Pursuant to an order signed by Attorney General Blanche, marijuana products regulated by a state medical cannabis license were immediately moved to Title III.
III. State-licensed medical cannabis dispensaries that wish to take advantage of the new legal protections and tax benefits that come with annexation status must first file an application with the DEA requesting information about their processes for storage, ordering, distribution, inventory, record keeping and other aspects of their business.
For each activity below, indicate whether the company has a standard operating procedure (SOP):
the order
receiving
Inventories
Marijuana storage
security
Distribution (including delivery services)
to divide
Destruction/Disposal
Reporting Theft/Loss
Due diligence (including provider/patient/professional verification)
Corresponding Liability
Record keeping”
The application asks about specific details of security measures such as vaults, safes, secure storage, access controls, alarm systems and on-site security personnel.
Applicants can choose whether to apply for administration of marijuana, marijuana extracts, or naturally derived delta-9 THC.
Currently, with only medical marijuana moving to Schedule III, the application asks potential registrants whether their businesses handle or provide recreational marijuana.
According to last week’s DOJ order, an expedited administrative hearing process will be held beginning June 29 to consider the broader cannabis reorganization.
The DEA application, meanwhile, also asks companies to submit information about their state’s cannabis licenses and to answer questions about their criminal and disciplinary history.
It also asks, “Has anyone involved in the ownership or operation of the business previously manufactured, distributed, and/or provided a controlled substance without a DEA registration authorizing such activity?”
Allegedly every illegal cannabis company operating in the state today has key employees who have done so, medical marijuana was a Schedule I substance whose manufacture, distribution and general distribution was not permitted by the DEA until just a few days ago.
Applicants must also list the suppliers from whom they plan to procure marijuana, and report whether they plan to repackage or relabel cannabis products.
They must also provide lists of people whose business they expect to have “access to controlled substances,” including their dates of birth, social security numbers, and drug-related criminal histories.
“Provide the following for each person you plan to acquire controlled substances:
The name
Title(s)
date of birth
Social Security number
DEA registration numbers, if applicable
State/territory permits to manufacture, distribute, dispense, or otherwise handle controlled substances
Has this person been subject to one or more federal, state, territorial, or tribal disciplinary actions?
Has this person been convicted of federal, state, territorial, tribal, or local offenses related to controlled substances?
There is also $794 per year the application fee, currently only payable through PayPal, although DEA ”expects to have additional payment methods in the coming weeks.”
Application fees are non-refundable.
Separately, the DEA has launched a new web page on its website that contains key information about the new federal rescheduling move for cannabis, including copies of Federal Register orders outlining the process for the amendment and the upcoming litigation.
Blanche’s reorganization order last week said that to comply with the international drug control treaty’s “requirement that a government agency act as the exclusive purchaser of cannabis production,” the DOJ is setting in motion a process by which the federal government technically buys from marijuana producers and then sells to them or related entities.
“Registered growers must store the crops in a DEA-accessible facility until that transaction is completed, and each grower’s registration must specify the area in which the grow is allowed,” he said.
“All manufacturers registered under this subsection shall establish a nominal price for the purchase of their marijuana crops. The Administration shall then purchase the entity’s crops at that price and resell the crops to the entity, or a related or supporting entity, at the same price plus the administrative fee calculated in section 1318.06(a)..”
The reorganization will benefit state-licensed marijuana businesses by allowing them to take federal tax deductions that are currently prohibited under IRS Code Section III, known as Section 280E.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said the administration is moving forward with the marijuana overhaul because Cannabis reform is “very popular” with voters and because doing so will help people who need access to the drug for medical purposes.
“A lot of people are facing big problems, and that seems to be the best answer,” he said. “They’re very happy. So the reorganization begins, and that’s a big thing, the reprogramming.”
The president stated that his administration’s rescheduling of cannabis came about after his friend Howard Kessler told him about his use of medical marijuana.
“He had some medical difficulties, and it came about by chance, kind of,” he said. “He had to go through a lot of different medications, and he said this was the one that was so much better than anything else. And so he lived through that. He didn’t benefit from it, because now he lives much better from the perspective.”
“So we hope you don’t have to,” Trump said. “But if you must, I hear it’s the best of all alternatives.”
“We need to do this STRAIGHT and FAST, especially for those who have found CBD helping them,” he said in a social media post. “Also, I’m told it will help our BIG FARMERS that we love and will always be around.”
Marijuana Moment is made possible with the help of readers. If you rely on our pro-cannabis journalism to stay informed, consider a monthly Patreon pledge.
