PRIVATE DISCUSSION DRAFT — NOT INTRODUCED LEGISLATION
This proposal has not been introduced, assigned a bill number, referred to a committee, or endorsed by any congressional office, agency, or organization.
Section 781 of Public Law 119-37 is scheduled to change the federal definition of hemp on November 12, 2026. Its final-product rule would exclude a hemp-derived cannabinoid product containing more than 0.4 milligrams per container of combined total THC and covered THC-like cannabinoids. That rule may also capture non-intoxicating, CBD-dominant products containing trace amounts of naturally occurring THC.
Watch: A proposed full-spectrum CBD clarification
Author note: I am publishing this private discussion draft to invite legislative, scientific, regulatory, patient, and industry review. It is a starting point for legislative counsel—not a finished regulatory system.
What the draft proposes
| Issue | Section 781 scheduled for November 12, 2026 | Private discussion draft |
|---|---|---|
| Plant-level hemp threshold | Not more than 0.3% total tetrahydrocannabinols, including THCA, on a dry-weight basis | Not more than 1.0% total tetrahydrocannabinols, including THCA, on a dry-weight basis |
| Non-full-spectrum final products | More than 0.4 mg combined total THC and covered THC-like cannabinoids per container is excluded from hemp | More than 2.0 mg combined total THC and covered THC-like cannabinoids per container is excluded from hemp |
| Full-spectrum CBD | No separate safe harbor from the final-product cap | A defined CBD-dominant category limited to not more than 3 mg total THC per serving and at least a 15:1 CBD-to-total-THC ratio |
| Synthetic or converted cannabinoids | Excluded | Remain excluded |
| Processing intermediates | Potency during processing can create classification problems | A limited safe harbor for material held by a licensed or registered processor solely for further manufacture into a compliant final product and not marketed or sold to consumers |
The proposed full-spectrum CBD test
A final hemp-derived cannabinoid product would qualify as a “full-spectrum CBD product” only if it satisfies every condition below:
- It contains multiple naturally occurring cannabinoids and terpenes from Cannabis sativa L.
- It contains not more than 3 milligrams of total tetrahydrocannabinols, including THCA, per serving.
- It contains cannabidiol in an amount at least 15 times greater than the total tetrahydrocannabinols content.
- It is intended solely for oral or topical administration.
- It contains no cannabinoid that cannot be naturally produced by the plant and no cannabinoid synthesized or manufactured outside the plant.
- It is not marketed or labeled as producing intoxication, euphoria, or effects comparable to marijuana.
The purpose is to distinguish trace-THC, CBD-dominant full-spectrum products from products sold for an intoxicating effect. Congress, agencies, laboratories, patients, manufacturers, and state regulators should test whether these precise thresholds draw the right line.
What the proposal would not do
The draft would amend the federal definition of hemp. It would not, by itself:
- authorize CBD as an ingredient in conventional food or as a dietary supplement under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act;
- replace state hemp, cannabis, food, pharmacy, or consumer-protection laws;
- establish federal licensing, age restrictions, testing methods, labeling rules, manufacturing standards, recalls, or adverse-event reporting; or
- guarantee that a product classified as hemp is otherwise lawful to manufacture, market, ship, prescribe, or sell.
FDA authority and the FD&C Act remain separate. A workable hemp definition and a complete cannabinoid-product regulatory pathway are related, but they are not the same legal question.
Questions Congress should test
- Serving and package size: The proposed full-spectrum category has a 3 mg-per-serving ceiling but no express package-level ceiling. Should Congress add a maximum number of servings, a container cap, or both?
- CBD-to-THC ratio: Does the 15:1 ratio work across oils, capsules, gummies, and topicals, and how should it be measured?
- Testing: Which methods, conversion formulas, sampling protocols, laboratory standards, and measurement-uncertainty rules should govern?
- Processor custody: Who qualifies as licensed or registered, what records are required, and when does the intermediate-product safe harbor end?
- Consumer safeguards: Which agency should oversee truthful labeling, manufacturing controls, child-resistant packaging where appropriate, contaminants, recalls, and adverse-event reporting?
Congressional and technical review requested
Congressional offices, committee staff, agencies, laboratories, patient organizations, farm groups, public-health organizations, manufacturers, processors, retailers, and trade associations are invited to submit line-by-line comments.
Please identify the clause you would change, provide replacement language where possible, explain the product, testing, enforcement, or patient-access problem, and include supporting data that legislative staff can evaluate. Congressional offices may also request an editable Word version, a Section 781 comparison, or a short technical briefing.
Use the subject line Full-Spectrum CBD Discussion Draft. This is a public policy-review channel. Do not submit confidential or privileged information. Sending comments does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Primary sources
- 7 U.S.C. § 1639o, including the future amendment note
- Public Law 119-37, Section 781
- Congressional Research Service: Changes to the Federal Definition of Hemp
- Executive Order 14370: Increasing Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol Research
- FDA: Regulation of Cannabis and Cannabis-Derived Products, Including CBD
Legal disclaimer: This page and video are for legislative discussion and general educational purposes only. They are not legal advice, do not create an attorney-client relationship, and should not be relied on as a current compliance determination for any product or business. Laws, agency positions, and legislative text can change. Attorney Advertising.
Looking for legal counsel?
This legal-services intake is separate from the public policy-feedback process above. To discuss a hemp or cannabinoid business matter with Cannabis Industry Lawyer, call (833) 952-3111 or use the Cannabis Industry Lawyer contact page. Do not send confidential information until the firm confirms representation.
Frequently asked questions
Has the Full-Spectrum CBD and Hemp Clarification Act of 2026 been introduced?
No. It is a private discussion draft. It has not been introduced, assigned a bill number, referred to a committee, or endorsed by a congressional office.
Would this draft legalize intoxicating hemp products?
The proposed text is designed to preserve a limited CBD-dominant full-spectrum category while continuing to exclude cannabinoids synthesized outside the plant. It would apply a 2.0 mg-per-container limit to non-full-spectrum final products and require qualifying full-spectrum products to contain not more than 3 mg total THC per serving, maintain at least a 15:1 CBD-to-total-THC ratio, and not be marketed for intoxication. Those limits remain open to technical and legislative review.
Would meeting the proposed hemp definition make a CBD food or supplement lawful?
Not necessarily. Classification as hemp under the Agricultural Marketing Act does not displace FDA authority under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act or applicable state law.
