Panel votes to transfer hemp regulation from agriculture to alcohol enforcement agency

In a recent meeting of the House Commerce Committee held on March 12, 2025, significant discussions centered around the regulation of hemp and proposed changes to loan acquisition charges, reflecting ongoing efforts to adapt state policies to current economic needs.

One of the primary topics was the decision to transfer the regulation of hemp from the Department of Agriculture to the Alcoholic Beverage Commission (ABC). This shift was justified by committee members who argued that hemp, being an intoxicating substance, aligns more closely with the ABC's expertise in managing similar products. Representative Clements raised concerns about this transition, questioning the rationale behind moving hemp oversight away from agricultural experts. However, supporters of the change emphasized that the retail aspects of hemp sales resemble those of liquor stores, suggesting that the ABC is better equipped to handle enforcement in this area while the Department of Agriculture will continue to oversee the cultivation of hemp.

The committee also discussed House Bill 775, which proposes to increase the acquisition charge for B loans from 10% to 12.5%. This change aims to enhance services and access to credit for underserved and unbanked populations. The bill's proponents highlighted that the last adjustments to these rates occurred in 2012 and 2017, indicating a need for updates to reflect current economic conditions. The increase is expected to create more eligible customers for loans, as it would allow for higher interest rates that could accommodate those who previously did not qualify due to credit issues.

Despite some skepticism regarding the necessity of raising rates in a fluctuating economic landscape, the committee ultimately voted in favor of the bill, with 10 ayes and 4 nos. This decision underscores a commitment to improving financial access for vulnerable communities while navigating the complexities of lending practices.

As the meeting concluded, discussions on additional bills were postponed, indicating a busy legislative agenda ahead. The outcomes of these discussions will likely have lasting implications for both the agricultural sector and financial services in Tennessee, as the state continues to adapt its regulatory framework to meet evolving needs.