CPC of Missouri-Smithville, LLC and GF Saint Mary LLC, licensed cannabis growers and manufacturers in Missouri, filed a lawsuit in the Circuit Court of Jackson County on behalf of independent wholesalers, alleging that Good Day Farm (GDF) and its network of conspiring companies and investors were harmed by an intentional, coordinated and unconstitutional scheme. The complaint alleges that the “GDF Cartel” illegally controls or manages the state’s share of dispensary licenses and uses that market power to manipulate Missouri’s $1.52 billion cannabis market for its own profit.
GDF and its co-conspirators allegedly built the cartel by arranging for third parties to invest in limited liability companies (LLCs) that then acquire additional dispensaries, cultivation and processing facilities, all of which are owned, operated or controlled by GDF. The result: The alleged cartel exercises effective control over at least 61 dispensaries, nearly triple the 22 allowed by the Missouri Constitution, with more than 10% of dispensary licenses “under substantially common control, ownership or management.” With 224 dispensaries currently licensed statewide, the alleged GDF Cartel controls more than one in four dispensary licenses in Missouri. But its influence is even greater, with alleged Cartel dispensaries accounting for more than 40% of wholesale cannabis in the state, giving it significant — and illegal — influence over all independent growers and manufacturers forced to sell through its network.
To avoid the Missouri Constitution’s 10% licensing limit and avoid regulatory oversight, the alleged cartel operates under five different brand names:
Good Day Farm (21 dispensaries),
CODES (20 dispensaries),
Green light (10 dispensaries),
Fresh Karma (6 dispensaries), and
3 Fifteen Primo (4 medications).
But they’re all part of a single, coordinated operation, the complaint says.
Purchase cannabis products from non-Cartel wholesalers at artificially depressed prices;
They supply their 61 dispensaries with the same products—mainly those produced by Cartel growers—significantly excluding products from independent wholesalers;
Force independent drug wholesalers to purchase the Cartel’s finished products as a condition for their wholesale products to be placed on the Cartel’s drug store shelves; and
Boycott non-cartel wholesalers who refuse to agree to anti-cartel demands.
Bob Hoffman, one of the attorneys leading the case, said: “The GDF Cartel is removing competition from the wholesale cannabis market and enriching itself with illegal profits through a counterproductive, clandestine business conspiracy. Missouri growers and manufacturers have been suffering under this scheme for a long time; many of them know something is wrong, but we don’t realize how the cartel has manipulated the market through this manipulation framework. Missourians to approve recreational cannabis in 2022 They voted for a fair and competitive market. Missouri licensed cannabis businesses that have suffered these practices should join us because they may be entitled to substantial damages.”
The complaint alleges the financial toll the Cartel has taken: Since the Cartel began illegal price-fixing, it has used its collective market power to lower wholesale prices by more than 20%, and continues to squeeze wholesalers and threaten the viability of their operations.
The unconstitutional complaint alleges that GDF knew its plan to build cartels could create legal risks for the company under the Constitution’s 10% licensing limit. The complaint quotes from a document provided by GDF to potential investors: “There can be no assurance that the Missouri Department of Cannabis Regulation will not dispute the number of marijuana dispensaries operated or supervised by the operator or its affiliates…”.
This action is brought on behalf of a putative class that includes all licensed independent wholesalers in Missouri that are not members of the alleged GDF Cartel for purposes of injunctive relief. Wholesalers who believe they have been financially harmed by the alleged Cartel’s practices should join the case because they may be entitled to substantial damages. The putative class is represented by the law firms of Feuerstein Kulick LLP and Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP.
Source: Feuerstein Kulick LLP and Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP
After fifteen years of successful cooperation, managing director Moritz Böcking and the shareholders of Klasmann-Deilmann GmbH have mutually agreed to part ways. As of May 1, 2026, Moritz Böcking will hand over the position of managing director to Jan Astrup, who served as the company’s CEO in 2021/2022. Jan Astrup and Damian Ikemann will form the Board of Directors of the Klasmann-Deilmann Group from now on.
Klasmann-Deilmann thanks Moritz Böcking for his cooperation and the progress achieved in the transformation of the Klasmann-Deilmann Group. Moritz Böcking expanded Klasmann-Deilmann beyond the growing media business into new areas of commercial horticulture and promoted innovation and digitalization within the company. In addition, its achievements include the expansion of resources derived from renewable raw materials, as well as the acquisition of a subsidiary in Australia and production facilities in France and Canada, which operate in cooperation with external partners. He also significantly advanced Klasmann-Deilmann’s positioning as a global pioneer of sustainable development in the growing media industry, thereby making a decisive contribution to the company’s economic growth.
With Jan Astrup, Klasmann-Deilmann is getting an internationally experienced manager who has proven himself in the company and has extensive experience in raw materials, production, process optimization and technology. With the new CEO, raw materials and technology-driven areas for the substrate industry are now increasingly important at senior management level. Jan Astrup will strengthen the core commercial horticulture business and help develop the company for the future.
