Resistance Against Plans for the Sale of Legal Hemp

The law, which stipulates that the sale of smokable hemp products will only be possible in tobacconists from 2029, represents an "inexplicable discrimination" against hemp shops, which is effectively equivalent to a "professional ban," criticized ÖCB chairman Klaus Hübner on Wednesday at a press conference.

Cannabis Association: Rules for Sale of Legal Hemp "Not a Rescue, but a Death Blow"

In the three-year transition phase, where the distribution of smokable hemp with low THC content (maximum 0.3 percent) is to remain possible in licensed hemp shops, Hübner sees only a "reprieve." After that, several hundred businesses with over a thousand employees in Austria would face closure. In addition to retailers, manufacturers and even pharmacies are affected by the plan.

Harsh words were also spoken by Lukas Bock, manager of a hemp shop in Vienna. The law passed by the government in the Council of Ministers yesterday, including the transition period for businesses, is "not a rescue, but in truth the death blow." He has been paying high taxes for years, and now his business foundation is simply being taken away, Bock complained. And he is not the only one: "Hundreds of others are in the same situation as me."

The association is therefore calling for an independent "Cannabis Law" with a "coexistence model" to counteract the "arbitrariness of the tobacco monopoly." If cannabis flowers are subordinated to the monopoly and only tobacconists are allowed to sell them just because they are smokable, the same could be done with plants like sage, Hübner described the, in his view, twisted logic behind the plan. A "Cannabis Law" is necessary not only economically and legally, but also from a social perspective.

Sale of Legal Hemp: Government Re-regulates Tobacco Monopoly

On Tuesday, the government initiated an amendment that, among other things, aims to re-regulate the tobacco monopoly. However, this was preceded by a longer period of legal uncertainty. The trigger was a decision by the customs authority at the end of 2024, which referred to a supreme court ruling by the Administrative Court. It interpreted this to mean that the sale of legal cannabis flowers is reserved exclusively for tobacconists and tobacco wholesalers - with reference to the Tobacco Monopoly Act. The hemp industry, or the newly formed ÖCB in the spring, vehemently disputed this interpretation and filed a complaint with the Federal Finance Court.

Association to Challenge Plans for Sale of Legal Hemp Before the Constitutional Court

The corresponding procedure is still pending, as constitutional lawyer Heinz Mayer explained at the media event. Depending on when and how this is resolved, further legal steps will be directed. However, they will definitely end up before the Constitutional Court. In April, the expert stated in an opinion that an expansion of the tobacco monopoly to include cannabis is unconstitutional and an impermissible interference with the freedom to conduct a business.

Mayer continues to hold this legal opinion and referred to a similar situation from 2015. "We are now in a situation similar to where we were 10 years ago with e-cigarettes. The Tobacco Monopoly Act is being expanded and supplemented with a new product. At that time, it was challenged and this view was confirmed by the Constitutional Court." In other words: The court saw no factual justification for the expansion of the monopoly, and he, Mayer, is convinced that this will also be the case with legal hemp.

Hearing Before the Financial Court Possibly in a Few Months

Business lawyer Gerald Ganzger hopes that the matter can be negotiated at the Federal Financial Court in the next five to six months. The court is aware of the urgency of the matter, despite general overload, as professional livelihoods depend on it. "That's where we will present our arguments." And: "Monopolies are always difficult and require factual justification." From his perspective, there is no such justification for the new regulation.

The association is also considering further legal steps - specifically an individual complaint to the Constitutional Court - due to another regulation announced by the government yesterday: The 20-year license for e-liquid specialty stores, which will also fall under the monopoly - with a subsequent needs assessment for potential new stores by the monopoly administration. From Ganzger's perspective, this is a "clear unequal treatment." "As a society, we are challenged to keep laws understandable. And this is not understandable."

(APA/Red)

This article has been automatically translated, read the original article here.