Maine’s Hemp Policies Remain Turbulent as the Legislature Reconvenes

The legislature is reconvening on hemp issues this coming Thursday, January 9. The Committee on Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry is considering a simple resolve "Directing the Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry to Submit to the United States Secretary of Agriculture a Plan for Continued Implementation of the Maine Industrial Hemp Program." This resolve is self-explanatory; it will direct the Department to submit a plan to the USDA for hemp production which would finally bring Maine’s program in line with federal law. 

What this resolve doesn’t do is address a more pressing issue with Maine’s hemp policies at the moment: the continued crackdown on CBD products manufactured out-of-state. We’ve heard multiple reports of state inspectors telling retailers to sell whatever is on their shelves, but not to buy any more CBD products from outside Maine. The policy formally took effect on January 1 (though the original guidance issued by the State said December 1), and it remains to be seen how aggressive the crackdown will be, especially since a large portion of current CBD ingestible products on the shelves in Maine are from elsewhere.

Feds Take Steps to Increase Hemp Producers’ Access to Capital

The Department of Treasury released new guidance yesterday that makes it much easier for banks to serve hemp producers. This comes on the heels of the USDA interim rules governing hemp nationwide. 

Basically, the new guidance says that banks no longer need to file ‘suspicious activity reports’ with Treasury for hemp producers since the crop is now largely legal under federal law. Suspicious Activity Reports (or SARs) are a fairly burdensome regulatory requirement for banks that require a great deal of diligence. This new guidance not only reduces the regulatory burden; it also reduces legal exposure banks may face by working with clients in the hemp industry. This should mean a greater willingness on the part of federally chartered banks to work with hemp producers, which, in turn, will result in greater access to capital.

This is also important because of likely trickle down effects. Insurers, for example, will likely become more eager to work with the hemp industry as access to capital increases.

Of course, banks will still need to ensure that their clients are complying with state and federal laws governing hemp, and will need to conduct necessary diligence to avoid banking illegal marijuana operations with products containing THC in excess of 0.3%. In addition, banks will need to remain cautious about clients who work with CBD in food products given the FDA’s hostility to that practice.

All in all, I see this as another positive step in the long game toward broader legalization.

Do the Proposed USDA Hemp Rules Threaten Our CBD Industry?

We’re hearing concerns from some farmers and CBD manufacturers that the proposed USDA hemp rules, released earlier this week, could make it much more difficult to provide high-quality CBD products in the U.S. The concern, as I can best articulate it since I’m not a farmer, is that full-spectrum CBD is largely available in plants that have a longer growth cycle, but these plants may also have THC levels above 0.3 percent by virtue of being in the ground for longer. Under current regulations, some farmers and producers have found ways to reduce the THC content following harvest, which allows them to sell full-spectrum CBD products with compliant THC levels. The new USDA regulations, though, require that the crop be tested for THC content 15 days prior to harvest. Any crops with an excess of THC will need to be discarded. This eliminates the possibility of growing for longer and eliminating excess THC after the fact.

I can’t speak personally to whether this perceived threat is real or overblown, but its one interesting example of the many consequences (intended or otherwise) the new federal regime will have on the industry.

One other, related, strain: Though hemp must have THC levels below 0.3 percent, these new rules create a couple of safe harbors. First, they recognize that testing labs have margins of error, and so if your crop tests at 0.34 percent THC, but the lab results have a 0.05 percent margin of error, then the crop is legal and you’re good to go. Second, if your crop is above 0.3 percent but below 0.5 percent THC, you can’t sell it, but you also won’t be prosecuted. These rules basically recognize the inherent uncertainty involved with growing hemp.

USDA Hemp Rules Nearly Finalized

We haven’t seen a draft of the rules yet, but the latest news is that the White House has signed off on the proposed rules and they’ll be released any week now. Once the rules are released, a public comment period will begin. The USDA is still claiming that final rules will take effect before the end of 2019. 

The Maine Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry (which houses our hemp program) is likely to respond by drafting and proposing new rules of its own. These rules will likely parallel the federal rules including any THC potency testing guidelines, quality control standards, and broader cannabinoid testing requirements. 

Maine will also seek USDA approval of a state regulatory plan governing hemp. Once this approval is obtained, Maine hemp will finally be legal.

NCUA Advises Credit Unions They Can Provide Financial Services to Hemp Businesses

Last week, the National Credit Union Administration (“NCUA”) released interim guidance advising federally insured credit unions that they may provide certain financial services to legally operating hemp businesses. The interim guidance was released in response to the passage of the 2018 Farm Bill in December 2018 that removed certain hemp-derived products, including cannabidiol, from the list of Schedule 1 drugs in the Controlled Substances Act. 

The NCUA advises credit unions that they need to “understand the complexities and risks involved” if they choose to serve hemp-related businesses, and reminds credit unions that they “must have a Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) and Anti-Money Laundering (AML) compliance program” that addresses the risks related to hemp-related businesses. While the guidance encourages credit unions to “consider whether they are able to safely and properly serve lawfully operating hemp-related businesses within their fields of membership,” it also reminds credit unions of the “long and successful history” many credit unions have had in “providing services to the agricultural sector.”

The NCUA will issue additional guidance after the U.S. Department of Agriculture publishes its final regulations and guidelines.

The Latest USDA Guidance on Hemp Law

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Office of General Counsel issued some guidance last week on its view of the current legal status of hemp. The takeaways are:

1. Hemp is no longer a Schedule I Controlled Substance under federal law.
2. At the moment, states cannot prohibit the interstate transport of hemp (or hemp products) lawfully produced under the 2014 Farm Bill. Why the 2014 Farm Bill, when the 2018 Farm Bill just became law, you might ask? Well, point 3 gets to this.
3. The 2018 Farm Bill loosened the requirements for hemp to be grown legally, but this more relaxed regime only takes effect after the USDA publishes the necessary regulations. Once these regulations are published, then states and tribes may not prohibit the interstate transport of hemp produced under a state or tribal plan or under a license issued by the USDA.
4. While states and tribes cannot prohibit the commerce of hemp legally grown elsewhere, they can enact and enforce laws which prohibit the growth of hemp within their territory.
5. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) retains authority to regulate hemp under applicable FDA laws. In other words, the FDA can and will continue to crack down on those who make unapproved therapeutic claims related to CBD, and may continue to regulate the addition of CBD to food products.

Overall, this guidance is probably good news for those who are growing or sourcing their product legally, and want to reach a national market. It could also be interpreted as another baby step in the direction of nationwide legalization of one species of cannabis.