Utah panel weighs splitting kratom permits, product limits and taxes as public recounts deaths and addiction

The Business and Labor Interim Committee on Aug. 20 conducted an extended discussion of kratom regulation after a presentation from the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food (UDAF). Amber Brown, deputy commissioner for the Department of Agriculture and Food, and Dr. Forsyth of UDAF’s specialized products division laid out options that would allow the agency to better register and inspect kratom products sold in Utah.

Brown said the department is currently tasked with regulating kratom and that the program recently moved into the specialized products division, which also regulates medical cannabis and industrial hemp. She told the committee the department is not advocating that kratom be sold, but that it must regulate products currently on the market. "If the committee or the legislature decided to ban kratom outright, we would not oppose," Brown said.

UDAF staff recommended separating the current statutory role of “processor” into three distinct permit types — distributor, manufacturer and retailer — so the agency can tailor inspections and sanitation oversight. Dr. Forsyth said the split would mirror the department’s hemp program and enable targeted retail inspections: "If we require retailers to register, then we can identify where they are," he said.

The department also discussed product‑composition limits, focusing on 7‑hydroxymitragynine (7‑OH), an alkaloid with opioid‑like activity. UDAF noted current state rule allows a small natural amount of 7‑OH (the department cited a 2% limit of kratom alkaloid content) but said dosage‑and‑package limits and a clear statutory definition of percentage should be set to avoid manufacturers increasing alkaloid concentration through extraction or formulation. Dr. Forsyth warned that percentage limits measured against total product weight can be evaded by diluting with inert ingredients, and urged limits be tied to total kratom alkaloid content.

Public testimony included multiple perspectives. Chad Butterfield told the committee he had been addicted to kratom for two years and said, "This drug has taken nearly everything away from me.” His father, Fred Butterfield, said his son Brian Richard Butterfield died in 2019 after ingesting kratom and alcohol; Fred Butterfield said the product his son used "did have 7‑hydroxy in it." Michelle McComber of the Utah Medical Association and Melissa Hinton, a doctoral nurse practitioner, each told the committee they had treated patients who used kratom and cautioned about liver toxicity, drug interactions and respiratory risks when kratom is combined with other CNS depressants.

Industry witnesses argued for a regulated market with clearer federal and state standards. Ryan Bridal (recorded as representing Diversified Botanics/Versailles Botanics) said his company’s testing showed whole‑leaf kratom does not efficiently penetrate the skin when formulated as a topical and defended manufacturing for interstate markets. Matt Caddo, senior fellow on public policy for the American Kratom Association, said federal dietary‑supplement law (DSHEA) and adverse‑event reporting should guide state policy and proposed a limit of "no more than 1 milligram per serving and no more than 3 milligrams per package" for 7‑OH as a statutory approach.

The department raised administrative issues: inspectors are few, enforcement is resource‑intensive across a large state, and online or out‑of‑state sales complicate enforcement of shelf‑sale rules. UDAF recommended a phased approach to fees and possible taxation to fund inspections; it cited existing authority in Title 4 for fines and noted the hemp tax experience showed online and out‑of‑state sales are difficult to capture without tax‑commission cooperation.

The committee did not adopt specific statutory language that day, but members voted to open a bill file and form a working group to develop legislation. Representative Ballard moved to open the bill file; the motion passed on a recorded voice vote. Chairs asked members and outside stakeholders to work on a broad range of options — from prohibition to tightly defined, permitted sale of pure kratom — and to return draft language for committee consideration.

Distinguishing discussion from decision: UDAF framed several possible regulatory directions (separate retailer permits, dose/package limits, labeling to discourage youth appeal, and a reporting requirement for adverse events), and witnesses offered competing views on safety and market impacts. The committee’s formal decision was to open a bill file and convene a working group; any statutory changes will require subsequent legislative action.