How Biden’s rescheduling of marijuana could affect the US industry

Source: MJ Biz Daily | Author: Chris Roberts | Oct 14, 2022

After a half-century in which marijuana endured the strictest prohibition allowed under the law, President Joe Biden has set in motion a process that could lead to revolutionary changes for federal MJ policy.

It could mean struggling American marijuana companies can finally enjoy long-desired tax relief, or those same firms could lose cannabis entirely to big pharmaceutical companies.

Both outcomes – and many other scenarios – are all possible under the “administrative rescheduling” process the president activated last Thursday, according to legal and scientific experts.

At the same time, an act of Congress could cancel out whatever recommendations emerge from the Justice Department, the Department of Health and Human Services and the alphabet soup of other federal agencies responsible for drug policy now tasked with reviewing how Washington DC handles marijuana.

“Anyone who says they know what will happen doesn’t know what they’re talking about,” said Andrew Kline, senior counsel in the Denver office of the Perkins Coie law firm and former public policy director at the National Cannabis Industry Association.

“There are just too many unknowns at the moment.”

Under federal law, drugs fall into one of six categories, ranging from Schedule 1 to unscheduled.

And there are the five steps of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), ranging from most to least dangerous – and restricted.

There are also many substances understood to science as “drugs” that are unscheduled.

These include popular (and potentially deadly) tonics such as alcohol and tobacco as well as the intoxicating hemp-derived delta-8 and delta-9 THC products sold online and in barely regulated smoke shops and bodegas unleashed by the 2018 Farm Bill.

The situation is more complex than some observers realize, but here’s a brief review of the rescheduling process, where marijuana could finally end up and what it would mean for the current and future U.S. cannabis industry.

Schedule 1: status quo

Background: Since 1970, cannabis has been classified under Controlled Substances Act of the Richard Nixon era as a Schedule 1 controlled substance, the category for drugs with no recognized medical application, “a high potential for abuse and the potential to create severe psychological and/or physical dependence,” according to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration.

Other Schedule 1 drugs include heroin, LSD and peyote.

Even in 1970, the move was controversial. In 2022, this situation “makes no sense,” the president noted last week.

Very famously, marijuana has a “lethal dose” so high it’s never been definitively established in humans, while drugs classified as Schedule 2 have a large and growing body count.

Of the 107,622 Americans killed by a drug overdose in 2021, none died from cannabis while 71,238 died from synthetic opioids such as fentanyl that a doctor could theoretically prescribe, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

There is also growing recognition that cannabis has medicinal applications, as former U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy suggested in 2015 and as a 2017 National Academies review echoed.

Though the Schedule 1 status creates an infamous Catch-22 – studies are needed to justify a rescheduling, but Schedule 1 makes cannabis harder to study, a confounding logical pretzel Congress has thus far been unable to untangle – it seems certain that marijuana will be removed from this category, experts agreed.

“Schedule 1 is a fiction,” Kline said. “There’s clear evidence of its medical utility and little evidence of the high potential for abuse.

“There’s no question it should be removed,” he added. “The question is where does it go.”

Business impact: Under Schedule 1, marijuana companies are barred from taking traditional business deductions – thanks to Section 280E of the federal tax code. That has put a major crimp on their earnings. Scientific research involving marijuana also faces heavy restrictions.

Schedule 2: pharmaceutical model

Background: Schedule 2 drugs are like Schedule 1 drugs, with one exception – clinical application with legal availability through a prescription or under supervision from a physician.

These include Adderall and Ritalin as well as cocaine, methamphetamine, fentanyl and other synthetic opioids.

Schedule 2 – the category sought by a rescheduling petition filed in 1972 by the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) and finally rejected in 1994 – is in a way the cannabis industry’s worst nightmare: legal relief and a relaxation of prohibition but availability only via the arduous and expensive U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval process.

Business Impact: Federally legal marijuana would be “subject to tremendous testing and myriad regulatory requirements that are far beyond what states currently implement,” as The Brookings Institution scholars John Hudak and Grace Wallack wrote in 2015, when recreational cannabis sales were underway in several states in much the same fashion they are now across much of the country.

