Texas hemp rules, with their status stated honestly.

The adopted DSHS rules set out the required contents of a certificate of analysis for consumable hemp products as a condition of sale in Texas. Section 300.301(d) names twelve fields, among them laboratory identification and contact information, sample and lot identification, analytical methods and instrumentation with limits of detection and quantitation, an expiration date, measurement of uncertainty analysis parameters, a QR code verifying the authenticity of testing at an accredited laboratory, and results reporting delta-9 THC, total delta-9 THC, and total THC per container.

Citation

25 TAC §300.301(d) (adopted rules, 25 TAC Chapter 300)

Source

Texas Register — adopted rules, 25 TAC Chapter 300 (TRD-202601066)

Effective

In effect — March 31, 2026, adopted DSHS rules filed with the Secretary of State March 2, 2026 (TRD-202601066).

Enforcement

In force — No stay or injunction against the COA content requirements as such was identified in this review. The total delta-9 THC threshold is recorded separately below because its posture is different; §300.301(d) is the certificate-of-analysis field set and carries no threshold of its own.

Last reviewed

2026-08-16 · HempDash compliance research — primary-source verification pending

Pending verification

The required-field list was verified 2026-08-16 against two independent official publications — the DSHS adopted-rule text and the Texas Register adoption notice (TRD-202601066) — which agree that §300.301(d) names twelve fields. The earlier conflicting counts came from third-party summaries rather than the adopted text, and the count is therefore no longer withheld. The HempDash compliance team ratified the interpretation 2026-08-17: the twelve-field list is complete with no incorporated-by-reference additions, and the §300.303(h) analyte list is separate (receipt kv-receipt-2026-08-17-coa-q4). Open questions this record asserts in neither direction: the total delta-9 THC computation method (Q1) and present enforcement posture.

Section 300.402 sets what must appear on the label of a consumable hemp product marketed as containing cannabinoids: batch number, batch date, product name, the manufacturer or processor's name, their telephone number and email address, recommended serving size in milligrams and servings per container, and a uniform resource locator providing or linking to a certificate of analysis for the product or each hemp-derived ingredient, including the amount of cannabinoid per serving or unit, total THC, and total delta-9 THC. That URL must be conspicuously marked and must directly link to a webpage where the required COA may be found in three or fewer steps. The URL is mandatory and a QR code does not substitute for it, though one may be added. The section also requires five specific warnings, and the label must appear on the outer packaging of each product intended for individual retail sale.

Citation

25 TAC §300.402(a), (a)(6)(A)-(B), (b), (c)

Source

Texas Register — adopted rules, 25 TAC Chapter 300 (TRD-202601066)

Effective

In effect — March 31, 2026, adopted DSHS rules filed with the Secretary of State March 2, 2026 (TRD-202601066). Section 300.402 was adopted with changes to the proposed text published December 26, 2025 (50 TexReg 8486).

Enforcement

In force — No stay or injunction against the labeling requirements as such was identified in this review. Enforcement posture is not read here and is asserted in neither direction.

Last reviewed

2026-09-08 · HempDash compliance research — primary-source verification pending

Pending verification

Dual-source across authorities on 2026-09-08: the DSHS adopted-rule text, extracted mechanically rather than through a summarising model, and the Texas Register adoption notice for the March 2026 issue. The two agree on the section, its adoption posture, and the mandatory URL — in adopting §300.402 DSHS considered and declined a comment proposing a QR code in place of the URL, stating that HB 1325 requires the label to carry a URL linked to the certificate of analysis. This record was created out of a same-day correction: an earlier reading reported the three-or-fewer-steps condition as untraceable, which was wrong, and the checks that produced that result are documented in the receipt. Not decided by this record: what counts as a step under (a)(6)(B), which the rule does not define; §§300.405 to 300.407 on packaging, packaging control and misleading packaging, which are adjacent and separate.

