The Bundestag is debating a revision of the Medical Cannabis Act, including discussions about a shipping ban for cannabis flower and the question of who will cover treatment costs in the future. We posed ten questions to the Cannabis Industry Association (BvCW), including some uncomfortable ones. The association answered all of them.
📑 Inhaltsverzeichnis
- Transparency regarding this interview
- „It currently appears unlikely that parity will be reintroduced in this legislative term“
- When individual interests and industry positions diverge
- Shipping ban: „The solution does not lie in blanket prohibitions“
- Cultivation associations as a benchmark
- Election policy statements: one answer stands out
- The number nobody collects
- The state cultivation program: „These errors have been corrected“
- The losers nobody talks about
- What the industry itself needs to do better
- The day after the vote
- Analysis
- 💬 Fragen? Frag den Hanf-Buddy!
Two voices responded: Kathrin Konyen, board member and medical cannabis coordinator, addresses the medical and technical questions. Michael Greif, managing director of the association, responds to matters concerning the association and regulatory policy. According to the association, both statements reflect the official position of the BvCW and its board.
Transparency regarding this interview
This article is editorial and not paid. The BvCW is an industry association, not an advertising client of Hanf Magazin, and no compensation was agreed upon for publication. The answers are provided to us in writing and authorized.
One note is nonetheless important: In addition to her volunteer position on the BvCW board, Kathrin Konyen works for the medical cannabis company Canify. She answers the questions about reimbursement and supply in this interview—topics that affect her employer’s business. We consider this worth disclosing, even though the answers represent the association’s position rather than that of a single company.
„It currently appears unlikely that parity will be reintroduced in this legislative term“
The BvCW welcomes the relaxation of trial therapy requirements but demands the reintroduction of regular reimbursability for flower. How realistic is this demand in the current legislative term?
Kathrin Konyen: The substantial reversal of the requirement for a six-month trial with cannabis finished pharmaceuticals, which was introduced in late July through the GKV Financial Stabilization Act, was an important step toward supply security. This allows medical cannabis extracts to be prescribed directly in most cases again.
Kathrin Konyen: However, the continued exclusion of flower reimbursability places a considerable financial and health burden on many patients. That parity between flower and extracts will be reintroduced in this legislative term currently appears unlikely. As an association, we will continue to advocate for this position in future political processes, including after this legislative term.
When individual interests and industry positions diverge
The BvCW board includes representatives of companies. Isn’t it sometimes difficult to find a common position that may not be in your own business interests?
Michael Greif: Our board members engage in volunteer work for the overall association. This requires looking first and foremost at the entire industry rather than individual companies with every decision. The BvCW’s positions emerge through dialogue across the entire value chain and are guided by shared principles: legal certainty, quality, patient safety, and youth protection.
Michael Greif: It’s true that individual interests and overall industry interests can sometimes diverge. What matters is consensus: in the long run, a reliable, legally secure framework benefits all market participants more than an individual advantage in an uncertain environment.
Shipping ban: „The solution does not lie in blanket prohibitions“
The association speaks for producers, retailers, pharmacies, and telemedici providers simultaneously. On the shipping ban, these groups have conflicting interests. How does the BvCW find a position on this?
Michael Greif: That is precisely the strength of the BvCW: we bring the entire value chain together at one table and moderate this discourse internally so that we present a common position externally.
Michael Greif: On the shipping ban issue, there is a clear shared line that we share with professional associations from physicians, pharmacies, industry, and patient representatives: we reject a blanket shipping ban for medical cannabis flower. It would primarily affect patients with limited mobility, particularly in rural areas, who depend on continuous, barrier-free supply.
Michael Greif: At the same time, we take the market developments we have observed seriously. However, the solution does not lie in blanket prohibitions, but rather in the consistent enforcement of existing regulations governing pharmaceutical advertising, professional conduct, pharmaceutical law, and pharmacy law. This protects patients and guarantees quality across all supply channels, both locally and digitally.
Cultivation associations as a benchmark
What happens to cultivation associations if politics continues to backtrack, and is the business sector even interested in that?
Michael Greif: Already, excessive bureaucratic hurdles are slowing down cultivation associations. Further backtracking by politicians would place considerable strain on this sector, even though licensed associations enjoy some legal protection through their seven-year authorization.
Michael Greif: The cannabis industry has a strong interest in functioning cultivation associations. For this reason too, the BvCW actively supported the founding of the Federal Working Group on Cannabis Cultivation Associations (BCAv). The success of cannabis cultivation associations is a barometer for the success of the Cannabis Act. They contribute to youth protection, quality assurance, and reducing the black market.
Michael Greif: Furthermore, cultivation associations, which must themselves be organized on a non-commercial basis, are also an economic factor. They require professional products and services from the economy, from building rental to growing supplies to seeds and laboratory analytics.
Election policy statements: one answer stands out
The association submitted election policy statements on cannabis policy. Which party response surprised you most?
