Senate Bill 620, titled the STRONG Act of 2025, is a broad anti-fentanyl and opioid-response bill that combines tougher criminal penalties with public health, law enforcement, and treatment initiatives. It increases penalties for trafficking in opium, opiates, opioids, heroin, fentanyl, and carfentanil, including higher fines and longer prison terms, and it also raises penalties for certain death-by-distribution offenses. The bill further enhances penalties for trafficking near schools, child care centers, playgrounds, parks, shopping malls, and transit stations.
The bill also directs state resources toward enforcement and interdiction. It appropriates recurring funding to expand the SBI Drug Task Force, creates a State and Federal Drug Interdiction Task Force within the Department of Public Safety, and requires in-service opioid detection training for sworn law enforcement officers. In addition, it expands the Controlled Substances Reporting System to include reporting for gabapentin, xylazine, and nitazenes, adds veterinary dispensers to reporting requirements, and funds data analytics and automation upgrades for the system. The bill also directs the state to pursue federal data-sharing connections to better track cross-border trafficking trends.
On the public health side, the bill appropriates substantial nonrecurring funding for opioid overdose education, naloxone distribution, medication-assisted treatment, mobile treatment units, incarceration-based treatment access, community rehabilitation programs, and rural telehealth addiction counseling. It also calls for a statewide fentanyl awareness campaign and a real-time overdose data webpage. The bill includes findings supporting a tightly regulated medical cannabis pilot program and a possible certification process for faith-based and nonprofit rehabilitation centers, but it does not itself create those programs; instead, it authorizes study and reporting and leaves implementation to future legislative action.
The bill’s legal impact would be significant. It amends multiple sections of the North Carolina General Statutes, including criminal drug trafficking statutes, death-by-distribution penalties, law enforcement training provisions, the controlled substances reporting system, and state tax law. It also creates new appropriations and a new tax credit for businesses that employ workers who complete substance use disorder counseling, subject to documentation and annual caps. Effective dates are staggered, with some provisions beginning July 1, 2025, others December 1, 2025, and the training requirement beginning January 1, 2026.
Overall, the bill appears to be framed as a comprehensive, aggressive response to the fentanyl crisis, combining enforcement, prevention, treatment, and recovery measures. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, the available context does not show direct legislative debate or formal support/opposition. The bill’s structure suggests likely broad support for addressing overdose deaths, but it also contains potentially contentious elements, especially the increased criminal penalties, expanded surveillance/reporting requirements, and the use of state funds for law enforcement and interdiction rather than treatment alone.
The bill would amend North Carolina criminal law to impose harsher penalties for trafficking opioids and heroin, increase punishment for certain death-by-distribution offenses, and enhance penalties for trafficking near schools and other sensitive locations. It would also expand state reporting and enforcement infrastructure by broadening Controlled Substances Reporting System reporting requirements, creating a new drug interdiction task force, mandating opioid detection training for law enforcement, and appropriating funds for SBI and public health programs. In tax law, it creates a nonrefundable income tax credit for businesses that employ workers who complete substance use disorder counseling, while also directing new appropriations for treatment, recovery, and overdose prevention services.
The most likely points of contention are the bill’s increased criminal penalties, especially the higher fines and longer prison terms for fentanyl-related trafficking and death-by-distribution offenses, and the expanded reporting obligations for controlled substances, including gabapentin, xylazine, and nitazenes. Some stakeholders may also question the balance between enforcement spending and treatment funding, the creation of a state-federal interdiction task force with federal participation, and the bill’s reference to a medical cannabis pilot program and certification of faith-based rehabilitation centers without actually establishing those programs. The tax credit for employers may also draw scrutiny over eligibility, verification of counseling completion, and fiscal cost.