New regulations for hemp businesses could soon happen across Alabama if bill becomes law
MONTGOMERY, Ala. (WIAT) — A new bill that would crack down on hemp and THC-products sold across Alabama could soon become law.
HB445, sponsored by Rep. Andy Whitt, recently passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate and now awaits Gov. Kay Ivey's signature. Specifically, the bill calls for the regulation of the sale and distribution of hemp products, including drinks and gummies, sold in businesses, keep them out of those younger than 21, as well as place a 10% tax and limit them to establishments licensed by the Alcoholic Beverage and Control Board.
In addition, serving sizes would be limited to 10 milligrams of THC, all regulated by the ABC Board.
Alabama nonprofit art studio that celebrates the autism community hit by Trump cuts to NEA
Whitt, R-Harvest, said hemp gummies and snacks can be found in some convenient stores around the state.
'Nachos. THC-flavored nachos,' Whitt said. 'It's just unreal what I've seen out there in the product.'
Whitt claims convenient stores are marketing gummies and snacks to children, all with 'dangerous THC levels.'
'Do you think the students in our high schools are going around and reading the back of those packages, and saying, 'Oh, I'm sorry, a dose of this is 1/16 of this gummy?' That's just not happening,' he said
However, some business owners are calling these regulations a burden. Carmelo Parasiliti, owner of Green Acres Organic Pharms in Florence, said the bill would eliminate almost all of the products they offer.
'It puts honest, community-focused business at risk,' Parasiliti said. 'And, we've done everything right. We've followed the rules. We've tested every product. We've created our Compassion Cancer Program.'
That program, as Parasiliti explains, provides products to cancer patients free of charge. He said that would go away with new taxes levied under the bill.
Parasiliti is urging Ivey to veto the bill. As of Tuesday, a petition on Change.org has received nearly 1,300 signatures requesting Ivey kill the bill.
'Last week was small business awareness week,' he said. 'We're a small business. And this- you'll have a way to save our business by vetoing this. So, please do.'
3 Big Lots stores reopening in Alabama after emerging from bankruptcy
Birmingham Mayor Randall Woodfin has also taken issue with the bill, claiming it would do more harm than good to local businesses.
'This bill doesn't protect our communities — it destroys jobs, shuts down local businesses, and hands the industry to big corporations,' Woodfin said in a statement Monday.
If HB445 is signed into law, THC products could be sold in designated areas at grocery stores, as well as shops serving customers 21 years old and older.
Whitt said the bill isn't a complete ban on the product, but that some will need to change their business model.
'Your convenient store, local convenient store, is not a pharmacy. It should not be viewed as one,' he said. 'So they should be selling gas and snacks, not drugs to our kids.'
While those in Ivey's office said the bill is still under review, it could automatically become law if she doesn't take action on it by the end of the day Wednesday.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
France Moves to Curb ‘Ultra-fast' Fashion With Bill Targeting Shein and Temu
PARIS — As major brands scale back their sustainability initiatives, France is pressing ahead with legislation aimed at reining in 'ultra-fast fashion' platforms such as Shein and Temu, known for their extremely low-cost clothing. The bill, introduced by Anne-Cécile Violland, a member of parliament from the Horizons party, passed the Senate one year after clearing the lower house of the French Assembly. More from WWD Inditex Sales Slow as Economic Headwinds Hit the High Street Rebag Expands Access to Pre-loved Luxury Goods With New Amazon Collaboration Designer Vincent Van Duysen Opens Antwerp Home for Zara Home+ 4th Collection The unusually long gap between votes led to some watering down of the original provisions, exempting traditional fast-fashion players such as H&M, Primark, and Inditex-owned Zara. 'It's a relief that it moved forward, but there has been a shift in the goal of the legislation that it is now specifically targeting what is called 'ultra-fast fashion,'' said Pierre Condamine, spokesperson for the Anti Fast Fashion Coalition, an umbrella group of 11 environmental organizations in France. Earlier drafts had adopted a broader definition of fast fashion that included Europe-based brands. 