President Donald Trump is pressing Congress to fix a looming federal rule that could strip hemp-derived, full-spectrum CBD products from store shelves before the end of 2026, even as a Missouri governor moved independently to ban intoxicating hemp products at the state level.

Trump’s push centers on a law that, without congressional action, would effectively recriminalize hemp-derived CBD products containing trace amounts of THC. He’s calling for speed. “We must get this done RIGHT and FAST, especially for those who saw that CBD helps them,” Trump said, adding that reform “will also help our GREAT FARMERS, who we love, and will always be there for.”

The White House sent its feedback directly to Rep. Andy Barr (R-KY) as part of the ongoing effort to shape pending hemp legislation. At the same time, Rep. Mary Miller (R-IL) filed a new amendment that would accelerate enforcement of the federal recriminalization of hemp THC products, which is currently set to take effect in November. That’s a tight clock. Two House members pulling in opposite directions on the same issue tells you how fractured Republican cannabis politics have gotten, even on something as relatively mainstream as CBD.

Fractured. But not frozen.

California cultivators who’ve watched the hemp-derived cannabinoid market undercut licensed dispensary sales will be tracking this closely. A federal crackdown on intoxicating hemp products could reshape that competitive pressure overnight, depending on how any new rules define potency thresholds and product categories.

On the tax side, the Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service issued a signal this week that cannabis rescheduling will matter for licensed operators’ bottom lines. The two agencies said they expect rescheduling “to have significant positive tax consequences for businesses in the medical marijuana industry” and will issue formal guidance on how 280E relief applies to existing tax years. The Department of Cannabis Control has repeatedly flagged 280E as a major financial burden on California licensees, who can’t deduct normal business expenses because cannabis remains a Schedule I substance under federal law. Rescheduling to Schedule III would change that math significantly for medical operators.

The IRS guidance is expected to include a transition rule that ties 280E relief to the full taxable year that includes the effective date of the rescheduling final order, for activities that no longer involve Schedule I or II substances. That’s a critical detail for any California cultivator or dispensary operator trying to plan for 2026 tax exposure.

Separately, the Food and Drug Administration announced new steps to “accelerate” access to psychedelics for people with mental health conditions, following a recent executive order from Trump. The FDA didn’t specify exact timelines, but the announcement signals the administration wants to move faster than the standard clinical approval process typically allows. Psychedelic-assisted therapy has gained real traction in California policy circles, and any federal pathway would have downstream effects on state-level programs.

The House Appropriations Committee also approved spending bill language directing federal agencies to study the “adequacy” of state marijuana laws and assess options for preventing diversion of legal cannabis products into states that prohibit use. California, with its sprawling licensed market and persistent illegal grow problem, would almost certainly factor into any such federal review. As Marijuana Moment reported, the committee language frames diversion as a federal enforcement concern, not just a state one.

Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe signed a bill banning intoxicating hemp THC products in his state, a move designed to hold regardless of whether federal restrictions arrive on schedule or get pushed back. That kind of state-level preemption is becoming more common as governors grow impatient with Congress’s inability to draw clear lines between hemp and marijuana.

For California, the absence of a strong state ban on intoxicating hemp products has left licensed dispensaries competing against gas station shelves stocked with delta-8 and other synthetically derived cannabinoids. The California Bureau of Cannabis Control’s historical licensing data shows the regulatory gap between licensed dispensaries and unregulated hemp retailers, a gap that federal hemp reform could finally start to close.

Trump’s coalition on this issue is unusual. Farm-state Republicans want hemp protections for agricultural revenue. Enforcement-minded members want tighter THC limits. Public health advocates want FDA oversight of CBD products. Getting all three camps to agree on a single bill before November, when the recriminalization clock runs out, will require the kind of horse-trading that Washington has so far been unable to produce on cannabis.