A landmark bill to ban the younger generation from ever smoking has cleared its first hurdle in the House of Commons.
The legislation, backed by 415 to 47, means anyone born after 1 January 2009 will be prevented from buying tobacco if it ultimately becomes law.
Before then, the bill must go through further parliamentary stages, with MPs able to suggest amendments to any aspects they don’t like.
Other measures being proposed include a total ban on vape advertising and sponsorship, with a possible ban on the sale of sweet vape flavours, subject to consultation.
While tonight’s numbers indicate large cross-party support, there was some strong criticism from Conservative, Liberal Democrat and Reform UK MPs, who raised concerns about “civil liberties”.
The division list showed Tory leader Kemi Badenoch voted against the measure, having previously said “people born a day apart will have permanently different rights”.
Former home secretary Suella Braverman, shadow immigration minister Robert Jenrick, and Sir Iain Duncan Smith are among the other high-profile Conservatives who also didn’t back the bill.
More from Politics
While most Liberal Democrats did vote to support the bill, the party’s health spokeswoman Helen Morgan said: “The introduction of a phased smoking ban is problematic and not because Liberal Democrats want to see people smoke themselves into an early grave – far from it – but because it raises issues of practicality and raises issues of civil liberties.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:26
Pupils ‘can’t last a lesson’ without a vape
Known as the Tobacco and Vapes Bill, it was first proposed by Rishi Sunak when he was prime minister but failed to make its way to the House of Commons after he called the general election, which he lost.
Mr Sunak was recorded as having not voted tonight, as was the case for Nigel Farage – though the rest of the Reform UK MPs were against it.
He also told MPs it would “come down on the vaping industry like a ton of bricks to prevent a new generation from getting hooked on nicotine”.
Call for levy on tobacco products
A wide-range of views were heard during the debate, which was a free vote for Tory MPs – meaning they could side with their conscience and not party lines.
Conservative MP Bob Blackman called for the legislation to go further to include a levy on tobacco companies’ profits to hold them responsible “for the blight on our population’s health”.
Image: Health Secretary Wes Streeting. Pic: PA
“Both of my parents died from smoking-related cancer. My late mother was only 47, and she was a very heavy smoker all her life. I was then left as a 23-year-old with three younger sisters to bring up as a family,” he said.
Former health secretary Victoria Atkins was also among the 23 Conservatives who backed the bill, while 35 Tories were listed as voting against.
The legislation includes powers to introduce a licencing scheme for retailers to sell tobacco, vape and nicotine products in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
Shopkeepers found to be selling to anyone under age will receive on-the-spot fines of £200.
Mr Streeting said the government “will consult on banning smoking outside schools, hospitals and in playgrounds, protecting children and vulnerable people from the harms of second-hand smoke”, as part of the bill.
For years, launching a crypto project in the United States has been a maze of uncertainty. Legal ambiguity and a hostile regulatory environment have driven founders offshore, turning places like Switzerland and the Cayman Islands into global hubs for blockchain innovation.
With Trump’s election, things finally started to change, with a US administration openly declaring its intention to be crypto-friendly. Yet, despite the rhetoric, nothing concrete has changed so far.
Launching a crypto project in the US is just as difficult as ever. US regulatory agencies continue to offer nothing but vague threats and “regulation by enforcement” lawsuits. America wants to be a leader in crypto, but, even under the Trump administration, it isn’t taking action to create the conditions that would make that happen.
Killing crypto in America
Every crypto project faces the same fundamental problem: Achieving decentralization is critical to avoid regulatory scrutiny, but until a project launches its token, a degree of centralization is unavoidable.
The SEC’s outdated Howey test ensures that nearly every legitimate crypto project gets classified as a security. The logic is self-defeating. Projects can’t decentralize without launching a token, but launching a token in the US instantly puts them in the SEC’s crosshairs.
This isn’t just a theoretical issue; it has real consequences. Liquidity providers, essential for all new token launches, won’t engage with US-based projects because they assume their tokens will be classified as securities. Centralized exchanges refuse to list tokens issued from US entities for the same reason. Even decentralized exchanges face pressure from their legal teams to avoid actively seeding liquidity for American projects. The result? US founders are boxed out of the global crypto economy before they even get started.