The adopted rules require retailers of consumable hemp products to register with DSHS, with a registration fee of $5,000 per retail location under the adopted fee provisions. DSHS separately publishes the amount payable as $5,150 per location for a one-year registration, stating that the $5,150 includes the Texas Online (TOL) fee — so the figure in the rule and the figure at the point of payment are different quantities, and the difference is the surcharge rather than a change to the fee. Three further provisions of §300.502 bear directly on an applicant. Under (b)(7) the application must contain written consent — from the applicant, or from the property owner where the applicant is not the owner — for the department, the Department of Public Safety, the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission, and other state or local law enforcement agencies to enter all premises where consumable hemp is manufactured, processed, sold, or delivered, for physical inspection or to confirm compliance with the chapter. Under (d) an initial or renewal application runs on three stated periods: a first period of 45 calendar days from receipt of a completed application, which instead ends on the date the department issues written notice that the application is incomplete — a notice the department must issue within 60 calendar days of receiving an incomplete application, describing the specific information or fee required; a second period of 45 calendar days from receipt of a completed application, ending when the department issues the license or a written notice proposing denial; and a third period of 135 calendar days from the date that incompleteness notice issues, after which, if the applicant has not supplied the requested information or fee, the department considers the application withdrawn. Under (h), where an application is not processed within those periods, the applicant has the right to request in writing, within 30 business days after the end of the second period, full reimbursement of the fee paid; if the department finds good cause does not exist for exceeding the periods the request shall be approved, and the department shall notify the applicant in writing within 30 business days of its decision.

Citation

25 TAC §300.502(b)(7), (d), (g), (h) and §300.202(c) (registration provisions); Texas Health & Safety Code ch. 443

Source

Texas Administrative Code, Title 25, Chapter 300 (Secretary of State rules portal)

Effective

In effect — March 31, 2026 (adopted DSHS rules).

Enforcement

In force — No stay or injunction against the registration requirement was identified in this review.

Last reviewed

2026-09-14 · HempDash compliance research — primary-source verification pending

Pending verification

The $5,000-per-location rule figure was triple-source verified on 2026-08-16 against 25 TAC §300.502(g) (receipt kv-receipt-2026-08-16-fees-r5); an earlier note here describing it as pending was stale and is corrected. The $5,150 amount payable was verified on 2026-08-27 across two DSHS licensing surfaces (supplemental receipt kv-receipt-2026-08-27-fees-tol). The TOL component itself is derived by subtraction from those two verified figures and is not an amount published by DSHS or Texas.gov; whether the surcharge also attaches to renewal, delinquency and amendment fees is unresolved. Subsections (b)(7), (d) and (h) were read 2026-09-14 from the Texas Register republication of the adopted text and are recorded above (supplemental receipt kv-receipt-2026-09-14-502-dh-b7). Two points are deliberately NOT resolved there: (d)(2) says the second period ends when the department issues the “license”, in a subchapter that otherwise issues a retail “registration”, and this record keeps the rule’s word rather than reconciling it; and (h)(1) measures the reimbursement request from the end of the second period while (d) also defines a third period of 135 days, which the text does not expressly reconcile. Neither is resolved here. The adoption preamble summarises (b)(7) as consent for TABC to enter; the operative text names the department, DPS, TABC and other state or local law enforcement agencies, and the operative text governs. ONE WORD IS NOT VERBATIM: in the second purpose clause of (b)(7) the summary above substitutes “confirm” for the rule’s own verb, which the site-wide copy gate bans as outcome-promise language. The gate was not weakened for this record. The clause is reproduced exactly, and the substitution identified, in receipt kv-receipt-2026-09-14-502-dh-b7.

The adopted rules explicitly extend retail registration to online retailers selling consumable hemp products to Texas consumers — selling into Texas from outside the state does not place a seller outside the registration requirement.

Citation

25 TAC Chapter 300 (registration provisions)

Source

Texas Administrative Code, Title 25, Chapter 300 (Secretary of State rules portal)

Effective

In effect — March 31, 2026 (adopted DSHS rules).

Enforcement

In force — No stay or injunction against the online-retailer registration provision was identified in this review.

Last reviewed

2026-08-14 · HempDash compliance research — primary-source verification pending

The adopted rules carry provisions specific to smokable hemp products. This record states that the provisions exist and are in effect; it does not summarize their scope, because that summary has not been verified against the rule text.

Citation

25 TAC Chapter 300 (smokable hemp provisions); Texas Health & Safety Code ch. 443

Source

Texas Administrative Code, Title 25, Chapter 300 (Secretary of State rules portal)

Effective

In effect — March 31, 2026 (adopted DSHS rules).

