Wisconsin Hemp Vape Penalties Take Effect as Missouri Lawsuit Advances

# Wisconsin Hemp Vape Penalties Take Effect as Missouri Lawsuit Advances

**MIDWEST, September 1, 2026:** Wisconsin's Department of Revenue began imposing $1,000-per-day forfeitures Tuesday on manufacturers or retailers caught selling an unlisted hemp vaping device, closing a year-long grace period that had shielded hemp products from a penalty already in force for other vapes. To qualify for the state's Electronic Vaping Device Directory, a hemp vape must test at or below 0.3 percent delta-9 THC by dry weight, or the maximum federal law otherwise allows, and carry lab certification showing no nicotine; manufacturers pay a $500 annual fee per listed device. Products sold in violation can be seized and destroyed, according to the Marijuana Herald.

The delayed enforcement date was set by 2025 Wisconsin Act 15; non-hemp vapes have faced the same $1,000-a-day penalty since September 2025. The rule is separate from Wisconsin's stalled hemp beverage licensing debate, where Senate Bill 681 and its companion Assembly Bill 606, which would regulate hemp drinks under a three-tier, alcohol-style system, remain contested inside the Senate Republican caucus. Sen. Patrick Testin has called the bill "dead" and "deader than dead," while competing measures from Rep. Lindee Brill and Rep. Rob Swearingen offer a ban and a lighter-touch alternative, respectively. No floor action on any of the three was reported this week.

In Missouri, the fight over House Bill 2641's November 12 ban on intoxicating hemp products moved forward a step. The Missouri Hemp Trade Association and its co-plaintiffs filed a response this week to the state's motion to dismiss their federal lawsuit, arguing the law is "unconstitutionally vague" because a hemp-derived product can simultaneously meet the statute's definition of legal hemp and illegal marijuana, according to the Missouri Independent. The state's motion, filed August 6, argues the law "guard[s] against confusion" by specifying that any product meeting the hemp-derived-cannabinoid definition is treated as marijuana, and characterizes the suit as following a legal playbook that has failed against similar laws elsewhere. Plaintiffs' attorney Chuck Hatfield said the case "deserve[s] a day in court." U.S. District Judge M. Douglas Harpool has not ruled on the motion.

Minnesota produced no legal or regulatory movement this week, but new reporting quantified how exposed the state's hemp beverage industry is to a federal cutoff even under its own settled framework. Indeed Brewing chief business officer Ryan Bandy told Axios Twin Cities that 20 to 30 percent of the Minneapolis brewery's own THC beverage sales go to out-of-state buyers, and more than 70 percent of what it co-packs for other brands ships across state lines; the company has already paused hiring for one open role as a hedge against the deadline. Separately, Earl Giles Drink Emporium co-owner Nick Kosevich said out-of-state demand for the THC concentrate his company sells has dried up amid the uncertainty, an estimated $1 million in lost sales so far.

Elsewhere in the region, Ohio's Sixth Circuit appeal over the injunction shielding ten hemp beverage companies from Senate Bill 56 remained pending with no ruling this week, and Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas, North Dakota and South Dakota reported no new hemp beverage developments. The U.S. House returned from recess this week and is expected to vote on the Senate's measure delaying the federal hemp restrictions to December 11, a decision that bears directly on Missouri's and Ohio's pending cases and on Minnesota's interstate exposure alike.