While the bill for 2026 keeps moving forward, the battle to save the US Hemp Industry has heated up.
As seen in a growing number of US states taking action to regulate the booming ‘intoxicating hemp industry’, Federal efforts to do so have significantly overreached, and now threaten to decimate the non-intoxicating and industrial hemp industry across the country.
Last week MEDCAN24 Reports stated that a controversial bill to redefine hemp in federal law, which was led by Republicans, had passed through the Republican-led US House Committee. This could push the industry closer towards ruin.
The House Appropriations Committee’s Fiscal Year 2020 agriculture funding bill is at the core of this controversy.
The original draft redefined hemp in a way that would exclude any product containing a ‘quantifiable’ amount of THC or cannabinoids with similar effects, irrespective of the widely accepted 0.3% THC limit for industrial hemp established under the 2018 Farm Bill.
After industry backlash, the committee adopted a ‘manager’s amendment’ clarifying that non-intoxicating hemp products with only trace THC were not intended to be affected.
Industry leaders claim that despite the attempts to clarify the situation, this did little to ease concerns and only added confusion.
Jonathan Miller is the General Counsel for the US Hemp Roundtable. He said, “The language of the report has no legal binding impact and FDA has ignored similar language in the previous.”
This threatens not only to eliminate intoxicating hemp but also a large swathe non-intoxicating CBD product that millions depend on.
Other people argue that many hemp-based products, even those not intoxicating, are likely to fall under the vague terms of this bill.
Analysts are also concerned about a repetition of the regulatory ambiguity which followed the 2018 Farm Bill. This legislation, originally intended to encourage industrial hemp production, inadvertently created a boom in the market for psychoactive hemp derivatives, such as delta-8-THC.
Viridian Capital Advisors in a 16th of June briefing highlighted the financial stakes. In a June 16 briefing, Viridian Capital Advisors highlighted the economic stakes.
“This isn’t the windfall of $19 billion that some cannabis operators were hoping for,” Viridian said. Many consumers will likely return to the illegal market, rather than deal with higher prices, difficult access or medical certification requirements.
States like Texas with limited medical marijuana programs are expected to experience the least shift towards legal cannabis. Recreational states could capture as much as half of the lost hemp sales. However, enforcement issues and consumer habits are a major obstacle. The Viridian report concluded that a significant segment of consumers values convenience and price over perceived safety.
This regulatory drive has drawn criticism from outside the hemp industry. The Wine & Spirits Wholesalers of America (WSWA), a major alcohol lobby, issued a rare rebuke of the proposed changes, warning that an overcorrection could drive intoxicating products underground.
Francis Creighton of the WSWA said, “Congress creates even more chaos on the marketplace.” He urged lawmakers to allow the states to regulate their markets rather than impose sweeping Federal bans.
Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD), chair of the appropriations subcommittee overseeing agriculture and FDA funding, defended the language as necessary to close ‘the hemp loophole’ that has led to ‘the proliferation of intoxicating cannabinoid products… in gas stations nationwide under the false guise of being USDA-approved.’ The office of Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD) insists that the language strikes a balanced between protecting industrial hemp and closing loopholes.
The measure’s future remains in doubt, however, as Congress is now on recess. A final vote has also been delayed. One constant is that, as legislative language continues to evolve, a fast-growing, highly fragmented sector faces the greatest threat it has ever faced.