It would also quite likely still be heavily taxed, as Kline and other experts have said. Section 280E prohibits tax deductions for “trade or business” in Schedule 1 or 2 controlled substances that is “prohibited by Federal law or the law of any State in which such trade or business is conducted.”

Schedule 3-4: tax relief, but doctor’s orders

Background: Schedule 3 is where drugs with “a moderate to low potential for physical and psychological dependence,” such as Tylenol with codeine, anabolic steroids and ketamine, live.

This is the threshold “where 280E tax exemption is no longer an issue,” said Shane Pennington, a Denver-based counsel with the Vincente Sederberg law firm.

This is also the classification sought after in the thus-far symbolic bills introduced by the Congressional Cannabis Caucus that have died in committee without a hearing. That is no huge tragedy, as they currently do not stand a chance of passage in the Senate.

Yet, as Pennington observed, this also isn’t what most existing cannabis companies would want, since Schedule 3 drugs are also only generally legally available with a doctor’s authority and, thus, some level of compliance with the FDA approval process.

The same is true with drugs in Schedule 4, which have a “low potential for abuse,” such as Ambien, Ativan and Xanax.

Business impact: It’s here that the fundamental problem with using the Controlled Substances Act to regulate marijuana appears, at least in the cannabis industry’s eyes: You can’t get rid of the FDA, and the FDA process isn’t something that the current industry is built to comply with.

“People need to understand that regardless of the schedule, you’re still subject to the FDCA (Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act),” Pennington said.

“The point is that the model is not built for cannabis.”

Schedule 5: over the counter, or unscheduled?

Background: Schedule 5 drugs are still FDA-approved and regulated, but they are sold over the counter in pharmacies, supermarkets, gas stations and convenience stores like low-codeine cough syrup.

That’s exactly where most big cannabis companies would love to have their products appear – except, as Pennington pointed out, Schedule 5 products are not considered recreational or adult use.

These include cough syrup formulations.

In that analysis, no place on the Controlled Substances Act is appropriate for marijuana at all, though most observers agree that a complete removal from the CSA is something federal authorities are unlikely to recommend.

Business impact: Better from a C-suite and investors’ point of view would be total removal from the CSA – the legal status enjoyed by delta-8 and delta-9 THC products (though some states currently ban hemp-derived products sold outside their state-regulated cannabis industries).

Rescheduling, then, “would have some benefits but could unintentionally impact the 37 state medical (marijuana) programs which could effectively be dismantled were it placed into Schedule 2 or 3,” said David Holland, a New York City-based cannabis attorney.

“There would need to be a tremendous amount of federal regulation and that would only permit medical usage, not responsible adult usage.”

The upshot

What Biden might have unleashed could turn out to be “an unintended shock wave were rescheduling undertaken, rather than descheduling, which would allow the states to decide the issue of medical legalization and how it may be used in each state – medically and/or recreationally,” Holland said.

In this way, administrative rescheduling could herald tax relief and bigger margins for existing publicly traded marijuana companies.

It could also just as easily lead to an end of federal prohibition packaged with U.S. regulations so onerous that newly burdened big firms disappear and cede marijuana to something like the state-recognized small cooperatives that thrived in the early days of medical cannabis.

About the only thing known is that Biden – in making the most consequential step on federal marijuana policy of any president since Nixon – has unleashed a very long, very complex and very unpredictable force on the world that might yet wreak unintended havoc.

U.S. trade group cries foul over proposed strict limits on THC in extracts

Source: HempToday.net | Author: HempToday | Aug 16, 2022

A proposed provision in landmark U.S. cannabis legislation under consideration would set an unnecessarily low level for trace amounts of THC in hemp flower-based food products, leading to “the elimination of the substantial majority of the hemp extract and CBD industry,” a trade group has warned.