'There is sort of a shift in what was supposed to be an environmental legislation, with the objective to shift the whole sector towards sustainable practices, while now it's sort of becoming a protectionist text,' he told WWD. The revised bill targets ultra-fast fashion directly, proposing a tax on small parcels shipped from outside the EU ranging from 2 to 4 euros per package. The fee is intended to slow the influx of packages from Chinese platforms to France, in a move reminiscent of the U.S. ending its de minimis exemption. Shein and Temu together shipped 800 million packages to France in 2024 — more than half of all parcels sent to the country. The French government will first notify the European Commission, as several measures, including a total advertising ban on ultra-fast-fashion platforms, require approval at the EU level. This process could take up to three months before the bill goes to the Assembly and Senate joint committee for resolution, likely in the fall in late September or October. Several key provisions may face scrutiny in Brussels, including the parcel fee, which could conflict with the European Commission's plan for a bloc-wide fee by 2028, and the proposed national advertising ban. Although Shein is registered in Singapore, its European headquarters in Ireland could present a legal loophole. As it stands, the bill mandates eco-contributions from fashion companies based on a 'bonus-malus' system — rewarding sustainable practices and penalizing environmental harm. Penalties could rise to 10 euros per item by 2030, though the methodology for valuing items has yet to be defined. The bill would also eliminate tax advantages for 'donating' unsold stock by ultra-fast-fashion brands, which are not permitted to destroy unsold items under an anti-waste law passed in 2020. A critical element of the bill is its specific definition of 'ultra-fast' or 'ultra-express' fashion. This distinction leaves out more traditional fast-fashion companies that have a retail presence like H&M, Primark and Zara. By differentiating between ultra-fast platforms and fast-fashion brands with physical retail locations, the legislation potentially creates a loophole for companies headquartered in Europe — Sweden, Ireland and Spain respectively — even though their production relies heavily on low-wage countries like China, India and Bangladesh via subcontractors and diffuse supply chains. The original bill passed by the Assembly featured the broader definition, but companies lobbied intensively over the past year for the narrower language, arguing that they contribute to local employment. Senator Sylvie Valente Le Hir of Les Républicains, who ushered the bill through the Senate, highlighted its targeted approach: 'We have drawn a clear line between those we want to regulate — ultra-express fashion — and those we want to preserve, accessible but rooted fashion, which employs in France, which structures our territories, which creates links and supports a local economic fabric,' she said. The industry group La Fédération Française du Prêt à Porter Féminin praised the bill as a 'step forward' in tackling ultra-fast fashion. 'It formalizes the long-standing collective commitment of many stakeholders to defend a fashion industry that respects workers, consumers, citizens, French businesses, and the planet,' the organization said in a statement. However, Condamine noted that while large global fast-fashion retailers remain profitable – Zara's parent company Inditex reported sales were up 4.2 percent in constant-currency in the first quarter on Wednesday — French high street brands like Camaieu and NafNaf have entered administration, and independent stores continue to shutter. 'The economic crisis in the clothing industry in France, it started way before Shein,' Condamine said. 'It started when fast fashion — Zara, H&M, Primark — arrived. Now they are saying if they're targeted, it will be a catastrophe [for jobs]. But they're doing great economically, and they're part of the problem.' Some lawmakers described the bill as a 'strong first signal' and indicated that fast fashion as a whole — including the European players with physical presence — could face future regulation due to unsustainable business practices. On the other hand, critics — chiefly Shein — have said the legislation punishes cost-conscious consumers and lower-income households. The company, which markets itself under the slogan 'Fashion is a right, not a privilege,' has staged events in French cities like Béziers. On Sunday, its director of government relations, Fabrice Layer, held a presentation in front of the southeastern town's city hall to rally public support for the company. 'We ultimately find ourselves with a law that is not only anti-Shein, but anti-Shein customer,' Quentin Ruffat, Shein's spokesperson in France, told AFP. 'This law, if passed, will directly penalize our customers' wallets and drastically reduce their purchasing power.' The company has also accused France's fashion establishment of protecting legacy brands and says it will continue lobbying to amend the bill further. Shein representatives did not respond to requests for comment. New research from l'Institut Français de la Mode (IFM) shows that in the first quarter of 2025, Amazon, Shein and Temu together accounted for 24 percent of online apparel sales by value, representing 7 percent of total apparel consumption across all channels. Online sales made up 29.4 percent of apparel purchases by value, including the online stores of traditional retailers. Best of WWD Walmart Calls California Waste Dumping Lawsuit 'Unjustified' Year in Review: Sustainability's Biggest Controversies of 2021 Year in Review: Sustainability's New Strides
