Ecuador's Hemp Regulations

Home | Canna Law Blog | Ecuador’s Hemp Regulations MAG Hemp Regulations In October, Ecuador's agriculture ministry (MAG) released hemp regulations, in the form of Acuerdo Ministerial No. 109 (English). This follows the National Assembly's 2019 decriminalization of cannabis with a THC content of less than 1.0% THC (which entered into forced on June 21, 2020). The regulations distinguish between industrial hemp (cáñamo para uso industrial) and hemp (cáñamo), also referred to as non-psychoactive cannabis (cannabis no psicoactivo). Both are legal, but their regulation is slightly different. Frankly, the regulations could be a little clearer when it comes to defining both categories. In essence, however, industrial hemp is that used for activities such as fiber production, while "plain" hemp is used to make consumer products. Under the regulations, MAG is tasked with the licensure of entities that wish to participate in the hemp industry. These entities must be either incorporated or domiciled in Ecuador. Seven types of licenses MAG will issue seven types of licenses: License 1: importation and commercialization of hemp seeds and cuttings (including seeds for industrial use) License 2: sowing and production of hemp seeds and cuttings (including seeds for industrial use) License 3: hemp cultivation License 4: industrial hemp cultivation License 5: hemp processing and production of hemp derivatives License 6: plant breeding and/or germplasm banks, and research License 7: acquisition of derivatives and/or biomass or hemp flower (including biomass for industrial use) for export The most permissive of these is License 3, which allows holders to also engage in the activities permitted by License 1 and License 2. In addition, License 3 holders can acquire hemp biomass or flower from other License 3 holders, as well as export these products. However, they cannot sell hemp derivatives for human or animal consumption, unless they concurrently hold License 5; this license is also required to import biomass or derivatives. Imported derivatives must comply with the same requirements as derivatives produced in Ecuador, including labeling requirements contained in Article 15 of the regulations. The regulations prioritize domestic production by authorizing imports only if domestic production falls short. However, it is expected domestic production will be insufficient, presenting an opportunity for foreign producers. It must be noted the regulations distinguish between derivatives and finished products. Derivatives are defined as "oils, resins, tinctures, crude extracts ... used or intended to be used as raw material for the production" of finished products." In turn, finished product is defined as "a product obtained from hemp derivatives, for human or animal use, and which is duly approved for use under Ecuadorian law." Such products include "processed foods, dried flower, beverages, food additives, food supplements, cosmetics, homeopathic products, medicines, medical devices, processed natural products for medicinal use, and veterinary products." The regulations make clear that finished products are outside MAG's purview. Stated differently, none of the licenses described above will allow the importation of ready-to-use hemp products. Additional regulatory approval must be obtained. Finally, the regulations provide for limitations in the number of licenses issued, as well as the quantity of hemp that is allowed to be cultivated. With this in mind, interested parties should move promptly to obtain their licenses. This is particularly the case for foreign companies that first need to establish a branch in Ecuador, in order to avail themselves of the opportunities created by the new legal framework. We would like to thank Quito law firm Bustamante & Bustamante for providing us with an English version of the regulations. Check Out Our Cannabis Law Services Share Twitter Facebook LinkedIn E-mail Comment Fred Rocafort Fred leads Harris Sliwoski’s intellectual property practice and is the coordinator of the firm’s international team. Much of Fred’s practice consists of helping cannabis businesses protect their brands. He also works with entrepreneurs and companies entering the Web3 space, a new frontier for IP law. Prior to joining Harris Sliwoski, Fred worked overseas for more than a decade, in both government and private sector roles. Fred is a regular contributor to the award-winning China Law Blog and Canna Law Blog. Fred began his career overseas as a U.S. consular officer in Guangzhou, China, where he advocated for fairer treatment of American companies and citizens in China and for stronger intellectual property rights enforcement. After entering the private sector, Fred worked at a Shanghai law firm as a foreign legal advisor and later joined one of the oldest American law firms in China, helping foreign companies navigate the Chinese legal environment. He also led the legal team at a Hong Kong-based brand protection consultancy, spending most of his time out in the field, protecting clients against counterfeiters and fraudsters in Greater China, Southeast Asia and Latin America. In addition to his IP work, as a native Spanish speaker, Fred works closely with different Harris Sliwoski teams on Latin America and Spain matters. Fred also provides advice to cannabis industry participants and other businesses on import and export transactions. Fred is an ardent supporter of FC Barcelona—and would be even in the absence of Catalan forebears who immigrated to Puerto Rico in the mid-1800s. Harris Sliwoski Attorney Read more posts [email protected] Read More Hemp/CBD, 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