Enforcement

In force — No stay or injunction against the smokable hemp provisions was identified in this review.

Last reviewed

2026-08-14 · HempDash compliance research — primary-source verification pending

Pending verification

The scope of the smokable hemp provisions — and how they interact with earlier smokable-hemp litigation history — is pending counsel verification. The provisions' substance is deliberately not summarized until then.

Sales of consumable hemp products in Texas are restricted to purchasers 21 and over, grounded in Executive Order GA-56 (2025) and carried into the adopted Chapter 300 rules.

Citation

Executive Order GA-56 (2025); 25 TAC Chapter 300

Source

Office of the Texas Governor; Texas Administrative Code

Effective

In effect — GA-56 issued October 2025; the Chapter 300 age provisions took effect with the adopted rules on March 31, 2026.

Enforcement

In force — No stay or injunction against the age restriction was identified in this review.

Last reviewed

2026-08-14 · HempDash compliance research — primary-source verification pending

Pending verification

Deep link to the GA-56 order text is pending; the source URL is the issuing office's site.

A TABC permittee or licensee may not authorize or allow any person to consume a consumable hemp product on any permitted or licensed premises where the consumption of alcoholic beverages is generally prohibited. The rule attaches to the premises, not to the product: a location that cannot let customers drink on site cannot let them consume hemp products on site either. It governs consumption only — it is not a restriction on sale, and it is separate from the DSHS Chapter 300 rules that govern the product itself.

Citation

16 TAC §35.7 (TRD-202602271; adopted without changes to the proposed text at 51 TexReg 2306)

Source

Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission; Texas Register

Effective

In effect — adopted at the Commission's June 2, 2026 meeting, filed with the Secretary of State June 2, 2026 (TRD-202602271), published in the June 19, 2026 Texas Register, and effective June 22, 2026. Adopted without changes to the text proposed April 10, 2026 (51 TexReg 2306).

Enforcement

In force — No stay or injunction against this rule was identified in this review. TABC is a separate authority from DSHS: this rule sits in the Alcoholic Beverage Code and reaches TABC permittees and licensees, so it binds a subset of hemp sellers — those that also hold a TABC licence or permit — and does not reach a retailer that holds none. Nothing in this record speaks to the enforcement posture of any DSHS rule, which is answered record by record elsewhere and is not settled by this one.

Last reviewed

2026-08-28 · HempDash compliance research — primary-source verification pending

Pending verification

The verbatim adopted text has NOT been read. The June 19, 2026 adopted-rules page carries the preamble, reasoned justification and comment responses only; the operative language sits at 51 TexReg 2306 (April 10, 2026) and a deep link to it is pending. The rule's effect is stated here on the agreement of three official surfaces rather than quoted. Also not recorded: TABC's own page states a base penalty of $250 and a duty to take reasonable steps to prevent consumption — both single-source, neither rule text, and both left out pending a second source.

A Texas controlled-substances scheduling change places manufactured and synthesized cannabinoids on the state schedules, published in the Texas Register at 51 TexReg 4597 on July 10, 2026 and effective July 31, 2026.

Citation

51 TexReg 4597 (published 2026-07-10)

Source

Texas Register, Office of the Secretary of State

Effective

In effect — July 31, 2026.

Enforcement

In force — No stay or injunction against the scheduling action was identified in this review. DSHS states on its Consumable Hemp Program page that consumable hemp products "labeled to contain delta-8 THC or shown to contain more than trace amounts of tetrahydrocannabinols, including delta-8 THC, may be detained and referred to law enforcement" (read 2026-08-26). That is the agency's statement of what it may do; it is not a determination that any particular product is unlawful. Which specific products and processes fall within "manufactured" or "synthesized" is a scope question — see the delta-8 record below.

Litigation

Federal challenge: an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order was reported DENIED 2026-08-10 (S.D. Tex., Galveston Division), on the stated ground that plaintiffs had not sufficiently demonstrated irreparable harm; the request for a preliminary injunction was reported still pending. Reported by multiple independent press outlets; the docket was NOT read and the case number is not yet confirmed. State challenge: the temporary injunction was lifted 2026-06-05 by the Fifteenth Court of Appeals at the State's request, and the interlocutory appeal continues — see the total delta-9 THC threshold record below.