The Hill
30 minutes ago
- The Hill
Stablecoin bill clears another hurdle in Senate, inching toward final vote
The Senate voted Wednesday to advance legislation setting up a regulatory framework for payment stablecoins, bringing the crypto bill one step closer to a final vote in the upper chamber. Seventeen Democrats voted with almost every Republican to end debate on an updated version of the GENIUS Act. The new bill text was reached as part of lengthy negotiations between Republicans and crypto-friendly Democrats last month, ahead of an earlier procedural vote on the Senate floor last month. The vote breakdown was largely similar to the May vote, although Sen. Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.) switched her vote to oppose the measure. She had supported the bill both in the Senate Banking Committee in March and on the Senate floor last month. Blunt Rochester voiced some hesitation Tuesday about Senate leadership's decision to forgo an open amendment process on the GENIUS Act, emphasizing that she hoped to see additional changes to the bill. 'I was really clear,' she told The Hill. 'I hoped that there would be an open amendment process, and that's what I heard Leader Thune say around last month, so I will take a look at this language, and we'll make a decision from there.' Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) ultimately scrapped the push for so-called 'regular order,' as controversial amendments — most notably, Sen. Roger Marshall's (R-Kan.) Credit Card Competition Act — threatened to upend support for the bill. The decision to move forward without an open amendments process frustrates a push by several Democrats to add in a provision that would prevent President Trump and other elected officials from profiting off stablecoins. 'The GENIUS act attempts to set up some guardrails for buying and selling a type of cryptocurrency, one type called a stablecoin,' Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) said on the Senate floor ahead of Wednesday's vote. 'Well, we need guardrails that ensure that government officials aren't openly asking people to buy their coins in order to increase their personal profit or their family's profit,' he continued. 'Where are those guardrails in this bill? They're completely, totally absent.' However, crypto-friendly Democrats who have been deeply involved in negotiations are urging their colleagues to support the bill despite some of its shortcomings. 'It's extremely unhelpful that we have a president who's involved in this industry, and I would love to ban this activity, but that does not diminish the excellent work of this legislation,' Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) said Wednesday. 'It does not diminish the hard work that bipartisan group of senators put into this to make a difference and to write a law that can protect consumers, that can protect our financial services industry, that can protect the strength of the dollar, and that can protect people who would like access to capital,' she added. The GENIUS Act likely faces a handful more votes before it can clear the Senate and head to the House. Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.) told The Hill on Tuesday that she expects a final vote on the bill next week.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
By the numbers: Here are the changes proposed to the food stamp program
The Brief More than 3 million people could be cut from food stamp assistance if President Trump's spending bill is approved. A little over 42 million people receive food stamps in the U.S., or one out of every eight people. President Donald Trump's big, beautiful spending bill could mean billions of dollars in cuts for food stamps. The proposed changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, would make states pick up more of the costs, require several million more recipients to work or lose their benefits, and potentially reduce the amount of food aid people receive in the future. Those changes would likely cut 3.2 million people from the SNAP program, the Congressional Budget Office estimated. Here's what to know: RELATED: Senate Republicans plan to release revisions to Trump tax bill The backstory The federal aid program formerly known as food stamps was renamed the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, on Oct. 1, 2008. The program provides monthly payments for food purchases to low-income residents