Offshore jurisdictions are winning
This regulatory failure has spawned an entire cottage industry of offshore legal firms specializing in setting up token-issuing entities. With its FINMA no-action letter system, Switzerland has become a hotbed for crypto projects because it offers one of the few structured ways to get legal clarity on a token’s classification. The Cayman Islands and British Virgin Islands have also established themselves as crypto safe havens, providing flexible corporate structures that allow projects to operate with far less regulatory risk.
The absurdity is that the actual work — the development, the hiring, the innovation — still happens in the US. The token issuance gets pushed offshore via “Associations” and “Foundations,” which serve non-profits operating independently of US-based development shops. American founders are forced to funnel money into unnecessary legal fees, overseas operators, and shell foundations to avoid the inevitable crackdown from US regulators. This isn’t just bad for crypto; it’s bad for America. Until it can be solved, the US will continue to hemorrhage talent, investment, and influence to less myopic jurisdictions.
Make America crypto-friendly
The US has spent years fumbling crypto policy, and now, even with an administration that claims to be pro-crypto, it’s still failing to deliver real change. The solution isn’t to promise capital gains tax exemptions on crypto, as some have suggested. That does little to ameliorate the punishing regulatory landscape US-based projects are forced to navigate. If the US truly wants to lead in crypto, it also must take the lead in providing regulatory clarity.
That means finally recognizing that the same regulations that have governed traditional financial markets can’t always be applied to crypto. The Howey test doesn’t work. Instead, the government must provide a new and functional legal framework for the crypto industry.
It’s time for US legislators and regulators to acknowledge that crypto tokens can’t achieve decentralization instantaneously and almost always require the efforts of a team of core contributors to bootstrap initial growth and development. The federal government must devise a version of the Howey test that does not automatically classify every new crypto token as a security but instead allows tokens a grace period to decentralize. In conjunction with this, the US must establish new protections to ensure insiders aren’t unduly benefiting from crypto projects while they scale.
In addition to swiftly ending the “regulation by enforcement” approach employed under Gary Gensler’s SEC, a tactic seemingly designed to gradually smother crypto activity in the US, the government must provide clear guidelines. It needs to be feasible for market makers to evaluate whether US tokens are commodities or securities with a degree of stability and predictability. This is the only way to end the blanket bans market makers have placed on US tokens and bring crypto development back to America.
America’s window of opportunity is closing
Crypto founders aren’t waiting for Washington to figure it out. Every day, without clear regulations, more crypto projects are incorporated offshore. The US doesn’t even need to “embrace” crypto. It just needs to stop actively driving it away.
If this administration truly wants to make the US the leader in crypto, it needs to move beyond campaign slogans and start fixing the fundamental problems that forced this industry offshore in the first place. And it needs to act fast.
Opinion by: Shane Molidor, Founder, Forgd.
This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman’s digital identity project World, formerly Worldcoin, is facing challenges in Indonesia amid local regulators temporarily suspending its registration certificates.
The Indonesian Ministry of Communications and Digital (Komdigi) has halted the Electronic System Operator Certificate Registration (TDPSE) for World and World ID over suspicious activity and alleged registration violations, the authority announced on May 4.
After the suspension, Komdigi plans to summon World’s local subsidiaries, PT Terang Bulan Abadi and PT Sandina Abadi Nusantara, to provide clarification on the alleged violations, it said.
According to a preliminary investigation, World’s PT Terang Bulan Abadi was allegedly operating without TDPSE, while PT Sandina Abadi Nusantara — the one World was using for providing its services — is allegedly involved in legal misrepresentation.
Indonesian law requires registration by all digital service providers
In the statement, Komdigi emphasized that all digital service providers in Indonesia must receive electronic registration in accordance with local laws.
Additionally, using another entity’s registration is considered a major breach of Indonesian digital operations law, the authority noted.