Last reviewed

2026-08-26 · HempDash compliance research — primary-source verification pending

Pending verification

Deep link to the 51 TexReg 4597 issue is pending; the source URL is the Texas Register index.

P.L. 119-37 §781 replaces the federal definition of hemp at 7 U.S.C. 1639o. The new §297A(1)(A) defines hemp as the plant and any part of it "with a total tetrahydrocannabinols concentration (including tetrahydrocannabinolic acid) of not more than 0.3 percent on a dry weight basis" — so THCA counts toward the limit rather than delta-9 THC alone. The definition carries a separate set of exclusions at §297A(1)(C), recorded in the two records below. This is a scheduled future requirement. It is not in force today and nothing here binds any operator now.

Citation

P.L. 119-37 §781, enacting 7 U.S.C. 1639o §297A(1)(A) (139 Stat. 558-559)

Source

U.S. Government Publishing Office — govinfo, Public Law 119-37 enrolled text

Effective

Scheduled. §781 is effective 365 days after enactment of P.L. 119-37, which was signed November 12, 2025 — so November 12, 2026. NOT in effect today. From November 12, 2026 until December 11, 2026 the §781 amendments are narrowed by P.L. 119-103 §2019 to two subclauses only; see statutoryTimeline.

Enforcement

Not yet in force — Nothing about this provision is enforceable before its effective date. It is recorded here so operators can prepare, not because it binds anyone today. No enforcement posture, federal or state, is asserted in either direction.

Last reviewed

2026-09-14 · HempDash compliance research — primary-source verification pending

Pending verification

Statutory text and date chain read 2026-09-14 directly from two govinfo primary sources — PLAW-119publ37 (the §781 text) and BILLS-119hr6500enr (the §2019 narrowing) — extracted locally rather than through a summarising model, with positive controls confirming the searches would have matched had the terms been present. The enactment chain for P.L. 119-103 is from govinfo BILLSTATUS-119hr6500. Receipt kv-receipt-2026-09-14-fed-781-structure. This record states the definition text and its date semantics only. It does NOT state which compounds or products satisfy the definition or any exclusion; that classification is an open question and is asserted in neither direction. Record remains KV_PENDING pending counsel review of the classification questions.

P.L. 119-37 §781 excludes from the federal definition of hemp any final hemp-derived cannabinoid product containing "greater than 0.4 milligrams combined total per container" of (aa) total tetrahydrocannabinols including tetrahydrocannabinolic acid, AND (bb) any other cannabinoids that have similar effects — or are marketed to have similar effects — on humans or animals as a tetrahydrocannabinol, as determined by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. The cap is therefore a COMBINED figure across two groups, and the second group is defined by a determination the Secretary has not yet published. It is not a cap on total THC alone. This is a scheduled future requirement, not a rule in force today.

Citation

P.L. 119-37 §781, enacting 7 U.S.C. 1639o §297A(1)(C)(iv)(III)

Source

U.S. Government Publishing Office — govinfo, Public Law 119-37 enrolled text

Effective

Scheduled — §781 effective November 12, 2026. NOT in effect today. IMPORTANT: P.L. 119-103 §2019 narrows the §781 amendments until December 11, 2026 to paragraphs (1)(C)(ii)(I) and (1)(C)(iv)(I) ONLY. This container cap sits at (1)(C)(iv)(III) and is NOT among the paragraphs §2019 names. What that omission does to the cap's operation between November 12 and December 11 is a question of statutory construction this record does not decide, in either direction.

Enforcement

Not yet in force — Nothing about this provision is enforceable before its effective date. The per-container combined total is the figure to understand before then. No enforcement posture is asserted in either direction.

Last reviewed

2026-09-14 · HempDash compliance research — primary-source verification pending

Pending verification

Read 2026-09-14 from govinfo PLAW-119publ37, extracted locally. CORRECTION MADE BY THIS REVIEW: this record previously described the provision as a cap of "0.4 mg total THC per container". The statute caps a COMBINED total of total tetrahydrocannabinols AND a second, open class of similar-effect cannabinoids determined by the Secretary of HHS. The earlier wording understated the provision by omitting the second limb. Receipt kv-receipt-2026-09-14-fed-781-structure. NOT decided here: whether the Secretary has made any determination under (bb); and what §2019 omitting (iv)(III) means for the cap before December 11. Record remains KV_PENDING.

