The regulatory history of hemp is like a pendulum—some years can swing more favorably, allowing research and development to flourish and new products to market, while others can very much go the other way with red tape and restrictions. Last year swung strongly in the latter direction.

The federal government’s bill to end the record-breaking shutdown in November surprised many by including language that essentially recriminalized hemp. In the stroke of a pen, lawmakers designated that the yardstick of legal hemp—the percentage of THC per dry weight—would shift to a “total THC” framework measured in milligrams. This marked a reversal of nearly a decade of hemp regulation and left producers scrambling to understand the letter of the law.

Despite an initial 12-month deadline to bring the new restrictions online by November 2026, senators began pushing for a two-year extension in January. Extra time is good for hemp, but extensions aren’t solutions. Two more years of limbo won’t fix the underlying problem—hemp needs a permanent regulatory pathway so that compliant producers can think long-term, secure financing, and build consumer trust.

The stakes are higher than ever

Industry insiders have long expected changes to hemp. After all, 2018’s legalization created a blanket rule that allowed hemp at or under 0.3% delta-9 THC threshold by dry weight. Meeting these guidelines allowed producers to extract CBD and other naturally occurring cannabinoids as well as synthesize compounds like Delta-8. Appeals courts backed the bill but acknowledged it was “for Congress to fix its mistake” if these synthesized cannabinoids were unintended consequences.

Of course, hemp experts knew revisions were on the way and commentators like myself hoped that industry and regulators could come together for market clarity. What the market didn’t expect, however, was that regulators would fight dirty.

Adding this language into the shutdown bill without any consultation is the epitome of bad faith. The new framework abandons the previous “percentage of THC per dry weight” standard in favor of a “total THC per container” limit of just 0.4 milligrams. This means any consumer product containing any other hemp-derived cannabinoid exceeding this total threshold per package—not per serving but per jar, bottle, bag, or cartridge—becomes federally illegal. This isn’t much, and the legislation goes a step further by banning any synthesized cannabinoid. 

It’s for these reasons that producers believe this framework, if enacted and enforced, spells the end for delta-8 THC, delta-10 THC, HHC, and THCA. Further, the stricter percentage-to-milligram standard switch threatens gummies, chews, chocolates, baked edibles, vapes, oils, tinctures, and virtually all hemp extract products. Altogether, this rule change could eliminate 95% of the current hemp market, a $28 billion industry supporting more than 300,000 jobs across the country.

An outsized impact on hemp farmers, producers, consumers

This is a legislative earthquake and we’re still seeing tremors. Raw hemp prices are down because processors and manufacturers aren’t sure what will happen and don’t want to end up with a potentially unusable crop. Farmers are therefore hit by a double whammy of lower prices and, as the year’s planting season approaches, the uncertainty of whether to seed by March.

Producers face similar questions. Investing in new equipment, enhanced testing, or quality improvements makes little sense when your product category might not exist by November. Unfortunately but understandably, the threat of recriminalization creates prolonged uncertainty and encourages short-term thinking—the exact opposite of what hemp needs to get to the next level of market maturity.

And ultimately, it’s consumers who pay the price. We’ve come a long way from the days of CBD bath bombs and energy drinks. The most exciting growth in recent years has been the wellness embrace of cannabinoids— from sleep to menopause to anxiety—and how consumers have incorporated them into their daily routines. Peer-reviewed research (which was only possible with lower regulatory barriers) consistently shows how hemp-derived cannabinoids can assist with a variety of ailments. It’s now concerning to consider the many ways this decision pushes us backward.

More years in limbo don’t fix the problem

Yet again, hemp is forced to “wait and see.” The problem is that this has been our approach for almost a decade. Of course, we should hope that this decision to recriminalize hemp is extended and offers the market some breathing room. In this regard, it’s heartening to see bipartisan support behind the extension push by the US Hemp Roundtable. But again, extending the status quo for a few more years isn’t a solution.

What we need is honest, effective regulation. A true framework for hemp isn’t something that can be undone by a random rule attached to a midnight shutdown bill. Instead, it’s transparent rulemaking and good faith discussions that include stakeholder input. For example, introduced at the end of January, the Hemp Enforcement, Modernization, and Protection (HEMP) Act appears to be a step in the right direction. The bill would establish the first federal regulatory pathway for hemp-derived products under FDA oversight. Importantly, the legislation establishes a framework to replace inconsistent state laws, distinguishes between cannabis and federally legal hemp, and requires the FDA to set clear standards for CBD products with an automatic backstop if the agency fails to act within three years. These are sensible suggestions for a safe market that respects the lives and livelihoods at stake.

Consumers and producers simply can’t operate under this regulatory pendulum any longer. The swings are too violent and unpredictable. We need sustained, multi-year certainty to ensure what we’re bringing to market is backed by long-term investment, high-quality production, and the best of the best. Hemp and our consumers deserve better.