Regulate Hemp-Derived Beverages
Senate Bill 535 would regulate nonalcoholic hemp-derived beverages in North Carolina by bringing them into the state’s Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) framework. The bill defines “hemp-derived beverage” and “hemp-derived cannabinoid,” and it amends the state’s alcohol laws to treat hemp-derived beverages as a category of malt beverage for regulatory purposes. It also creates a new prohibition making it unlawful to manufacture, sell, transport, import, deliver, furnish, purchase, consume, or possess hemp-derived beverages except as otherwise authorized in the ABC law.
The bill gives the ABC Commission authority to set standards and adopt rules for hemp-derived beverages, including standards related to harmful substances, purity, identity, labeling, and advertising. It also allows the Commission to test these products, rely on outside testing, and charge manufacturers for testing costs. The bill further updates a permit provision related to keg purchase-transportation by referencing the revised definition section, and it directs the Commission to adopt or amend rules to conform with the act. The effective date is July 1, 2025, and the new rules apply to hemp-derived beverages manufactured or handled on or after that date.
If enacted, the bill would expand Chapter 18B of the General Statutes to expressly cover hemp-derived beverages, placing them under ABC Commission oversight and subjecting them to the same general regulatory structure used for alcoholic beverages and malt beverages. It would also create a new statutory prohibition on unregulated possession, sale, transport, and related activities involving hemp-derived beverages, while authorizing the Commission to establish product standards, testing procedures, and related compliance rules. The bill would affect manufacturers, distributors, retailers, consumers, and the ABC Commission, and it would likely require rulemaking and administrative adjustments before the effective date.
Based on the bill’s title and structure, the measure appears aimed at tightening regulation rather than banning hemp-derived beverages outright, suggesting a policy approach focused on consumer safety, product standards, and regulatory clarity. No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate, support, or opposition in the available materials. The absence of voting history also means the overall sentiment cannot be measured from legislative action, only inferred from the bill’s regulatory framing.
The main point of contention is likely to be whether hemp-derived beverages should be regulated like alcoholic beverages under the ABC system or treated as a separate hemp product category. Potential concerns may include the breadth of the prohibition in Section 2, the inclusion of synthetic cannabinoids derived from hemp, and the extent of ABC Commission authority to set standards and require testing. Businesses in the hemp beverage market may view the bill as imposing new compliance burdens, while supporters are likely to argue that the measure is needed to protect consumers and create clear statewide rules.