P.L. 119-37 §781 excludes certain cannabinoids from the federal definition of hemp using TWO distinct subclauses, which appear once for intermediate products at §297A(1)(C)(ii) and again, in identical wording, for final products at (1)(C)(iv). Subclause (I) reaches "cannabinoids that are not capable of being naturally produced by a Cannabis sativa L. plant" — a question about what the SPECIES can produce at all. Subclause (II) reaches cannabinoids that "(aa) are capable of being naturally produced by a Cannabis sativa L. plant; and (bb) were synthesized or manufactured outside the plant" — a question about the ORIGIN OF THE PARTICULAR MATERIAL. The two tests can give opposite answers for the same compound, which is why the statute states them separately. This record deliberately does NOT collapse them into a single category of "synthesized cannabinoids". This is a scheduled future requirement, not a rule in force today.

Citation

P.L. 119-37 §781, enacting 7 U.S.C. 1639o §297A(1)(C)(ii)(I)-(II) and (1)(C)(iv)(I)-(II)

Source

U.S. Government Publishing Office — govinfo, Public Law 119-37 enrolled text

Effective

Scheduled — §781 effective November 12, 2026. NOT in effect today. P.L. 119-103 §2019 narrows the §781 amendments until December 11, 2026 to paragraphs (1)(C)(ii)(I) and (1)(C)(iv)(I) — that is, to subclause (I) ONLY. Subclause (II) is not among the paragraphs §2019 names. That §2019 omits subclause (II) is a fact about the drafting of one sentence; it is NOT a finding that subclause (II) does or does not operate from November 12, and no inference in either direction is drawn here.

Enforcement

Not yet in force — Nothing about this provision is enforceable before its effective date. Whether a given compound is "capable of being naturally produced by a Cannabis sativa L. plant", and whether particular material "was synthesized or manufactured outside the plant", are product-specific questions of chemistry and law for counsel. This record states the tests; it does not apply them.

Last reviewed

2026-09-14 · HempDash compliance research — primary-source verification pending

Pending verification

Subclause text read 2026-09-14 from govinfo PLAW-119publ37 and quoted verbatim; the §2019 narrowing read from govinfo BILLS-119hr6500enr, whose operative sentence names paragraphs (1)(C)(ii)(I) and (1)(C)(iv)(I) and no others. Both extracted locally with positive controls. CORRECTION MADE BY THIS REVIEW: this record previously summarised §781 as excluding "synthesized cannabinoids", collapsing subclause (I) into subclause (II) — the same collapse found across secondary coverage on 2026-09-06 and again on 2026-09-13, now removed from our own record. Receipt kv-receipt-2026-09-14-fed-781-structure. NOT decided here, and asserted in neither direction: which compounds satisfy subclause (I) versus subclause (II); whether any particular product — delta-8, delta-10, THCP, THCA flower or any other — falls within either; and what §2019's omission of subclause (II) means for its operation. Record remains KV_PENDING on those classification questions.

The adopted rules set the consumable hemp product threshold at a total delta-9 THC concentration of 0.3% or less on a dry weight basis. Texas requires three separate measures to be tested and reported — delta-9 THC, total delta-9 THC, and total THC (§300.301(a)(3), (b)(2)) — and the threshold binds to total delta-9 THC, which is neither delta-9 alone nor total THC. A sample also meets the threshold where the accredited laboratory's measurement of uncertainty produces a distribution or range that includes a result of 0.3% or less. The threshold's effective date and its present enforceability are separate questions, answered separately in this record.

Citation

25 TAC §300.301(a)(3)-(4), §300.301(b)(2), (b)(4); 25 TAC §300.302(b)(1), (c)(3)

Source

Texas Register — adopted rules, 25 TAC Chapter 300 (TRD-202601066)

Effective

Effective March 31, 2026 — adopted DSHS rules, filed with the Secretary of State March 2, 2026 (TRD-202601066).

Enforcement

Under review — The calculation basis is settled by the rule text and is no longer the open question; what remains open is whether the threshold is presently being enforced. Litigation posture changed in June 2026 and remains under verification. This page does not state that the threshold is currently being enforced, and does not state that it is not; the verified facts are the threshold text and effective date above and the litigation history below.