Michael Greif: It is positive to note that we have received cross-party constructive responses to reform needs in industrial hemp and medical cannabis. This shows there is a common basis for discussion on this topic that can be built upon.
Michael Greif: Most remarkable was the response from the AfD state association in Saxony-Anhalt, which wrote that cannabis attacks „German strengths“ such as discipline, dedication, and intellectual performance. This shows how strongly the debate in some quarters continues to be shaped by ideological notions.
The number nobody collects
What figure about the German market do you most miss, and why does nobody collect it?
Michael Greif: We lack a representative figure on how high the proportion of consumers in Germany is who cover their needs through legal, quality-assured sources and how large the remaining black market is. Initial studies like the EKOCAN interim report provide valuable insights.
Michael Greif: This metric is essential to evaluate the success of partial legalization, estimate actual overall demand, and realistically calculate revenue potential from a cannabis tax.
Michael Greif: Since home cultivation and cultivation associations are not sufficient, we need scientific pilot projects for regulated sales in specialized shops („pillar 2“) to close precisely this knowledge gap. Sound data collection naturally comes with corresponding costs. We are in preparation for this and intend to publish findings in 2027.
The state cultivation program: „These errors have been corrected“
The state cultivation program was small compared to imports from the beginning. Was that a mistake?
Kathrin Konyen: It was a major step forward that the then-new Cannabis as Medicine Act in 2017 finally enabled legal medical cannabis cultivation in Germany. The bureaucratic bidding process, which had to be repeated due to errors, led to considerable delays, and the total cultivation quantity was too strictly regulated. Only three companies received permission to grow.
Kathrin Konyen: These errors were finally corrected with the new Medical Cannabis Act (MedCanG) as of April 1, 2024: the rigid bidding system was replaced with a licensing procedure. Since then, companies can flexibly respond to demand and produce corresponding quantities while meeting quality standards.
The losers nobody talks about
Who are the losers of developments since 2024 that nobody discusses?
Kathrin Konyen: The greatest suffering is experienced by severely ill patients who no longer have their medical cannabis flower reimbursed by health insurance. Some resort to telemedici, whose restrictions are being discussed, which would affect them even more significantly.
Kathrin Konyen: That black market actors now do less or no business was a goal of the reform. On the other hand, actors in the legal cannabis industry invested in companies following the legalization announcement by the former traffic light coalition government in order to be present in the market from the start. They were deprived of their intended business foundation by the failure to introduce specialized shops, not even as pilot projects („pillar 2“), which led to several insolvencies and changes in business focus.
What the industry itself needs to do better
What should the industry itself do better before asking politics for anything else?
Michael Greif: We continuously set high standards for ourselves. This includes not only formally complying with quality assurance, product safety, and youth protection, but actively advancing them as a reliable standard through our own initiative and acting transparently toward authorities.
Michael Greif: Self-responsibility and political demands go together for us. We set standards where we can act ourselves and expect reliable, practical regulatory conditions from politics so these standards can be effective.
Michael Greif: However, there are industry actors outside our association who stand out through rule violations, for example in advertising guidelines. Here, more cease-and-desist letters against unlawful practices within the industry as well as more regulatory inspections would be useful so that the behavior of bad actors doesn’t lead to stricter laws and bans for everyone.
The day after the vote
If the Bundestag passes the revision in this form: What is the association’s first step the day after?
Michael Greif: If the bill passes in its current form, we will contact the Federal Ministry of Health with questions about how it intends to solve the resulting problems. We will also keep the public well informed during this period and remain a reliable, factual dialogue partner for politics. Even now, we are incorporating the experiences and assessments of our members from practice.
Michael Greif: We would monitor the effects on supply practice and transparently report the resulting problems to politics, ministries, and authorities, and propose solutions. Good association work does not end with a Bundestag vote; it accompanies legislation and its implementation with practice-oriented expertise.
Michael Greif: We do not assume, by the way, that the MedCanG revision as currently presented can achieve a majority, but rather that reason and moderation will lead to a more sensible adjustment.
Analysis
Two points are remarkable in these answers. First, the association acknowledges that the return of flower to regular reimbursement in this legislative term is „unlikely.“ This is clearer than associations typically are about their own demands, and it aligns with the picture drawn by the inconsistent case law of social courts currently.
Second, the BvCW shifts the debate over the shipping ban away from the question of „allow or prohibit“ toward enforcement of existing law. This position aligns with the expert opinion suggesting that presence requirements and shipping bans could fail under EU law.
Sollten Cannabisblüten wieder regulär von der Krankenkasse erstattet werden?
What remains unaddressed is what happens to patients for whom both converge: no reimbursement and restricted access. To date, nobody—not the association and not politics—has an answer to this question.
Branchen-Update
News, Analysen und Reportagen — mehrmals im Monat direkt in dein Postfach.
Folge uns
