Skip to main content

Tag: “Hemp Industry Economic Impact Analysis

Key Facts About SB 3 and Hemp Testing in Texas

Written by Jay Maguire on . Posted in Lab Testing. No Comments on Key Facts About SB 3 and Hemp Testing in Texas

FACT SHEET: Texas Hemp Legislation & Testing Controversy

Cannabis Retailers Alliance of Texas (CRAFT) | May 14, 2025

Key Facts About SB 3 and Hemp Testing in Texas

Flawed Testing Protocols

  • State-contracted laboratories, including Armstrong Forensic Laboratory, use gas chromatography (GC-MS) methods that artificially convert THCA into delta-9 THC during analysis.[1]
  • This conversion process causes legally compliant hemp products to test as controlled substances, resulting in unjustified felony charges.[1,2]
  • The Texas Forensic Science Commission’s April 2025 Schuette Report confirms these testing methods are only valid for pre-harvest plant material, not finished products like oils or edibles.[1]

Regulatory Context

  • No legislative updates have occurred since HB 1325 legalized hemp in Texas in 2019.[3]
  • The Department of State Health Services has not issued updated guidance to address finished hemp product testing.[2,4]
  • CRAFT has developed industry self-regulation standards including batch testing verification, age restrictions, and third-party standards for product safety.[5]

Economic Impact of SB 3

  • Projected job losses: 50,000+ direct and indirect positions[6]
  • Affected businesses: 8,000-10,000 retail locations statewide[6]
  • Economic activity at risk: Estimated $2.7 billion annually[7]
  • Disproportionate impact on working-class commercial districts where hemp retailers have revitalized vacant storefronts[6,8]

Law Enforcement Actions

  • Multiple retailers operating under existing legal frameworks have faced felony charges based on contested testing methodologies[2,9]
  • Defense attorneys have challenged the validity of these prosecutions citing the Schuette Report findings[1,9]
  • No demonstrated correlation between enforcement actions and public health incidents[10]

Scientific Consensus

  • Proper testing of non-plant hemp materials requires HPLC or GC with derivatization to accurately distinguish THCA from delta-9 THC[1,11]
  • Current testing methods used by Texas law enforcement do not align with scientific best practices for finished product analysis[1,11]
  • Federal standards recognize the distinction between THCA and delta-9 THC in compliance verification[12]

Sources:

  1. Texas Forensic Science Commission, “Schuette Report on Cannabis Testing Methodologies,” April 2025
  2. Department of State Health Services, “Hemp Program Guidelines,” Last updated June 2019
  3. Texas Legislature, “House Bill 1325,” Passed May 2019
  4. Texas Register, “Department of State Health Services Regulatory Notices,” 2019-2025
  5. CRAFT, “Industry Standards and Best Practices,” 2025
  6. Texas Economic Development Council, “Hemp Industry Economic Impact Analysis,” March 2025
  7. University of Texas Bureau of Business Research, “Economic Contribution of Texas Hemp Industries,” 2025
  8. Texas Municipal League, “Commercial District Revitalization Report,” January 2025
  9. State of Texas v. [Multiple Defendants], Court Records, 2024-2025
  10. Texas Department of Health Services, “Consumer Product Safety Incident Reports,” 2023-2025
  11. Journal of Analytical Toxicology, “Methods for Cannabinoid Analysis in Complex Matrices,” Vol. 49, 2024
  12. USDA, “Guidelines for Hemp Testing Procedures,” Updated January 2025

For additional information, contact CRAFT at [email protected] or visit www.joincraft.org