California’s sweeping overhaul of hemp rules, enacted final week, continues to attract sharp criticism from hemp producers, producers, and different stakeholders who say it’s going to shrink the authorized market, deepen regulatory confusion, and drawback each hemp and hashish companies.

Opponents argue the legislation, Meeting Invoice 8 (AB 8), cements an unworkable “zero THC” customary for meals and drinks, folds hemp too tightly into the marijuana regulatory system, and will worsen oversupply issues for licensed hashish cultivators. Others warn that accompanying tax modifications could cut back funds meant for neighborhood and youth packages.

It’s solely Section 1

AB 8 integrates hemp merchandise into California’s marijuana regulatory framework and sharply restricts the usage of hemp-derived cannabinoids in meals and drinks. Signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom late final month, the legislation bans the incorporation of uncooked hemp extracts into meals, drinks, and dietary dietary supplements beginning in 2026, with additional integration of hemp merchandise into the hashish system to observe in 2028.

The measure builds on California’s emergency rules, which already require hemp consumables to include no detectable THC—a normal many merchandise can not meet. It additionally expands oversight by way of the California Industrial Hemp Enrollment & Oversight (IHEO) system, which mandates registration, testing, labeling compliance, and meals manufacturing permits.

Uncertainty

For firms constructed round minimally processed hemp merchandise, AB 8 creates severe uncertainty. The legislation successfully bars the usage of uncooked hemp extracts in meals and drinks and imposes strict THC and serving-size limits that few merchandise on this class can meet.

Chris Boucher, CEO of Vista-based Farmtiva, stated the modifications will hit gross sales channels exhausting. “AB 8 has a extreme unfavorable affect on promoting any CBD to on-line shops, well being meals shops, grocery shops, juice bars—all over the place,” he stated.

Farmtiva’s Juicetiva uncooked hemp leaf juice incorporates nondetectable THC, which provides it a slim compliance benefit. “We’re in a singular class because it’s whole-plant meals and never a cannabinoid extract,” Boucher stated. However even with these benefits, Farmtiva should navigate new serving caps, labeling necessities, and an unsure regulatory definition of what qualifies as “traceable” THC.

Murky forms

Boucher stated California’s zero-tolerance THC customary is actually unworkable for many producers, since solely pharmaceutical-grade CBD isolate can reliably meet the requirement. He famous that such isolates are far much less environment friendly than full-spectrum extracts, requiring roughly twice as a lot to attain the identical impact.

He additionally criticized the state’s lack of readability on testing strategies. Whereas regulators depend on gasoline chromatography to find out hint THC ranges, the legislation itself doesn’t clearly outline what counts as “traceable,” leaving producers to navigate shifting interpretations with out clear steering.

IHEO authorization is obligatory for hemp producers in California, however the system is commonly described as disorganized and troublesome to navigate—significantly for small and mid-sized companies.

“The CDPH is so disorganized and ill-informed they clearly don’t know the legal guidelines,” Boucher stated. “I may go on concerning the chaos they’ve precipitated.”

Hempseed on separate path

In contrast to CBD and hemp extracts, hempseed and its derivatives—hulled hempseed, hempseed oil, and hempseed protein—have been usually acknowledged as secure (GRAS) beneath U.S. federal legislation since 2018. AB 8 doesn’t tackle hempseed, and California has not imposed further limitations to their sale.

These merchandise are broadly obtainable by way of typical meals channels and are stocked by main retailers within the state. Hempseed is primarily sourced from Canadian and U.S. grain manufacturing and is utilized in plant-based meals, protein powders, cooking oils, and snacks. A number of California-based firms incorporate hempseed substances into branded meals, however the state doesn’t have a big hemp grain manufacturing sector of its personal.

Opponents additionally argue that AB 8 could worsen financial issues on either side of the hemp–hashish divide. By requiring many hemp merchandise to be reformulated with ultra-pure isolates or enter the marijuana system, the legislation narrows the authorized house for non-intoxicating hemp meals, drinks, and dietary supplements.

Risk to pot retailers

On the identical time, critics warn that permitting some hemp-derived THC merchandise into the hashish provide chain may deepen the glut going through licensed hashish cultivators and undermine state revenues. Boucher estimates that there are at the moment solely about 900 marijuana dispensaries in California, in comparison with nicely over 50,000 shops that would promote hemp CBD merchandise.

“AB 8 is among the most harmful hashish legal guidelines in America,” Boucher stated. “California is a large financial powerhouse of the world, and this legislation destroys all of the financial alternatives for hemp CBD firms. The marijuana trade lobbyists have bribed Gov. Newsom into signing this insane legislation.”