Tenths Of A Percent Will Decide The Future Of Legal Hemp

The legality of hemp is a matter of margins. The Farm Bill legalized hemp-derived cannabinoids in 2018 as long as the plant remained below a threshold of 0.3% Delta-9 THC by dry weight. Cannabis cousin compounds – CBD, THCA, Delta-8 THC, and a slew of minor cannabinoids – were therefore legal provided they met this concentration for Delta-9. The floodgates opened and cannabis products were now available from gas stations to doorstep delivery.

But this rule isn't set in stone. The Farm Bill is meant to be updated every five years and, following two year-long delays, is scheduled for debate and passage this year. This time, senators are fighting back, particularly against psychoactive cannabinoids they view as a loophole in need of closing.

Early indications suggest lawmakers will push for a total THC standard of 0.3%, potentially curbing access to minor cannabinoids and undoing the scientific, social, and production progress made in this space. Let's take a deeper look at how tenths of a percent will define and ultimately decide the future of legal hemp.

The threshold debate cuts both ways

Last year's postponed draft bill offered the first indication lawmakers wanted to shift from a 0.3% Delta-9 THC standard to a 0.3% total THC standard, encompassing THCA and other THC variants. While this wouldn't likely affect non-THC cannabinoids like CBD, it would target psychoactive cannabinoids.

Ironically, this more restrictive proposal came as other lawmakers argued in the opposite direction. Republican Senator Rand Paul believes the dry weight concentration is too low – and should be tripled – since current rules require testing the flower rather than the final product. This can easily lead to "hot" crops above 0.3%, a real problem with the USDA estimating about 20% of hemp grown during the crop year exceeds legal THC limits.

Up or down, senators aren't happy with the THC threshold status quo and particularly the newfound legality of psychoactive cannabinoids. This has been a sticking point for conservative lawmakers who feel "duped" that they didn't intend to legalize intoxicating cannabinoids with hemp. As a result, more than 20 states have active bans against cannabinoids like Delta-8, creating a patchwork of production and consumer rules across the country.

A spectrum of cannabinoids

It's worth reiterating that not all cannabinoids are equal. There's an entire world of more than 120 minor cannabinoids in the hemp plant, with the spectrum ranging from non-psychoactive compounds with solely wellness applications, such as CBD, to psychoactive compounds primarily intended for recreational use, like THCA. And we're only scratching the surface.

The Farm Bill removed red tape and finally let researchers dig into the plant's potential. Early results are promising with CBD proving anecdotal benefits under lab conditions for things like anxiety, inflammation, and sleep. Meanwhile, research into other minor cannabinoids (psychoactive and non-psychoactive) suggests therapeutic applications for conditions such as neuropathic pain, neurodegenerative diseases, skin disorders, and even cancer.

This is important to mention because a total concentration standard could shut the door on some minor cannabinoids and stop this progress in its tracks. 

Industry and consumers need clarity

Unfortunately, industry stakeholders will need to wait and see what's next. Congress is getting good at kicking the cannabinoid can down the road, and it seems their legislative agenda is currently focused on the budget. About 60% of agricultural economists believe the Farm Bill – yet again – will go on hold until 2026 due to shifting government priorities.

Regardless of timing, this debate will continue to rage on. And, at the heart of the matter, is how we test products for consumption. I agree that the threshold should be measured against final products rather than raw flower, and producers shouldn't be penalized when concentration factors are often beyond their control. In this regard, there's merit to raising the limit to 1% and only testing the final formulation.

However, it's harder to see the benefit of eliminating psychoactive cannabinoids through a blanket total threshold. From my perspective, as well as that of many in the industry, better production standards and stricter compliance could achieve the same consumer protection goals without further complicating the dry weight framework.

Don't get me wrong – this sector isn't perfect. Some bad actors cut corners on testing and quality, and those of us committed to best practices like organic production, third-party lab verification, and proper labeling welcome rules that raise the bar for consumers. However, a total THC threshold feels like a one-size-fits-all approach that merely seeks to penalize psychoactive cannabinoids. Further, it doesn't address the quality control vacuum left by federal inaction.

Let's hope in the remaining months (or years) of bill debate that industry and lawmakers can come together in good faith to find a solution that works for all sides – one that protects consumers while preserving the promising research and business development we've seen since 2018. Those tenths of a percent may seem insignificant but the stakes couldn't be higher.