The sun is setting on proposed hemp bills in the Sunshine State

Editor’s note – This article was written by Kight Law attorney and Florida native, Amber Lengacher. 

The morning of April 30, 2025, Florida Politics reported that the Florida “[l]egislature will not pass a regulatory framework for hemp this Legislative Session.” Florida House Rep. Michelle Salzman, who led a House working group on the issue, said the legislature “will not be focused on this legislation as we wrap up the 2025 Session.”

The Florida legislature ends on Friday, May 2, 2025, according to the legislative calendar.

Rep. Salzman was spearheading two bills: HB 7027 focused on hemp regulatory policy and HB 7029 focused on taxation. The House was also considering SB 438, which was passed by the Senate earlier this year.

In this article, Sen. Colleen Burton, sponsor of SB 438, told the outlet that “she remained hopeful on chambers negotiating a deal, but that there remained ‘stylistic differences’ between the House and Senate.” Those differences include bans on synthetic cannabinoids and how to measure THC allowances.

Later that same day, Florida Politics released another article, asking “what’s the problem for Salzman?” proposing it “couldn’t possibly be that she just wants to leave products potentially harmful to children to remain unregulated.”

But hemp extract and products made therefrom are regulated in Florida. See the Florida law here and the Florida rules here. These requirements include:

• An age prohibition requiring all hemp retailers to only sell products to adults 21 years of age or older, including online sales. Retailers must post signage, verify identification, and prohibit staff from even allowing sampling by those who are underage.
• Enforcement around products and advertising that are considered to be “attractive to children” with a sophisticated definition of the term;
• Full panel product testing requirements for pesticides, residual solvents, heavy metals, biological contaminants, mycotoxins, yeast, and mold;
• A robust list of prohibited ingredients including color additives, vitamin E acetate, Diacetyl, Myclobutanil, and so much more;
• Packaging compliant with ASTM International D3475-20, Standard Classification of Child Resistant Packages;
• Detailed labeling requirements identifying required serving sizes in a way that is more clear than any other state in the country (one pre-roll equates to a single serving);
• Business licensing requirements including Retail Hemp Food Establishment Permits from the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (“FLDACS”) more.

Under these existing requirements, the FLDACS has conducted widespread enforcement actions.

So, what’s all the fuss about when Florida already regulates these products and enforces against bad actors? Isn’t this still about ending prohibition? What were these new bills trying to accomplish?

SB 438, as passed by the Senate, would tighten existing regulations on the hemp industry, limiting consumer access to these in-demand products and restricting where hemp and hemp extract could be sold even further beyond current business licensing requirements. The bill would limit hemp products to 5mg of THC per serving and 50mg per container on a wet-weight basis, whichever is less, except that a THC-infused beverage may not contain more than 5mg per unopened can or bottle or in any other sealed container. SB 438 limits the sale of hemp beverages to licensed alcohol establishments and requires distributor licensing. The bill would ban D8, D10, other cannabinoids. Usually unique to cannabis, the bill contains distance setback requirements (500 feet from schools, daycares, other hemp establishments) to further limit where hemp products are sold. It bans street and festival sales of hemp products too. The bill would also provide $2 million to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement for testing equipment needed to implement the act.

Many view SB 438 as an attempt to allow the monopolization of the hemp industry, similarly to Florida’s limited “medical marijuana” program.

As to the Florida House bills, HB 7027 would regulate where consumable hemp goods can be sold and how much THC they can contain (100mg of hemp and psychotropic cannabinoids for most packages, with smaller serving sizes). It defines “psychotropic cannabinoids” to include “any cannabinoid, including synthetic cannabinoids, that causes or may cause a psychotropic effect when ingested or inhaled. The term includes delta-8-tetrahydrocannabinol, delta-10-tetrahydrocannabinol, hexahydrocannabinol, tetrahydrocannabinol acetate, tetrahydrocannabiphorol, tetrahydrocannabivarin, and any other cannabinoid defined as psychotropic by department rule.” The bill also defines “non-psychotropic cannabinoids” to include CBD and others established by rule. A reasonable distinction other states have made as well, “non-psychotropic cannabinoid” products would not have to meet all the requirements of their counterparts.

The other Florida House Bill, HB 7029, would impose a tax on goods more similar to cigarettes and alcohol. HB 7029 would cut hemp excise taxes from 60% to 15%.

We’ll have to wait the next few days to see if any legislative action takes place in Florida on these bills, but—for now at least—it seems none of them have the requisite momentum to make it to the Governor’s desk, a governor who, you may recall, previously vetoed restrictive hemp legislation passed by Florida’s legislature.

As a long-time Florida resident, a graduate of UCF and UF Law, former Corporate Counsel for Trulieve, and an avid anti-prohibitionist, I sincerely hope that Florida lawmakers understand their mission: decriminalize cannabis, repair the harm from the failed War on Drugs, and maintain an open market for all cannabinoid products that prioritizes consumers through product quality and price competition.

April 30, 2025

This article was written by Kight Law attorney Amber Lengacher. Kight Law represents hemp businesses in the US and throughout the world.