Litigation

THBC v. DSHS — Travis Co. temporary injunction reported dissolved 2026-06-05 by the Fifteenth Court of Appeals; interlocutory appeal continues. Re-checked 2026-08-26 against the plaintiff-side trade organization's own public account, which CORROBORATES the 2026-06-05 lift (at the State's request) and supplies a case number for the interlocutory appeal, No. 15-26-00099-CV, with a plaintiff brief filed 2026-08-14. That source is PARTY-ADJACENT — a party's account of its own litigation — and the appellate record was not read. Separate federal litigation: a temporary restraining order was reported denied 2026-08-10 with a preliminary injunction still pending (see the scheduling record above). NOTE that secondary coverage frequently conflates this case with the separate Sky Marketing delta-8 matter; the Texas Supreme Court ruling reported in May 2026 was in Sky Marketing, not here.

Last reviewed

2026-08-26 · HempDash compliance research — primary-source verification pending

Pending verification

Verified 2026-08-16 against two independent official publications (the DSHS adopted-rule text and the Texas Register adoption notice, TRD-202601066): the threshold binds to total delta-9 THC, the 0.3% boundary is inclusive, and the measurement-of-uncertainty allowance is part of the rule. Those are recorded above as settled fact. The HempDash compliance team resolved the open computation question 2026-08-17: total delta-9 THC is computed as delta-9 THC plus 0.877 times THCA, and per §300.301(d)(12) all three tested values — delta-9 THC, total delta-9 THC, and total THC per container — are required on a conforming COA (receipt kv-receipt-2026-08-17-q1-method). One question remains open and is asserted in neither direction here: the present enforcement and litigation posture.

The legal position of delta-8 THC products in Texas has a contested, unsettled history spanning agency action and litigation since 2021. The July 31, 2026 scheduling of manufactured and synthesized cannabinoids (51 TexReg 4597) bears on delta-8 products to the extent they are produced by synthesis or conversion — a scope question this record does not decide.

Citation

51 TexReg 4597 (published 2026-07-10, effective 2026-07-31); prior contested history

Source

Texas Register, Office of the Secretary of State

Effective

The scheduling action is in effect as of July 31, 2026. How it applies to any particular delta-8 product depends on how that product is made.

Enforcement

Under review — Whether and how the scheduling action is being enforced against specific delta-8 product categories has not been verified in this review. DSHS states on its Consumable Hemp Program page that "[o]nly trace amounts of delta-8 THC naturally produced by the hemp plant from which the consumable hemp product was manufactured are permissible" and that products labeled to contain delta-8 THC, or shown to contain more than trace amounts, "may be detained and referred to law enforcement" (read 2026-08-26). That is the agency's published position on its own authority, not a determination about any particular product.

Litigation

The pre-2026 delta-8 dispute history (agency scheduling attempts and the resulting injunction litigation from 2021 onward) is part of the record but is not summarized here pending counsel verification of its current state.

Last reviewed

2026-08-26 · HempDash compliance research — primary-source verification pending

Pending verification

Counsel verification pending on: (1) which delta-8 production methods fall within the scheduled definitions, and (2) the current state of the earlier delta-8 litigation. The 2026-08-26 pass identified the thread question (2) turns on: the separate Sky Marketing matter, in which the Texas Supreme Court was reported to have ruled in DSHS's favor in May 2026 on delta-8 scheduling. That matter was NOT read and is not summarized here. Secondary coverage routinely conflates it with THBC v. DSHS, so it is named explicitly to keep the two apart.

Senate Bill 3 of the 89th Regular Session, which would have imposed broad restrictions on consumable hemp products, was vetoed by the Governor on June 22, 2025. It never took effect and imposes no requirement on any operator. It appears here because it is still widely — and wrongly — described as current law.

Citation

SB 3, 89th Legislature, Regular Session (2025); vetoed 2025-06-22

Source

Texas Legislature Online

Effective

Never took effect — vetoed June 22, 2025.

Enforcement

Not applicable — A vetoed bill is not law and is not enforced.

Last reviewed

2026-08-14 · HempDash compliance research — primary-source verification pending