• LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

CPAs & Advisors to the Cannabis Industry Since 2009 Schedule An Appointment

Bridge West LLC
  • About Us
    • Firm Overview
    • Leadership
    • Our Companies
    • Industry Affiliates
    • International Affiliations
  • Services
    • 280E Mitigation
    • IRS and State Audit Assistance
    • Advisory Services
    • License Application Advisory Services
    • Business Valuation
    • Financial Statement Audit and Other Attest Services
    • Tax Compliance
    • Outsourced Accounting Services
    • Investment Advisory
    • Technology Services
  • Industries
    • Cultivator
    • Processor
    • Dispensary
    • Vertical
    • Hemp
    • CBD Retail and E-commerce Operators
  • Events
  • Cannabis News
    • CannaBlog
    • Podcast
    • Webinar
    • Videos
  • Client Access
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Menu Menu

DEA Interim Rule on Cannabinoids: Shot Across the Bow or Misfire?

in CannaBlog

Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Interim Rule on Cannabinoids: Shot Across the Bow or Misfire?

Bridge West CannaBlog Guest Contributor,

Edward R. Culhane Esq., of Culhane Law Firm

 

the cannabis leaf and judge gavel

On August 21, 2020, the FDA fired the opening shot in a new war on hemp by promulgating an interim final rule on tetrahydrocannabinols (THC) in hemp extracts.[1] In short, the interim rule purports to make any hemp extract or concentrate a Schedule I controlled substance if it contains more than 0.3% of delta-9 THC. Anyone with even a passing familiarity with hemp extraction processes knows that it is impossible under available technology to produce cannabidiol (CBD) from hemp without handling in-process crude oils and distillates that “run hot” and exceed 0.3% of THC. Whether the DEA is intending to send a shot across the bow of the industry or has simply misfired remains to be seen. But clearly, this presents a mortal threat to the hemp industry. You need to take this very seriously.

Some background may help. According to Wikipedia, the term cannabis refers to a genus of flowering plants in the family Cannabaceae. The term hemp is really just a legal term that applies to a cannabis plant that has low levels of THC, which is the substance responsible for the high associated with marijuana. Marijuana is also a legal term that applies to (most parts of) a cannabis plant that has intoxicating levels of THC. Although somewhat arbitrary, federal law, and most state laws, recognize 0.3% of THC, as measured on a dry weight basis, as the threshold that distinguishes intoxicating marijuana from non-intoxicating hemp. If the THC level is 0.3% or lower it is hemp, and if the THC level exceeds 0.3% it is marijuana. Or as I frequently say, “if it’s hot, then it’s pot.”

The Agricultural Improvement Act of 2018, commonly known as the “2018 Farm Bill,” memorialized this distinction in federal law. It removed from the federal Controlled Substance Act any cannabis plant with a THC level not exceeding 0.3% on a dry weight basis. Under the 2018 Farm Bill, “hemp” means:

“the plant Cannabis sativa L. and any part of that plant, including the seeds thereof and all derivatives, extracts, cannabinoids, isomers, acids, salts, and salts of isomers, whether growing or not, with a delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol concentration of not more than 0.3% percent on a dry weight basis.” (emphasis added)

While this definition can easily be applied to distinguish a hemp plant from a marijuana plant, calculating the THC concentration of an oil or liquid “on a dry weight basis” is dubious at best. Further, it is manifestly obvious that Congress recognized and implicitly legalized an industry that is fundamentally dependent on processing hemp into salable products. Similarly, it is obvious Congress intended to keep intoxicating marijuana and related materials on the Controlled Substances list. So how can we reconcile these Congressional goals?

Perhaps common sense is a good place to start. According to the National Conference of State legislatures, 48 states have authorized the cultivation of hemp. In fact, many of those states further issue licenses to hemp processors and extractors and openly encourage investors and business owners to enter the emerging industry. This includes states that have not legalized recreational or medicinal marijuana. Or put differently, several states that are not marijuana-friendly are huge supporters of hemp cultivation and processing, including extraction processes that run hot while producing CBD. Why? Because they want the jobs and the tax revenues.

