Florida lawmakers are considering legislation to tighten regulations on the production and sale of kratom, an increasingly controversial herbal supplement made from the leaves of a Southeast Asian tree. SB 994, sponsored by Sen. Joe Gruters, and HB 1205, sponsored by Rep. Dean Black, would expand the 2023 Kratom Consumer Protection Act, which they say would help shield consumers from a dangerously unregulated and wildly volatile drug.
Yet kratom’s advocates, while favoring more robust regulation of their product, say the legislation disproportionately disadvantages manufacturers of leaf-based products and retailers like kava bars while favoring the corporate interests of synthetic producers, which they contend would increase health risks for consumers.
“All I know, is that if your business model doesn’t allow you to protect public safety, then your business should perish,” Black said in an interview with the Florida Trident.
Black’s bill makes no distinction between synthetics and plant-based products—but critics say the distinction matters. They say that only producers of highly potent extracts and derivatives, whose products command far higher profit margins and come with far more risk—would be able to absorb newly imposed compliance costs.
On the other hand, says Matthew Lowe, executive director of the Global Kratom Coalition, the bill would likely punish the very businesses that have long championed responsible kratom use: kava bars.
“To be honest?” responded Black, “I don’t know what a kava bar is.”
Advocates laud kratom for its relaxing, pain-relieving, and mildly euphoric properties. The plant leaf has been consumed as powder or tea in parts of Asia for centuries—and by millions of kava bar patrons across the United States since the 1970s. It’s also touted by some as a natural, holistic remedy for opioid withdrawal symptoms, since its active alkaloid, mitragynine, interacts marginally with opioid receptors—which is also what some argue may make it addictive.
Research on the subject is mixed; while some studies suggest that some may experience mild to moderate withdrawal symptoms after high-dosage, prolonged use, further research suggests that the way kratom compounds affect specific opioid receptors may reduce the potential for addiction relative to opioids.
In light of the nation’s ongoing opioid epidemic, kratom’s complex pharmacological profile partially accounts for both its popularity and its susceptibility to controversy. In 2023, for instance, a Tampa Bay Times investigation raised concerns not only about the addictive potential of kratom-based products but also about the wide variation in their chemical composition.
The investigation reported on hundreds of kratom-related deaths across Florida, though the majority of cases involved a lethal mix of diverse substances, and those reported to have involved kratom alone did not differentiate between plant products and synthetics. Many kratom advocates insist that concerns about the plant primarily stem from widespread confusion about the important distinction between kratom leaf and its derivative compounds. And many argue that the latter should not be sold as kratom at all.
Free of health risks?
While research by the FDA and other agencies suggests that kratom carries a relatively low potential for abuse or harm when used responsibly, it isn’t free of health risks or addictive potential. Still, kratom is not, medically or legally speaking, an opiate—but its most potent synthetic derivative, 7-OH (7-hydroxymitragynine), is. That distinction is missing from the proposed legislation.
The new bill defines kratom broadly as a product that “contains any part of the leaf.” It requires processors to comply with strict testing, labelling, and manufacturing standards, obtain FDA registration and product liability insurance, subject each batch of any product to independent lab testing, sell products free of any other psychoactive substances, label their products with revised warnings and directions, and comply with FDA drug manufacturing standards.
“Leaf Kratom’s Rise to Prominence: The Evolution of Leaf Kratom.”
But while “the objective is great,” maintains Lowe, “the details are unworkable” for all but high-margin synthetic manufacturers, who already require pharmaceutical-grade laboratories and facilities to manufacture their potent products, and who, unlike producers of leaf-based products, will likely find themselves federally mandated to adhere to such provisions in the long term.
Moreover, while the bill defines kratom as a product that “contains any part of the leaf,” it strikes out references to “extract,” “synthetic alkaloid,” and “synthetically derived compound.” Most of the bill’s subsequent provisions— registration, labeling, certificates of analysis, retail restrictions, and enforcement—apply only to “kratom products,” which would conceivably allow synthetic producers to plausibly argue that they fall outside the bill’s regulatory regime.