In a letter sent to main sponsors of the Cannabis Administration and Opportunity Act (CAOA), filed in the Senate last month, the U.S. Hemp Roundtable (USHR), a Kentucky-based trade association, criticized the THC provision in the bill, which sets a limit of 1 milligram of total THC per 100 grams on a dry weight basis, translating into a 0.001% total THC standard.

The CAOA, considered to be the most comprehensive among several cannabis bills currently floating around in the U.S. Congress, is not expected to become law any time soon, but serves as a center of gravity for the discussion of marijuana and hemp policy.

Scope of the CAOA

The bill would recognize the legalization of cannabis by the states and decriminalize, regulate, and tax businesses, offering provisions related to justice, immigration, and enforcement; small business administration; public health; education infrastructure; labor; veterans; banking, housing; and community development.

The U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) would regulate cannabis products through a new Center for Cannabis Products, under provisions in the proposed law. 

“This is an arbitrary and unrealistic standard,” USHR said of the THC limit proposed for hemp-based products. “No full spectrum or broad-spectrum hemp extract would qualify, and likely most CBD isolates would be challenged to comply, given the limitations of current testing technology.

“Indeed, this limit would delegate most, if not all, popular, non-intoxicating CBD and hemp extract products to the adult-use cannabis market,” the group said, urging the bill’s sponsors to reconsider what it called “a misguided standard for intoxication” that is “uniquely onerous and unprecedented.”

Delta-8 should be regulated

In the letter, sent to Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey and Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, the lead sponsors of the CAOA, USHR called for expanded protections for all non-intoxicating hemp derivatives including CBD and other cannabinoids, legalizing the sale of CBD and other hemp extracts as food and beverage ingredients, and loosening up on who may conduct safety evaluations.

Despite its vigorous defense of CBD, USHR said it supports the CAOA’s effort to regulate psychoactive cannabis products, like delta-8 THC, which is derived from hemp-based CBD. Separate regulatory pathways for non-intoxicating hemp and intoxicating cannabis products should be established, USHR recommended.

The CAOA should be changed to establish a more comprehensive rulemaking process for determining daily serving limits for CBD that invites stakeholder input, USHR also urged.

Task force proposed

In addition to the allowable THC levels for consumer products, USHR said other provisions in current CAOA language could undermine the industry, and urged creation of a task force to also set regulations for daily serving limits for CBD, consider the advisability of the current delta-9 THC limit for hemp plants of 0.3%, and address other potentially intoxicating hemp derivatives.

The task force would include representatives from the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA), the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health, hemp growers, manufacturers, processors and distributors, and testing laboratories. 

The group would report findings and offer recommendations within 120 days after being formed, USHR recommended. FDA and other federal agencies would then have 90 days to start the rule-making process to implement the task force’s recommendations.

Reforms move slowly

Observers have said only incremental reform on cannabis is expected in the near future, especially if the Democrats lose the Senate in the 2022 midterm elections. Problems with banking, for example, could be resolved with separate legislation, the SAFE Banking Act, which would finally permit financial institutions to service cannabis companies without fear of reprisal.

While CAOA’s sponsors have said they will not support the SAFE Banking Act in the absence of broader criminal reforms, policy that provides basic financial services for cannabis operators enjoys bi-partisan support in Congress.

About USHR

The U.S. Hemp Roundable is led by Pete Meachum, president, a lobbyist who also serves as Senior Director for Government Affairs for the Cronos Group, Ontario, Canada. The following businesses and organizations are on the USHR board, according to the group’s website: Ananda Hemp (Kentucky), Balanced Health Botanicals (Colorado), Canopy Growth Corporation (Ontario, Canada), CBD American Shaman (Kansas), Cultivated CBD (Minnesota), Curaleaf (Massachusetts), Garden of Life (Florida), GVB Biopharma (Nevada), Hemp Industries Association, Just Brands (Holland), Koi CBD LLC (California), Medterra CBD (California), Recess (New York), Red Mesa Science & Refining (Utah), SC Labs (California), Turning Point Brands (Kentucky), U.S. Hemp Authority, Verge Agritech (United Kingdom), and Zilis (Texas).