Rep. James Comer (R-KY) introduced the delay proposal as an amendment to the Farm Bill, while Rep. Mary Miller (R-IL) introduced an expedited approach. Neither will move forward, however, with Comer withdrawing his measure and the House Rules Committee failing to vote on Miller’s.
Hemp derivatives containing less than 0.3 percent delta-9 THC by weight of the drug were made federally legal under the 2018 Farm Bill signed by President Donald Trump in his first term. But late last year, Trump signed new legislation containing provisions that will redefine hemp so that only products with a total of 0.4 milligrams of THC per container will be legal starting Nov. 12.
Comer’s amendment, sponsored by Reps. Kelly Morrison (D-MN), Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Morgan Griffith (R-VA), would have delayed the ban until November 2027.
According to Miller’s proposal, however, the ban will begin the day the new Farm Bill takes effect. However, it is unclear based on progress in Congress whether the large-scale farming legislation will actually become law, and the legislation could not pass until after the current recriminalization date.
Comer told the panel at Monday’s meeting that his amendment would “protect American farmers” and “help the hemp industry and the thousands of jobs that use and rely on these products.”
“It is clear that Congress needs more time to pass legislation that protects jobs, eliminates bad actors, standardizes labeling and requires third-party testing,” he said. “My amendment would give Congress another year, until November 2027, to develop this solution.”
It is not clear why he decided to remove it from the annex to the proposal Farm BillAlso known as the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026, or HR 7567.
Griffith, a member of the Rules Committee who sponsored Comer’s amendment, noted that there are “a lot of hemp products from overseas that don’t have third-party testing” on the market, “frankly all kinds of junk.”
He said the real solution is for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to regulate the products, citing a separate bill he has introduced on the issue, but argued that “we have to have time to adjust,” which he said would provide the delay amendment.
Meanwhile, Rep. Andy Barr (R-KY) also introduced an amendment to the bill that, according to the sponsor’s summary, “changes the definition of hemp to protect the legal hemp market, creating a regulatory framework that protects children, bans synthetics, and ensures that products on the market are of American origin.”
The congressman later withdrew the proposal for undisclosed reasons.
Last week, Vince Haley, director of the White House Domestic Policy Council, and James Braid, assistant to the president for legislative affairs, sent hemp policy suggestions to Barr, who is helping lead efforts to establish regulations for the plant as an alternative to prohibition.
“We appreciate your work to advance policy,” the executive order Trump signed in December, which included provisions to protect Americans’ access to CBD products, the staff wrote in a letter to Congress.
“We are submitting draft legislation and comments to your account to address the final statutory definition of hemp-derived cannabinoid products to ensure that Americans have access to adequate full-spectrum CBD products while maintaining Congress’ intent to limit the sale of products that pose serious health risks,” White House officials said, according to a social media screencast. “We are open to discussion and further technical assistance.”
The annex to the administration’s proposed legislative text has not been released publicly, and the White House and Barr’s office did not immediately respond to Marihuana Moment’s request for more details.
It’s not clear from the text of the letter whether the White House was proactively sending legislative proposals to the lawmaker or whether they were responding to something sent by his office, though two cannabis industry sources suggested to Marihuana Moment that Barr was sending the language to the administration, and then providing technical feedback.
“I’m calling on Congress to update the Act so Americans can continue to have access to the full-spectrum CBD products they trust and support, while maintaining Congress’ intent to restrict the sale of products that pose health risks,” the president said in a Truth Social message Thursday, the same day his administration announced it is moving forward to re-regulate marijuana.
“We need to do this RIGHT and FAST, especially for those who have found CBD to help them,” he said. “Also, I’m told it will help our BIG FARMERS that we love and will always be around.”
The Farm Bill passed by the previous committee includes provisions to help the hemp industry and farmers who grow cannabis for industrial purposes, such as fiber and grain. For example, the legislation would amend statutes related to states and tribes developing regulatory plans for industrial hemp production, including policies on testing, sampling, background checks and record keeping.
Other bipartisan hemp reform bills are pending in Congress.
Ernst withdrew his name, however, as a sponsor of the legislation. His office did not respond to Marihuana Moment’s request for clarification on the move.
As hemp products become more popular among consumers, some big brands are trying to get in on the action.
The main retailer Target, for example, is expanding its involvement in the hemp-derived THC beverage market. Last year, the company began a pilot program in 10 stores in Minnesota that sell cannabis drinks. That apparently went well, and now the company has secured licenses from Minnesota regulators to sell lower-potency edible hemp products — including THC drinks — in 72 stores in the state.
Marijuana Moment is made possible with the help of readers. If you rely on our pro-cannabis journalism to stay informed, consider a monthly Patreon pledge.