape for all cannabinoids.

There is no uniform EU rule. The Tobacco Products Directive 2014/40/EU regulates nicotine-containing liquids in Article 20, with 20 milligrams of nicotine per millilitre, 2 millilitre tank volume and 10 millilitre refill containers. Cannabinoids do not appear in it. The Commission presented its evaluation report on the directive on 2 April 2026 and launched a public consultation on the revision in May, which ran until 14 August 2026. A proposal for the successor rules was announced for the end of 2026. Whether cannabinoids get a place of their own in it is open.

What this means for the market

For CBD liquids in Germany, nothing for now. The draft is not in force and the final version is open. Anyone trading in them should follow the process, because in the present version the product would not be restricted but off the market. The draft names no transition period for cannabinoids, according to the association, while transition rules are provided for other substances.

The direction is what is interesting. The EU is regulating intoxicating cannabinoids ever more tightly, HHC is now internationally controlled, and in France the medicines agency ANSM has added further new cannabinoids to the narcotics list. At the same time, non-intoxicating substances are now being drawn in too, via the detour of product form and advertising. Anyone using CBD vapes notices it first on the shelf.

Open questions

• Will the ministry hold to the outright ban, and how will it then justify the missing risk assessment?
• Will the reference to the four laws be repaired in drafting terms, or does the contradiction between exemption and Annex 2 remain?
• Will there be a lawsuit? With a substance ban and no quantified risk, the road to Luxembourg is mapped out.
• And the bigger question: do cannabinoids get their own article in the revised Tobacco Products Directive, or does it stay with 27 national solo efforts?

Facts and interpretation: The draft, the paragraphs, the BvCW submission of 27 October 2026 and the argumentation are reproduced as reported by Hanf Magazin on 9 November 2026; I did not see the draft itself. The statement that this is not applicable law is established. The Czech ban from 1 July 2026 and the exemption for oils and cosmetics rest on a European market overview, not on the Czech legal text. The assessment that the draft could fail on coherence and free movement of goods is the association's legal view, not a decision. This article is not legal advice and contains no recommendation to use.

Sources: Hanf Magazin on the draft and the BvCW submission; Canatura, European overview of vape bans; European Commission, e-cigarettes and Article 20 TPD. As of 11 November 2026.