Apple Secretly Joined Amazon In Advancing Commercial Cannabis Reform

Source: Forbes.com | Author: Robert Hoban | Feb 15, 2022

This past summer, a little recognized thing occurred — one of the largest and most respected companies in the world quietly changed its policies in favor of cannabis. That company was Apple. As a result, they joined the ranks of Amazon as a global corporation advocating for policy reform that would open a federally legal, commercial cannabis industry in the United States.

For years, large tech companies, including Facebook and Google, have refused to acknowledge the legality of industrial hemp, let alone the legality of medical or recreational marijuana. Finally, Apple bucked that trend. In June, the fine print of Apple’s “App Store Review Guidelines” release stated that apps handling sales and delivery of medical and recreational cannabis in legal jurisdictions are now allowed on the App Store. This was monumental.  

Unlike the big headlines we’ve seen recently from Amazon, Uber, the NFL, and other mainstream, institutional businesses, showing a positively changing attitude toward cannabis, Apple made no big-splash announcement that this had happened. Yet, this change came at a time of a shift in the cannabis paradigm for voters, policymakers, and the average American. 

As we’ve discussed previously, U.S. voters are shifting rapidly and dramatically in favor of cannabis legalization. The most recent Gallup poll showed that 68% of American voters support some form of legalization. There’s also tremendous momentum from the recent unveiling of the Cannabis Administration and Opportunity Act by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ).

The financial technology experts at ArtisIQ are ahead of the curve in identifying the imperative to collaborate with tech leaders like Apple to update policy to reflect the mainstream adoption of cannabis. Co-Founder and CMO of Artis, Adair Lion shares, “As a fintech company on the cutting-edge of development in both cannabis and retail, Apple’s Policy changes are a monumental shift in the way our society does mobile transactions.”

When political leaders and Fortune 100 companies begin modifying policies and behavior to accommodate something that has been seen as fringe, elicit, or otherwise illegal, the hearts and minds of American start to change. It’s safe to say the tide is turning. 

This is the kind of influence that sets the tone for mainstream behavior. Think back to the early days of Babe Ruth and baseball, where ball players were smoking cigarettes in the dugout and cigarette advertisements abounded. Or more recently, Elon Musk and Tesla’s support of cryptocurrency which influenced much wider adoption and made the price of Bitcoin soar. 

The fine print of Apple’s policy update states that apps involved in the sale of cannabis are exclusive to licensed legal entities and strictly require geo-fencing within the legal jurisdiction. This requires an enormous amount of technological and regulatory compliance and is precisely where a fintech software company like Artis could excel. Consumer behavior shows the need for embedded digital payment technology. There’s been modest growth in payment and technology solutions for the cannabis industry and ancillary service providers. This is in no small part due to federal illegality and the fragmented nature of the industry.   

Apple’s policy adjustments are just an example of the level of innovation and attention to detail that Artis is providing to the cannabis industry. What is it that propels some tech companies above the rest? It’s those that provide solutions for the world’s most complex problems. It’s plain to see that cannabis has presented enormous complexity to politicians, enterprise businesses, and just about every other imaginable cog in the machine of our modern world.  

The contributions of experienced professionals are unequivocally what is necessary to propel cannabis further into the mainstream. These are the building blocks, the intimate details, that ultimately bring to reality the hopes of grand legislation, like the Cannabis Administration and Opportunity Act. Compliant and lawful participation in the cannabis ecosystem is paramount to widespread, mainstream adoption. As one who has had to navigate the grey areas of cannabis law for many years – and I’m as honest as a Denver man can be – I will always applaud the hard work to deliberately pave the way forward for this industry.

Another bill to raise U.S. THC limit to 1.0% introduced in Congress

Source: HempToday.com | Author: HempToday | Feb 8, 2022

A new bill introduced in the U.S. Congress would raise the limit for THC in hemp from 0.3% to 1.0% and adjust other provisions in current law to ease the path to market for producers.

