CBD cat treats sit in a strange legal position. Federal law technically permits the hemp they’re made from, yet the FDA has never approved a single Holistapet CBD product for use in any animal, cat or otherwise. That gap between “legal to sell” and “approved for the claims on the label” drives most of the confusion in this market.
The Farm Bill and What It Actually Legalized
The 2018 Farm Bill removed hemp, defined as cannabis containing no more than 0.3% THC by dry weight, from the federal list of controlled substances. That change is why hemp-derived CBD products are widely available at all. It did not, however, give the FDA’s blessing to CBD as an ingredient in food, treats, or supplements for animals or people.
Two different agencies end up governing different pieces of the supply chain. The USDA oversees hemp cultivation and interstate commerce of the raw plant material under rules that followed the Farm Bill. The FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine oversees whether finished pet products can legally make health claims, and on that front the answer has consistently been no.
FDA Enforcement in 2025
Enforcement picked up noticeably last year. In April 2025, the FDA posted warning letters to four pet product companies, including Bailey’s Wellness, Holista (marketed as HolistaPet), and House of Alchemy (marketed as CBD Dog Health and MycoDog), for selling what the agency classified as unapproved new animal drugs. A separate wave of letters followed in June 2025.
The letters made a consistent point: products marketed with claims about treating anxiety, arthritis, or pain are being sold as unapproved drugs, regardless of whether they’re labeled as a “supplement” or a “treat.” No cannabis-derived product currently holds federal approval for therapeutic or nutritional use in cats or dogs.
A few specifics from the FDA’s position, as reported by outlets covering the letters:
- Companies had 15 working days to respond and explain how violations would be addressed
- Non-compliance risks included product seizure and court injunctions
- The agency flagged particular concern about CBD products marketed for food-producing animals, citing unresolved questions about residue and human food safety
- This wasn’t isolated: similar letters went out in November 2024 and earlier rounds dating back to 2022
For a cat owner, this doesn’t mean every CBD treat on the shelf is illegal or unsafe. It means the specific health claims on the packaging, not the presence of hemp itself, are what draws regulatory attention.
The Role of the National Animal Supplement Council
With no federal approval pathway currently open for CBD as an animal drug or supplement ingredient, an industry group called the National Animal Supplement Council (NASC) has stepped into part of that vacuum. Member companies agree to a voluntary quality-assurance program covering manufacturing practices, adverse event reporting, and labeling standards.
NASC membership isn’t a government certification. It functions more like an industry seal of self-regulation, and after the 2025 warning letters, the organization publicly urged its members to review their marketing claims for compliance. Products carrying the NASC seal aren’t guaranteed to be more effective, but they do come from companies that have agreed to a baseline of manufacturing and reporting standards that non-member brands haven’t.
What This Means When Buying
The regulatory picture translates into a few practical checkpoints:
- Marketing language claiming a product “treats” or “cures” a specific medical condition is not FDA-backed, no matter how confidently it’s written
- Third-party lab testing (a COA) is currently the closest thing to independent verification available in this category
- NASC membership is a reasonable, though not definitive, signal of manufacturing accountability
- Rules are actively shifting; the FDA has signaled that clearer guidance for animal cannabis products could arrive as its ongoing review process develops
None of this makes CBD cat treats illegal to purchase or use. It does mean the label’s promises carry less regulatory weight than a bag of prescription flea medication, where FDA approval has already been through a formal review.
Final Thoughts
The market keeps growing while the regulatory framework lags behind it, which puts more responsibility on individual buyers to check testing documentation and read claims skeptically. That gap is unlikely to close quickly, given how recently enforcement activity has ramped up.