So this brings us back to the task of reconciling apparently contradictory Congressional goals of promoting the new hemp industry while keeping intoxicating products illegal. Again, common sense is our guide. The regulatory framework should allow but place controls over in-process materials that exceeds 0.3% THC to be tracked and handled only by licensed operators, and prohibit the sale of any products with a THC concentration exceeding 0.3% to end consumers. This would allow licensed processors that have been vetted by state regulators to produce, handle and sell bulk concentrates such as crude oil and full spectrum distillate, yet prevent intoxicating products from being sold to consumers.

Regardless of the DEA’s intention in promulgating the interim rule, this is a wakeup call for the industry. I encourage you to comment on the interim rule. Also, contact your elected officials and let them know that the DEA’s interim rule is threatening your livelihood.

If you are a processor and have questions as to how this affects you, contact a qualified cannabis or hemp attorney.

Edward R. Culhane is an experienced cannabis attorney focused primarily in the areas of venture capital, private equity, securities and mergers and acquisitions. Mr. Culhane is a cannabis and hemp industry veteran and is licensed to practice law in the states of California, Colorado and Minnesota.

Click here to read the interim final rule
Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on WhatsApp
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share by Mail
https://bridgewestcpas.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/thumbnail_BridgeWest_2023_Powered_800.png 0 0 Brigid Galvin https://bridgewestcpas.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/thumbnail_BridgeWest_2023_Powered_800.png Brigid Galvin2020-08-25 17:39:582020-08-27 14:41:03DEA Interim Rule on Cannabinoids: Shot Across the Bow or Misfire?

Newsletter Registration

Recent Posts

  • Minnesota Cannabis Updates 2023: Current License Holders
  • Why You Should Outsource Accounting for Your Cannabis Business
  • Updated Cannabis Industry Events
  • The Cannabis Industry and Tax Implications of Entity Structure: Issues to Consider for Cannabis Operators
  • What is Form 1099: Key Details You Need to Know

Services

280E Mitigation

IRS and State Audit Assistance

Cannabis and Hemp Advisory Services

Cannabis License Application Advisory

Business Valuation

Audit and Assurance

Tax

Outsourced Accounting Services

Investment Advisory

Technology Services

Resources

Contact

Events

CannaBlog

Leadership

Client Access

Serving all cannabis legal states

Headquarters:
7900 International Drive, Suite 800
Bloomington, MN 55425
(303) 651-0304
View Map >

© Bridge West LLC™ 2023 Privacy Policy
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
Utah Medical Marijuana Update | Jim Marty’s Summer Vacation | Politics...Bridge West is proud to be a Presenting Sponsor of NCIA’s Inaugural Catalyst...
Scroll to top

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

OKLearn more

Cookie and Privacy Settings



How we use cookies

We may request cookies to be set on your device. We use cookies to let us know when you visit our websites, how you interact with us, to enrich your user experience, and to customize your relationship with our website.

Click on the different category headings to find out more. You can also change some of your preferences. Note that blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience on our websites and the services we are able to offer.

Essential Website Cookies

These cookies are strictly necessary to provide you with services available through our website and to use some of its features.

Because these cookies are strictly necessary to deliver the website, refusing them will have impact how our site functions. You always can block or delete cookies by changing your browser settings and force blocking all cookies on this website. But this will always prompt you to accept/refuse cookies when revisiting our site.

We fully respect if you want to refuse cookies but to avoid asking you again and again kindly allow us to store a cookie for that. You are free to opt out any time or opt in for other cookies to get a better experience. If you refuse cookies we will remove all set cookies in our domain.

We provide you with a list of stored cookies on your computer in our domain so you can check what we stored. Due to security reasons we are not able to show or modify cookies from other domains. You can check these in your browser security settings.

Other external services

We also use different external services like Google Webfonts, Google Maps, and external Video providers. Since these providers may collect personal data like your IP address we allow you to block them here. Please be aware that this might heavily reduce the functionality and appearance of our site. Changes will take effect once you reload the page.

Google Webfont Settings:

Google Map Settings:

Google reCaptcha Settings:

Vimeo and Youtube video embeds:

Privacy Policy

You can read about our cookies and privacy settings in detail on our Privacy Policy Page.

Privacy Policy
Accept settingsHide notification only