The Hemp Advancement Act of 2022, introduced by Rep. Chellie Pingree, a Maine Democrat, addresses issues arising from the 2018 Farm Bill, which legalized industrial hemp federally.

In addition to raising the THC limit for crops in the field, provisions in the bill aimed at protecting consumers would set the combined limit for delta-9 and other forms of THC in hemp products at 0.3%.

Raising the limit to 1.0% THC in the field would protect farmers from their crops going hot, and protect producers from hemp going over that limit during the production process, which now makes them technically illegal.

Other key provisions

Other proposed provisions would provide additional protections for the processing and transportation of “hot” hemp, end a Drug Enforcement Agency monopoly on registering testing laboratories, and repeal a controversial ban on drug felons obtaining hemp licenses. 

Under current rules in the Farm Bill, hemp growers and processors often struggle to navigate THC testing and transportation requirements. Meanwhile, consumers are often confused by products that are marketed as hemp but which are more appropriately sold in recreational marijuana sales channels.

U.S. Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky has twice introduced a separate measure, the Hemp Economic Mobilization Plan Act, which also includes a proposal to raise the THC limit to 1.0%. The U.S. National Association of State Departments of Agriculture has supported the change.

Hemp experts say 2023 Farm Bill could even playing field between US and rival countries

Source: HempIndustryDaily.com | Author: Kate Lavin | Oct 21, 2021

Closing the gaps between the 2014 and 2018 Farm Bills could provide U.S. hemp companies with “a leg up on international trade,” according to Joy Beckerman, principal at New York-based Hemp Ace International.

Beckerman spoke Tuesday at the Hemp Industry Daily Forum, a daylong preconference event held in Las Vegas in connection with MJBizCon.

U.S. hemp companies looking to open new international markets may be eligible for government grants and programs to fund costs such as travel, said Larry Farnsworth, senior vice president of communications and marketing for the National Industrial Hemp Council.

Federal funds for such such business-development projects opened to hemp companies when the 2018 Farm Bill legalized the cultivation, processing and sale of hemp and hemp-derived products.

Trouble at home

Disparities between the 2014 and 2018 Farm Bill documents continue to create strife in the United States, however.

Regulators in some hemp markets adhere to rules from the 2014 Farm Bill, while others follow the 2018 document, making “some people think they are at a disadvantage to their neighboring states,” Farnsworth said.

Garrett Graff, partner at Moye White law firm in Denver, said he expects the 2023 Farm Bill to contain more harmonization of the two packages of federal legislation, along with further insight about testing rules required by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration.

He also expects environmental, social and corporate governance to play a larger role in the updated Farm Bill.

In the nearer term, NIHC’s Farnsworth predicted the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives would affirm the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s authority over hemp. Meanwhile, Senate Bill 1698, the Hemp Access and Consumer Safety Act, stands to clarify that hemp-derived CBD can be included in dietary supplements and food.

Planning for 2023

For her part, Beckerman would like to see the federally legal plant treated as such going forward.

Additionally, she said the 2023 Farm Bill should make clear that naturally occurring cannabinoids are a part of federally legal hemp, meaning the sale and use of hemp-derived CBD and other cannabinoids in finished products should not be subject to criminal enforcement in the United States.

“We defined a plant in the Farm Bill. We didn’t define a finished product, but that is what we are dealing with,” she said.

Other key issues Beckerman would like clarified in the 2023 Farm Bill include a repeal of the drug felon ban, which precludes individuals convicted of certain drug crimes from growing hemp for 10 years, and the ability to repurpose hemp that tests above the 0.3% THC limit for construction materials, plastics and other purposes.

Hemp content at MJBizCon

The Hemp Industry Daily Forum was one of three preconference events held as part of MJBizCon at the Las Vegas Convention Center.

In addition to several dozen educational sessions, MJBizCon includes a trade show with more than 1,000 exhibitors for the cannabis industry. Register for MJBizCon at mjbizconference.com.