Study Estimates Consumer Value of Hemp THC Beverages

A study published in the Journal of Wine Economics estimates that removing hemp-derived THC beverages from the U.S. market could reduce consumer welfare by $112.2 million to $145.9 million annually. The researchers describe these figures as scenario-based estimates, not a direct measurement of money consumers would spend or lose.

The paper, “Consumer Welfare Effects of Banning Hemp-Derived THC Beverages,” published by Cambridge University Press on October 13, 2026, was written by Aaron J. Staples of the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Valerie Kilders of Purdue University, and Vincenzina Caputo of Michigan State University.

The analysis examines the potential effect of a federal policy change that would significantly restrict the sale of intoxicating hemp-derived THC beverages. Its findings offer one estimate of the consumer impact, but they do not account for every economic, regulatory or public health consequence associated with the policy.

What the Study Found

The researchers estimated a consumer welfare reduction of $3.32 per person, per choice occasion, with a 95% confidence interval ranging from $3.04 to $3.71.

In economics, consumer welfare measures the value people receive from having access to products and choices. It is not the same as the amount they pay at checkout. The $3.32 estimate therefore should not be interpreted as a fee, a price increase or a guaranteed financial loss for every consumer.

To develop a national estimate, the researchers used the estimated size of the hemp-derived THC beverage market in 2024. Their calculations produced an annualized consumer welfare reduction of $112.2 million to $145.9 million.

These national figures depend on the assumptions used to translate the study's per-occasion estimate into an annual market-wide calculation. The researchers present them as a scenario-based approximation rather than a precise measurement of total consumer welfare.

How Researchers Calculated the Estimates

The paper does not report a new nationwide survey conducted specifically to measure the effect of the proposed restrictions. Instead, it uses consumer preference estimates from previously published experimental research on alcohol and cannabis products.

In that earlier research, participants were asked to imagine spending a weekend night with friends and select the alcohol and cannabis products they would expect to consume. The researchers used those preference estimates to calculate how consumer welfare could change if hemp-derived THC beverages were removed from the available choices.

The study then scaled the estimated welfare change using market sales figures. It used an average experimental price of $22.50 per six-pack to convert the estimated sales range into six-pack-equivalent units. Those units were multiplied by the estimated consumer welfare reduction per choice occasion to produce the annual national figures.

This method provides an economic estimate based on consumer preferences and market data. It does not establish how every consumer would respond to the policy change in real-world purchasing situations.

Why the Sales Figures Need Context

The study cites estimated U.S. hemp-derived THC beverage sales of $760 million to $988 million in 2024. At first glance, those numbers may appear inconsistent with Whitney Economics' broader estimate that total U.S. THC beverage sales reached between $1.0 billion and $1.3 billion in 2024.

The distinction is the market being measured. The research paper reports that approximately 76% of the broader THC beverage market was attributed to hemp-derived beverages. Applying that share to the $1.0 billion to $1.3 billion range produces the $760 million to $988 million estimate used in the study.

The figures therefore refer to different portions of the same broader market, rather than necessarily representing conflicting estimates. The distinction matters because the federal policy discussed in the paper concerns hemp-derived products, not every THC beverage sold in the United States.

What the Estimates Do Not Measure

The researchers identify important limitations in their analysis.

First, the original consumer preference experiment used a specific hypothetical setting. Consumer preferences may differ across situations, and the experimental results may not fully represent all real-world purchasing occasions.

Second, the national estimates depend on market sales data and the assumption that six-pack-equivalent units provide a useful basis for scaling the per-occasion welfare calculation. Actual consumer behavior may not follow that scenario exactly.

Third, the paper measures the consumer welfare effect of removing hemp-derived THC beverages from the available choices. It does not provide a complete assessment of the policy's net economic or social effects. Potential impacts on producers, retailers, supply chains, public health and other markets fall outside the scope of the reported consumer welfare figures.

The study also discusses potential public health concerns associated with edible cannabis products, including adverse psychological effects, accidental consumption by minors and impaired driving. Restricting access could affect some of these risks, although the overall effect would depend partly on how consumers respond and whether they switch to other products.

These limitations mean the results should be read as one component of the policy discussion, not as a complete cost-benefit analysis.

Funding and Disclosures

The paper's funding statement says that the original data collection was partially funded by the North Central Region Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education Graduate Student Grant, GNC21-337. The authors also state that they have no conflicting interests relevant to the work.

The funding disclosure is relevant context for readers evaluating the research. The published disclosure does not identify funding from a hemp beverage company or an alcohol company.

The Federal Policy Context

The federal hemp restrictions were introduced through Public Law 119-37, enacted in November 2025. The law amended the federal definition of hemp, including restrictions affecting certain hemp-derived cannabinoid products.

The original effective date for the relevant changes was November 12, 2026. Subsequent legislation, Public Law 119-103, delayed the effective date of most of those changes until December 11, 2026. The Congressional Research Service's analysis of the federal hemp definition explains the changes and their potential implications.

The delay does not apply to every provision. Certain restrictions involving intermediate and final hemp-derived cannabinoid products containing cannabinoids that cannot be naturally produced by a cannabis plant remain scheduled to take effect on November 12, 2026. The later date applies to other portions of the revised hemp definition, including the new total THC standard and the 0.4 milligram per-container limit for covered final hemp-derived cannabinoid products.

The White House confirmed that H.R. 6500, the Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2027, was signed into law on September 2, 2026. The law provides federal funding through December 11, 2026, and also contains the provision delaying the relevant hemp definition changes. Businesses should review the specific statutory requirements that apply to their products rather than assume every provision has the same effective date.

Lawmakers have also introduced proposals that could change the regulatory framework. The Lawful Hemp Protection Act, H.R. 9830, proposes a federal framework for hemp-derived cannabinoid products. The Beverage Regulatory Parity Act, H.R. 10079, proposes a separate approach for qualifying hemp-derived beverages. These proposals should not be treated as enacted law unless their legislative status changes.

State requirements may also differ from the federal framework. AHAA's reporting on Missouri HB 2641 and its November 12 effective date illustrates why businesses need to assess state rules separately from federal requirements.

What the Study Adds to the Policy Discussion

The research provides an estimate of the consumer value associated with retaining hemp-derived THC beverages as an available option. Its national figures depend on experimental consumer preferences, market sales estimates and assumptions used to scale the results.

The paper does not determine whether the policy produces a net benefit or loss for society. That broader assessment would require weighing consumer preferences alongside regulatory compliance, business impacts, public health considerations and other potential consequences.

As the federal framework evolves, the study offers one economic measure that policymakers and other stakeholders can consider alongside the evidence on safety, enforcement and market regulation.