Opinion
Portugal's persistent disregard for European decisions on industrial hemp.
At a time when the European Union is reinforcing investment in the bioeconomy, sustainable value chains, and agricultural competitiveness, Portugal insists on retreating into a bureaucratic labyrinth that Europe has already overcome. The industrial hemp sector, which is recognized as a legitimate agricultural crop in the European internal market, continues to be treated here as a suspicious artifact. The problem is no longer just regulatory delay; it is a rupture with European Union law and an attack on national legal security.
The most recent evidence is Circular Letter No. 25091/2025, issued by the Tax Authority on November 26th. Based on an opinion from INFARMED (the Portuguese National Authority of Medicines and Health Products), the document states that the marketing of products containing extracts of the cannabis plant, including CBD, is prohibited outside the medicinal context. The Tax Authority even classifies oils, extracts, e-cigarette liquids, and products equivalent to tobacco as controlled substances, regardless of their origin, purpose, or THC content. This position, besides being out of step with science and European legislation, represents a reversal of the logic of the internal market and ignores Portugal's obligations as a Member State.
This interpretation is not only conservative: it is technically untenable and legally invalid under European law.
Europe has already decided — and Portugal refuses to accept it.
O Court of Justice of the European Union, in the Judgment C-663 / 18 (Kanavape), established two fundamental principles:
1. Member States may not prohibit the marketing of CBD legally produced in another EU State., even when extracted from the entire plant, including flowers and leaves.
2. CBD is not considered a narcotic. According to the current state of science, it does not produce psychotropic effects and does not present a risk that justifies restrictions of this type.
The CJEU further added that the free movement of goods — a cornerstone of the EU — prevents each country from creating trade barriers based on prejudice or arbitrary national interpretations.
To make matters worse, industrial hemp has been recognized by the Union as a legitimate agricultural crop since the 90s. Regulation (EU) No 1307/2013 establishes its eligibility for CAP support, provided that the THC content is equal to or less than 0,2% (or 0,3% according to the most recent standard). Certified varieties are listed in the EU Common Catalogue of Agricultural Varieties.
Therefore, while the EU clarifies, Portugal obscures. While Europe defines technical criteria, Portugal responds with vague opinions. And while the Court of Justice reinforces free movement, Portugal invents administrative obstacles that did not exist.
Industrial hemp stores: a vivid portrait of legal uncertainty.
Across the country, establishments selling products derived from industrial hemp are experiencing a climate that would oscillate between tragicomic and Kafkaesque, if the consequences weren't so serious. They are confronted with:
● Inspections without uniform criteria;
● seizures of legal goods in the rest of the EU;
● cases that remain unresolved for years;
● Divergent interpretations between AT, PSP, GNR, ASAE and DGAV;
● notifications in which different state departments contradict each other.
The contrast is ridiculous. A bottle of hemp oil that is legal in Belgium, certified in Germany, and sold in supermarkets in France, can be seized at a Portuguese counter as if it were a shipment of contraband.
This distortion protects no one — it only destroys investment, stifles innovation, and pushes small businesses into uncertainty.
Portugal is European... but only when it doesn't bother anyone.
The internal market is not a buffet where each country chooses what to apply and what to ignore. Union law prevails over national law whenever there is a conflict. And ruling C-663/18 is clear. Portugal has no room for interpretation to prohibit, restrict or penalize the trade of CBD produced according to European standards.
To persist in this discrepancy is to reject the very spirit of the Union and to create a dangerous precedent: if Portugal can ignore the CJEU when it suits it, what prevents other Member States from doing the same?
Conclusion: aligning with science, with law, and with the future.
The Portuguese government needs to act quickly:
• Harmonize administrative procedures with EU law and with ruling C-663/18; • Review the position of INFARMED and the Tax Authority, eliminating interpretations that no longer have legal support;
• To train police officers, inspectors, and regulators so that they do not confuse industrial hemp with an illicit substance;
• To restore legal certainty that allows the sector to grow without fear.
Industrial hemp is legal. CBD is not a narcotic. Europe has already clarified this. Portugal can continue to ignore it—but not without economic, legal, and reputational costs.
It's time to abandon the prohibitionist mindset and restore rationality to a topic that, in truth, should never have left the technical domain. The European future of the sector already exists. The question is whether Portugal wants to be a part of it.
Leonardo R. Sousa
Covilhã, November 27, 2025
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
[Disclaimer: Please note that this text was originally written in Portuguese and is translated into English and other languages using an automatic translator. Some words may differ from the original and typos or errors may occur in other languages.]____________________________________________________________________________________________________
What do you do with €3 a month? Become one of our Patrons! If you believe that independent cannabis journalism is necessary, subscribe to one of the levels of our Patreon account and you will have access to unique gifts and exclusive content. If there are many of us, we can make a difference with little!

Leonardo Sousa