“Worldcoin services are recorded using TDPSE in the name of another legal entity, namely PT Sandina Abadi Nusantara,” Alexander Sabar, the Komdigi’s director general for digital supervision, said in the announcement, adding:
“Noncompliance with registration obligations and the use of the identity of another legal entity to carry out digital services is a serious violation.”
Community action required
According to Sabar, World’s temporary suspension in Indonesia is a measure taken to prevent potential risks to the community.
He mentioned that the digital ministry is committed to overseeing the digital ecosystem fairly and strictly to ensure the security of the national digital space.
Alexander Sabar is the head of Indonesia’s newly established Digital Space Monitoring Directorate General. Source: Komdigi
A proper supervision would require active participation from the community, Sabar added, stating:
“We invite the public to help maintain a safe and trusted digital space for all citizens. Komdigi also appeals to the public to remain vigilant against unauthorized digital services, and to immediately report suspected violations through the official public complaint channel.”
In the meantime, the community has apparently been divided over action by Komdigi.
“Good job Indonesia — at least somebody is standing up to that scam,” one commentator wrote on Reddit.
Others fired back, hinting at potential benefits stemming from World’s offering in Indonesia for the general public.
“If giving up your iris biometrics means you can feed your loved ones for a few weeks, that might be a trade worth making. In the end, it all depends on what matters most to you,” another Redditor said.
World’s latest news from Indonesia follows World’s debut in the United States in May 2025, with the platform rolling out its digital identity tech in six cities initially.
US President Donald Trump gave clashing answers to whether he has profited from the crypto memecoin he launched in January, just days before he re-entered the White House.
In a wide-ranging interview with Kristen Welker on NBC News’ Meet the Press released on May 4, Trump said he was “not profiting from anything” when asked to respond to critics who said he’s profiting from the presidency through the memecoin.
“So you’re not profiting off of the cryptocurrency at all?” Welker asked Trump.
“I haven’t even looked,” Trump admitted.
“But I’ll tell you what. Look, if I own stock in something and I do a good job, and the stock market goes up, I guess I’m profiting.”
Trump launched his memecoin, Official Trump (TRUMP), on Jan. 17, which hit a peak of $73.43 two days later, just a day before he was inaugurated as president on Jan. 20, according to CoinGecko.
The token has been in a steady decline since launch, but it surged late last month after its website offered top holders a chance to dine with Trump on May 22. It’s currently trading at $11.35, down nearly 85% from its peak.
Trump was apparently unaware of his token’s recent surge, repeatedly asking how much it was now worth.
Two companies, CIC Digital LLC, an affiliate of Trump’s sprawling Trump Organization, and Fight Fight Fight LLC, which is co-owned by CIC Digital, together own 80% of the token’s total 1 billion supply.
Most of those tokens are locked up and will be released over the next three years. The first unlock on April 18 saw 40 million tokens, worth $454 million, go to CIC Digital.
Trump-controlled entities own 80% of the TRUMP token supply, which will be released periodically until 2028. Source: Trump Meme
Trump’s memecoin project has made at least $350 million so far, according to a March analysis from the Financial Times, which found those behind the token made $314 million from selling them and $36 million from fees.
Trump has been criticized over his many crypto dealings, which his opponents say are a conflict of interest as he looks to unburden the sector from regulators.
Even those in his own party, Republican Senators Cynthia Lummis and Lisa Murkowski, have criticized Trump’s dinner offer to his top tokenholders.
Trump said during the interview that he would contribute his presidential salary “back to the government,” prompting Welker to ask if he would also contribute any potential crypto earnings.
“I never thought of that,” Trump answered. “I mean, should I contribute all of my real estate that I’ve owned for many years if it goes up a little bit because I’m president and doing a good job? I don’t think so.”
Trump reiterates crypto commitment
In a part of the interview, Trump made a meandering statement that reiterated his campaign promise to support crypto.
“I want crypto. I think crypto’s important because if we don’t do it, China’s going to. And it’s new, it’s very popular, it’s very hot,” he said.
Trump claimed former President Joe Biden “went after it violently, and then, before the election, he changed his tune entirely” to garner the crypto vote. Biden did not run against Trump in the last election, instead handing the baton to then-Vice President Kamala Harris.