The World Trade Organization and Cannabis

Home | Canna Law Blog | The World Trade Organization and Cannabis Last year, we helped a client take a hard look at an issue related to cannabis and the World Trade Organization (WTO). It was a fascinating project and WTO lawyers took preliminary interest in the issue. We were told that cannabis had not come before the WTO in any formal or informal context to that point, whether for market access or other issues. Moreover, there were no WTO working groups related to cannabis, no real reports, no recommendations and no “disciplines.” As far as we know, all of that is true today. Briefly, the WTO is a multilateral organization governing trade among nations, based on obligations its member states undertake through various treaties. The WTO is the largest international economic organization in the world. It’s also kind of new, having formed via the the Marrakesh Agreement in 1994. According to that Agreement, the purpose of the WTO is “the substantial reduction of tariffs and other barriers to trade and… the elimination of discriminatory treatment in international trade relations.” The WTO administers a complex legal regime regulating international trade, and WTO member countries must abide by these rules. Otherwise, they can be dragged before WTO’s dispute settlement body (sued, basically). When it comes to cannabis, it’s important to note that the WTO recently clarified (and even emphasized) in an Appellate Body Report that “illicit trade” is not exempt from WTO disciplines. This means that the WTO legal framework permits member countries to ban trade in products that are also prohibited domestically. However, if a WTO member legalizes a product domestically, its justifications for restricting international transactions might fail under WTO law. More and more countries are legalizing cannabis domestically, to various degrees. Let’s look at a few examples of how this could work: one with respect to “market access” issues, and one on “national treatment”, the two primary categories of WTO dispute resolution. The market access example for cannabis is based on a recent WTO dispute related to tobacco. Suppose Mexico finally gets its act together and puts the finishing touches on federal cannabis legalization in 2020. And suppose Mexican companies wish to export beautifully packaged cannabis chocolate to Canada (another country that has legalized cannabis federally). Canada tells Mexico it won’t accept the chocolate, because Canada has essentially adopted “plain packaging” regulations for cannabis based on public health concerns. Mexico could bring this issue to the WTO, challenging Canada’s “technical barriers to trade” and obstacles related to trademark registration. The WTO would parse these claims in the context of various treaties, including but not limited to TBT, TRIPS and probably even USMCA. That would be a fun dispute. Next is the national treatment example. Let’s say a WTO member country with a CBD export economy, like Bulgaria, accused another WTO CBD country, like the U.S., of “unfair treatment as to a like product.” Bulgaria might argue that the U.S. is unlawfully supporting or subsidizing its CBD industry in some fashion. Or, it might argue that U.S. FDA governance as to CBD is merely a pretext for economic favoritism. These types of “vice product” disputes come up frequently before the WTO. Also fun. It’s important to note that the WTO does not exist solely to resolve disputes. Sometimes the WTO takes on modernization projects when a new commodity emerges. Other times, it serves as a trade policy “think tank” of sorts: member states gather to hash out topics, recommend rules and explore new disciplines (just like in regional trade agreements). In general, though, the WTO is viewed as more reactive than proactive in most respects. When the organization does engage, a core philosophy seems to be that “markets should be open” and restraints on trade should be viewed skeptically. When WTO finally picks up cannabis, it will look closely at relevant treaties joined by member states. Those treaties will include WTO agreements, such as TRIPS and TBT , regional trade agreements, and also treaties like the U.N. Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. It will contend with health reports promulgated by the World Health Organization and other bodies, and defer to those findings extensively. The role of WTO is not to recommend policy, after all. Instead, it examines what other authorities have produced, and it considers member state trade policies in light of those laws, reports and recommendations. The WTO will engage the international cannabis trade somehow, some way, in the next few years. It will be fascinating to watch that ensue. In the meantime, for more on international law and cannabis, check out the following: The International Cannabis Trade: Webinar Video Replay USMCA and Cannabis Trade How to Export Medical Cannabis Internationally International Cannabis: Selling Worldwide U.S. Cannabis and International Trade: Never the Twain Shall Meet? International Cannabis: Breaking the Law, Staying Honest Should You Import Hemp to the United States? International Cannabis: Guidance for Companies Entering the U.S. Market International Cannabis Continues to Look to the U.S. Market As China’s Hemp Industry Suffers, U.S. Hemp Growers Prepare to Pounce What to Consider Before Entering the European CBD Market Border Woes: Transporting CBD into Canada is Not OK Cannabis and International Trade: Don’t Ignore the U.S.–China Trade War Cannabis, Tariffs and Vaping Imports from China Cannabis Legalization Roundup: Mexico, Luxembourg, Switzerland Check Out Our Cannabis Law Services Share Twitter Facebook LinkedIn E-mail Comment Vince Sliwoski Vince is an award-winning business lawyer, problem solver and dealmaker. His clients run the gamut from individual investors and entrepreneurs to widely held domestic and international corporations. Based in Portland, Oregon, he is Managing Partner of Harris Sliwoski and Editor of the Canna Law Blog and the Psychedelics Law Blog. Harris Sliwoski Attorney Read more posts [email protected] Read More International Cannabis Law Related Posts September 25, 2026 DEA Enforcement in a Changing Cannabis Landscape: Rescheduling, Hemp, and What Comes Next September 17, 2026 The Supreme Court May Decide if Cannabis-Related Residency Requirements are Unconstitutional September 16, 2026 A $31.8 Million Cannabis-Related Verdict That a Federal Court Wouldn’t Enforce September 15, 2026 Jason Adelstone Moderates Federal Cannabis Policy Discussion at IgniteIt Denver September 11, 2026 Medical Marijuana in Schedule III Survives Its First Major Challenge September 10, 2026 How to Acquire a Colorado Cannabis License September 4, 2026 The Intoxicating Hemp Products Ban Was Delayed a Month. Now What? August 31, 2026 Is the Global Shift to the Right Threatening International Cannabis Reforms? August 28, 2026 Oregon Cannabis Roundup: Fall 2026 August 26, 2026 Five Bills Every California Cannabis Operator Needs to Track in 2026 August 14, 2026 California Cannabis Contracts After Rescheduling: Why Your Contracts Need a Second Look August 4, 2026 DCC License Conversions After Rescheduling: How and When to Split A/M Licenses in California August 3, 2026 The Contradictions of Cannabis Law: From the United States to International Treaties July 28, 2026 What California Operators Must Do After Rescheduling: DEA Registration, License Restructuring, and 280E July 24, 2026 Medical Marijuana Schedule III Litigation: The D.C. Circuit's First Major Test Leave a comment Cancel reply