Industry, health advocates and brewers urge state regulation of hemp‑derived THC beverages; retailers warn of market disruption

Manufacturers, licensed cannabis businesses and public‑health advocates urged the Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure to create a regulatory framework for hemp‑derived intoxicating beverages, saying the unregulated market exposes consumers — including minors — to untested products and that legalization with controls would recapture tax revenue.

Adam Oliveri, co‑founder and CEO of Craft Collective Homegrown, testified on behalf of the Commonwealth Beverage Coalition that House Bill 357 and Senate Bill 222 would regulate hemp‑derived THC beverages to prioritize consumer safety, restrict youth access and require testing and labeling. “Regulation isn’t just an industry priority. It’s a public‑health necessity,” Oliveri said.

Brandon Pollock, CEO of Theory Wellness, said licensed cannabis companies invest heavily in compliance and age gating and that a regulated framework would help local health departments remove unregulated products from the market. The coalition projected $25 million to $40 million in new annual tax revenue in the first 12 to 18 months of implementation, and cited Minnesota and Rhode Island as regulatory models and examples of market size.

The Mass Brewers Guild and individual craft brewers voiced support for a regulated market but urged lawmakers to avoid rules that would exclude breweries from participating or that would reimpose franchise restrictions. Liz Littwall, treasurer of the guild and co‑owner at 4 Star Farms brewery, told the committee that as drafted the hemp‑beverage bills would force a brewery producing an infused beverage to sell to a wholesaler and then buy it back before selling it in its own taproom — a costly, duplicative step. “Craft brewers are already subject to stringent quality, safety, and traceability standards,” she said, and asked lawmakers to allow breweries to use existing sales privileges where appropriate.

Caleb Hilliades, director of brewing operations at Amherst Brewing, said his proposal for limited self‑distribution contemplates a cap — he cited a working figure of 50,000 gallons — but that brewers are open to negotiating quantity or distance limits with wholesalers. He said limited self‑distribution could allow local deliveries to sister restaurants or events without adding unnecessary trucks or cost.

Several craft brewers also opposed provisions in two bills they said would amend Massachusetts franchise law and lock in wholesaler contracts after a change of ownership, undermining the 2020 compromise embodied in “section 25 e and a half.” Sarah Lee, vice president of the Mass Brewers Guild, said the proposed changes would “strip breweries of flexibility, reduce company value and discourage investment.”

Retailers and the Massachusetts Package Stores Association presented a contrasting view. Rob Malyon, executive director and general counsel for the association, told the committee that Massachusetts has an oversaturated off‑premises retail market — “well over 3,000 off‑premise licenses” — and that expanding license apportionment or permitting new vertically integrated retail models would put additional stores at risk. Ben Weiner, a longtime retailer, said business has declined and urged caution before loosening licensing or distribution rules.

Packaged‑store owners said they were supportive of allowing hemp products back onto retail shelves as a way to offer new revenue streams, but they opposed measures they said would create monopoly advantages for other tiers or increase local license counts without safeguards.

The committee heard multiple technical and implementation questions but took no votes on the bills. The panel session ended with a procedural motion to close the hearing; the committee recorded the vote and will continue to accept written testimony on the docket.