Proposed Federal Legislation Would Ban Virtually All Hemp-Based Cannabinoid Products

A key U.S. House committee has approved a spending bill that, if passed, would effectively prohibit all hemp-based consumable cannabinoid products that were legalized by the 2018 Farm Bill. This article summarizes the proposed legislation, its likelihood of becoming law, and the potential impact on the hemp and cannabis industries.

The effort to redefine “hemp” at the federal level:

At stake in the spending bill is the line drawn by federal law between legal hemp and illegal cannabis. Under current law, “hemp” is defined as “the plant Cannabis sativa L. and any part of that plant . . . with a delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol [THC] concentration of not more than 0.3 percent on a dry weight basis.” Because this definition is based on delta-9 THC concentration, hemp-based products containing other isomers of THC, such as delta-8 and delta-10, are generally legal under federal law. This loophole in the 2018 Farm Bill has created space for psychoactive and sometimes adulterated High-THC products derived from hemp to flood the market. These products are widely available in gas stations, smoke shops, and convenience stores across the country, resulting in adverse events in youth and competitive harm to businesses that are trying to follow the law. These intoxicating hemp products have become the subject of state regulations and near-total bans in some states. Now, the federal government has hemp-derived products in their sights.

The 138-page Fiscal Year 2026 Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill (“the spending bill”) includes a dramatic change to the current definition of hemp. This provision was championed by Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD), chair of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies (“the subcommittee”), and a longtime opponent of cannabis reform.

How the spending bill would change the definition:

The spending bill would close the “hemp loophole” by changing the 0.3 percent cap to be based on total THC concentration, including all THC isomers as well as tetrahydrocannabinolic acid (THCA). Put differently, while the percentage threshold would remain the same, it would now be a total THC cap instead of a delta-9 cap, thereby redefining many products that contain delta-8, delta-10, and/or THCA as illegal cannabis.

But the spending bill goes much further. In its current form, any product that contains cannabinoids synthesized or manufactured outside the cannabis plant, regardless of concentration, would no longer be considered legal hemp. This provision takes direct aim at delta-8 and delta-10 THC, both of which may be produced by the cannabis plant in trace amounts but are typically synthesized outside the plant.

Most significantly, any product containing “quantifiable amounts” of THC, or any other cannabinoid with effects similar to THC, would be illegal under the spending bill’s definition. The bill does not define “quantifiable amounts,” and leaves this task to the Department of Health & Human Services. This means virtually all hemp-based cannabinoid products on the market today might be banned at the federal level, since even non-intoxicating CBD products usually contain trace amounts of THC.

The spending bill would create an express carveout for “industrial hemp,” which includes hemp grown for fiber, whole grain, oil, cake, nut, hull, microgreens, or other edible hemp leaf products, as well as hemp grown for research purposes. However, it’s unclear how the language banning any product containing a “quantifiable amount” of THC would apply to industrial hemp products that contain small amounts of THC.

Where the proposed legislation stands:

After being voted out of the subcommittee, the spending bill was approved by the full Appropriations Committee on June 23, 2025. The bill would still need to pass the full House, pass the Senate, and be signed by the President to become law.

Fortunately for the hemp industry, the spending bill faces an uphill battle, at least in its current form. Similar proposals in previous years, such as an amendment to the 2024 Farm Bill proposed by Rep. Mary Miller (R-IL), have failed to become law. The 2026 spending bill faces fierce opposition from Democrats—the subcommittee vote was 9-7, with all Republicans voting in favor and all Democrats against, and the full committee vote was 35-27, likewise on pure party lines—due to unrelated provisions, such as cuts to food assistance programs. Republicans have an ultra-thin majority in the House and can afford few defections on any vote. Moreover, hemp farming is a major industry in several key lawmakers’ home states, such as Kentucky and North Carolina. Finally, hemp proponents tend to come from both sides of the aisle, particularly in states where hemp is a significant industrial crop.

However, while it appears unlikely to pass in its current form, the spending bill still demonstrates the inclination of the current Congress to close the hemp loophole and limit the proliferation of hemp-derived products. The spending bill’s language changing the 0.3 percent cap to include all types of THC may have bipartisan support; for instance, the Senate version of the 2024 Farm Bill, introduced by then-Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), included similar language embracing a 0.3 percent total THC cap. Even a more limited legislative change could have serious implications for the hemp and cannabis industries.

What happens if the bill passes?

If the spending bill were to pass with its current redefinition of “hemp” intact, some implications would be immediate. Any product containing more than 0.3 percent THC and/or THCA by dry weight would become illegal under federal law, regardless of the specific THC isomer(s) present. The same would be true for any product containing THC synthesized or manufactured outside the plant, such as delta-8 or delta-10. For example, it would virtually eliminate hemp-derived infused beverages, such as seltzers and non-alcoholic beers which often contain 3mg-5mg of THC per container, from interstate commerce.

Other implications of the spending bill are not as straightforward. The current language would leave it to the Secretary of Health and Human Services to define what is a “quantifiable amount” of THC for purposes of differentiating legal hemp from illegal cannabis; this would require a separate rulemaking process that could take months or years. It’s also unclear how the ban would be implemented, administered, and enforced.

We are tracking the progress of the spending bill closely along with other hemp-related legislation at the state and federal levels. Overall, the spending bill reflects both the overall hostility of the current Congress to recreational THC, and the complexity of regulating hemp and cannabis at a granular level.