Ultimately, the legislation’s provisions offer no distinction between small, organic-based, privately owned and operated enterprises like kava bars and industrial entities manufacturing synthetic kratom by-products. The one-size-fits-all legislation raises familiar questions about the role corporate interests play in the economic dynamics of consumer protection guardrails in the nation’s wellness and healthcare system.
Since its U.S. commercial debut, kratom, like many imported holistic remedies before it, has been appropriated by enterprising alchemists looking to turn profits from the product’s conversion into potent extracts and synthetics (typically consumed in pill or concentrated liquid form). And none have rocked the market—and addiction-recovery communities—quite like 7-OH. Up to 20 times more powerful than kratom’s active alkaloid, mitragynine (and between 13-22x more powerful than morphine), 7-OH, present in trace amounts on dried kratom leaf, has since been lab-synthesized into commercial products containing up to 50x its natural concentration.
Since 7-OH flooded Florida’s smoke shops in 2023, reported deaths associated with kratom and its byproducts have skyrocketed. Part of the problem, says Lowe, is that law enforcement data typically doesn’t distinguish between deaths related to 7-OH and those related to kratom alone, primarily because postmortem toxicology panels typically test for “kratom-derived substances” without differentiating between 7-OH and mitragynine, and results are then grouped under the umbrella term of “kratom.” What differentiated data does exist suggests, according to Lowe, is that “people don’t overdose on the leaf alone.” “The numbers,” he says, “are confounded by the fact that people are using multiple substances,” such as alcohol, amphetamines, and 7-OH.
Both Lowe and Mac Haddow of the American Kratom Association believe that synthetics like 7-OH shouldn’t be called kratom at all. Many federal and state authorities agree. In July 2025, FDA Commissioner Marty Makary formally recommended that 7-OH be classified as a Schedule I substance, and in August, Florida Attorney General Uthmeier issued a mandatory order to that effect. “We’re not targeting kratom,” Makary specified, “right now, we’re focused on this dangerous synthetic concentrated byproduct.”
Despite that, Rep. Black says the distinction between organic kratom and its synthetic derivatives is immaterial. “This bill,” he says, is “about closing loopholes and cracking down on kratom being available to children and teenagers.” Black wants to ensure that the market remains open only to “pure,” unadulterated products. That makes sense in theory, says Lowe, but kava bars traditionally brew the plant into tea and mix it with other ingredients, such as black pepper and caffeine. To some, this bill seems to target those traditional practices while allowing products like 7-OH, which are technically unadulterated but much more potent, to pass themselves off as “pure.”
Cracking down on kratom
Most kratom advocates support regulation. “Kratom helps people, so we all have an interest in making the product safer,” said Gary Eliasov-Hodes of Cloud Smoke Shop in Tallahassee. He says he aims to sell products that are lab-tested and safe, and that “that should be the case everywhere.”
And yet, because kratom isn’t federally regulated (and remains underregulated in Florida), there remains a wide variation in the composition of available products. Such products, says Eliasov-Hodes, not only pose indeterminate health risks to consumers but could also conceivably be highly potent and habit-forming, particularly for those with a preexisting history of addiction.
Which is why Haddow, like Lowe, believes that products “ should be labelled, tested, and unavailable to children.” But as Eliasov-Hodes points out, “while batch-level, independent lab testing and drug manufacturing standards sound great to the layperson,” such measures are not financially feasible for leaf-based businesses that maintain low profit margins precisely because they won’t sell synthetics. By contrast, such standards are entirely achievable for 7-OH producers because of their high profit margins. Furthermore, they’re likely to have to submit to drug manufacturing standards in the near future anyway.
When asked if he collaborated with any advocacy groups on this bill, Black mentioned the Holistic Alternative Recovery Trust (HART). The group purports to “promote healthy alternative solutions to American consumers” and “address the national opioid epidemic,” while boasting a board of directors composed entirely of 7-OH producers.