generally earning less than $1,632 monthly for individuals, or $3,380 monthly for a household of four. Timeline The nation's first experiment with food stamps began in 1939. But the modern version of the program dates to 1979, when a change in federal law took effect eliminating a requirement that participants purchase food stamps. There currently is no cost to people participating in the program. RELATED: Trump's actions in Los Angeles spark debate over deportation funds in spending bill By the numbers A little over 42 million people nationwide received SNAP benefits in February, the latest month for which figures are available. That's roughly one out of every eight people in the country. Participation is down from a peak average of 47.6 million people during the 2013 federal fiscal year. Often, more than one person in a household is eligible for food aid. As of February, nearly 22.5 million households were enrolled in SNAP, receiving an average monthly household benefit of $353. The money can be spent on most groceries, but Trump's administration recently approved requests by six states — Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska and Utah — to exclude certain items, such as soda or candy. Big picture view Legislation passed by the House is projected to cut about $295 billion of federal spending from SNAP over the next 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. A little more than half of those federal savings would come by shifting costs to states, which administer SNAP. Nearly one-third of those savings would come by expanding a work requirement for some SNAP participants, which the CBO assumes would force some people off the rolls. Additional money would be saved by eliminating SNAP benefits for between 120,000 and 250,000 immigrants legally in the U.S. who are not citizens or lawful permanent residents. RELATED: Trump touts $1,000 'Trump accounts' for babies born in US Another provision in the legislation would cap the annual inflationary growth in food benefits. As a result, the CBO estimates that the average monthly food benefit would be about $15 lower than it otherwise would have been by 2034. Dig deeper To receive SNAP benefits, current law says adults ages 18 through 54 who are physically and mentally able and don't have dependents need to work, volunteer or participate in training programs for at least 80 hours a month. Those who don't are limited to just three months of benefits in a three-year period. The legislation that passed the House would expand work requirements to those ages 55 through 64. It also would extend work requirements to some parents without children younger than age 7. And it would limit the ability of states to waive work requirements in areas that lack sufficient jobs. Local perspective The federal government currently splits the administrative costs of SNAP with states but covers the full cost of food benefits. Under the legislation, states would have to cover three-fourths of the administrative costs. States also would have to pay a portion of the food benefits starting with the 2028 fiscal year. All states would be required to pay at least 5% of the food aid benefits, and could pay more depending on how often they make mistakes with people's payments. States that had payment error rates between 6-8% in the most recent federal fiscal year for which data is available would have to cover 15% of the food costs. States with error rates between 8-10% would have to cover 20% of the food benefits, and those with error rates greater than 10% would have to cover 25% of the food costs. Many states could get hit with higher costs. The national error rate stood at 11.7% in the 2023 fiscal year, and just three states — Idaho, South Dakota and Vermont — had error rates below 5%. But the 2023 figures likely would not serve as the base year, so the exact costs to states remains unclear. As a result of the cost shift, the CBO assumes that some states would reduce or eliminate benefits for people. What's next The legislation, which narrowly passed the U.S. House, could undergo further changes in the Senate, where it's currently being debated. Trump wants lawmakers to send the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" to his desk by July 4, when the nation marks the 249th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. The bill passed the House last month by a margin of just one vote — 215-214. A vote also could be close in the Senate, where Republicans hold 53 of the 100 seats. Democrats did not support the bill in the House and are unlikely to do so in the Senate. Some Republican senators have expressed reservations about proposed cuts to food aid and Medicaid, and the potential impact of the bill on the federal deficit. GOP Senate leaders may have to make some changes to the bill to ensure enough support to pass it. The Source This report includes information from The Associated Press.