Founded in 2023—the same year 7-OH flooded the U.S. market—HART’s board of directors includes leading synthetics manufacturers such as Adam Israel of Hydroxi, Brooke Willis of Colorado Chromatography Labs (d/b/a kanna21) and Sunflower Hemp LLC (d/b/a Sunflower Wellness), Vince Sanders, owner of Missouri-based Shaman Botanicals and Dharma Isomers, and Matt Schwarmann of Outpost Brands in Daytona Beach, one of the largest white label manufacturers of 7-OH—and a major Republican Party campaign donor.
Campaign finance records reveal that Schwarmann, whose brand produces products under names such as “Dozo Perks,” “Opia” and “Oxin,” has donated over $750,000 to various Florida Republican PACs since January 2025—including $75,000 to Florida Senate president designate Jim Boyd’s “Building on Your Dreams” PAC and $75,000 to PACs associated with Gruters, sponsor of the Senate kratom bill.
Public records show no direct contributions from the American Kratom Alliance, Global Kratom Coalition, or Florida’s top five leaf producers. But all three organizations (HART, AKA, & GKC) have registered lobbyists for the 2026 Florida legislative session.
In an interview with the Florida Trident, Lisa Kauffman, a HART representative, confirmed the organization’s involvement in drafting the legislation. “We helped [legislators] to get some of the policy ideas in place,” Kauffman said. “Strict regulation, not selective prohibition, is essential to protecting public health and keeping these products away from kids,” said Jeff Smith, National Policy Director for HART. Conversely, kava bar owners contend that, in fact, selective prohibition is the only means of distinguishing an herbal supplement from a dangerous drug.
So why would 7-OH producers support the legislation? Some leaf producers suggest that the synthetic industry still hopes to kill the AG’s scheduling bill by positioning 7-OH as a clean alternative to kratom leaf, and this bill’s broad definitions and emphasis on mitigating adulteration could help do that. In raising barriers for smaller, leaf-based sellers, this new regulatory framework could also conceivably allow 7-OH sellers to continue raising profits while they await further legislative developments.
“The process of scheduling drugs isn’t straightforward,” says Lowe. Which may explain why, long after having received multiple FDA warnings, Vince Sanders was still producing and selling 7-OH. In December, federal agents confiscated over 73,000 products from his facility. But “the craziest part,” said Sanders, was that because of the legal and practical complexities around drug scheduling, “we literally sat there continuing to make the products they were taking.”
While manufacturers like Sanders might be able to sustain operations under the new bill’s requirement that all kratom producers adhere to pricey FDA drug manufacturing guidelines, leaf-sellers with lower profit margins likely wouldn’t. Under 21 C.F.R. Part 210, drug manufacturers must maintain pharmaceutical-grade facilities, validation, documentation, and quality systems. But kratom leaf producers, says Lowe, “aren’t drug manufacturers—and kava bars aren’t selling drugs.”
While all parties agree on the necessity of transparency and tighter regulations, the plant’s proponents say most of the industry’s problems stem precisely from potent synthetics replacing natural leaf products. “If we used kratom here the way they do in Malaysia,” says Lowe, “we wouldn’t see the same issues.” Lowe, Haddow, and other kava advocates agree that kava bars, where kratom consumers drink brewed teas and many in addiction-recovery congregate, ought to be the model for kratom consumption in America. But Black’s bill, Lowe and Haddow maintain, may well drive kava bars out of business.
“We favor appropriate regulation that mandates testing and labelling and makes kratom unavailable to kids,” says Haddow. “But consumers deserve an empowering and appropriate regulatory scheme that allows them to make informed, responsible decisions.” But in what such a regulatory framework should consist remains, between plant advocates and producers of synthetic derivatives, a matter of enduring debate.
About the author: Camille Louise Goering is an essayist and freelance journalist earning a post-graduate degree at Florida State University. The Florida Trident is an investigative news outlet focusing on government accountability and transparency across Florida. The Trident was created and first published in 2022 by the Florida Center for Government Accountability, a non-profit organization that facilitates local investigative reporting across the state.
