Psilocybin laws around the world: how Canada compares

There is no single worldwide law on psilocybin. There is one treaty, the 1971 UN Convention on Psychotropic Substances, which names psilocybin and psilocin in its strictest list. What each country then does with that obligation varies, and in several places the answer depends on whether the law is talking about the compounds, the mushrooms or something else. Our psilocybin law tracker keeps dated summaries for each place in one view.

This guide compares the treaty with six sets of rules where we could open the government’s own text: Canada, US federal law, Oregon, Colorado, Australia and the Netherlands. We describe each only as its source states it, with a date. Where we could not open a source, we say so. We did not try to cover every country.

What does international law say about psilocybin?

The Convention on Psychotropic Substances was done at Vienna on 21 February 1971. Its Schedule I names psilocybine and psilocine (the treaty’s spellings; it adds the trivial name psilotsin for psilocine) alongside substances such as LSD, DMT, mescaline and MDMA (UNODC text). “Schedule I” here is the treaty’s own list. It is not the same list as US Schedule I or Canada’s Schedule III, which are national.

For substances in its Schedule I, Article 7 tells the parties to prohibit all use except for scientific and very limited medical purposes by duly authorized persons, in medical or scientific establishments directly under government control or specifically approved by it. It also requires that manufacture, trade, distribution and possession be under a special licence or prior authorization, and it prohibits export and import except between competent authorities or specifically authorized persons or enterprises (UNODC text).

The treaty binds states, not individuals, so what a person may lawfully do is set by national or local law. It entered into force on 16 August 1976, and the UN Treaty Collection lists 184 parties as of 4 October 2026 (UN Treaty Collection).

Does the treaty cover mushrooms themselves?

It lists the compounds. In its 2010 annual report the International Narcotics Control Board said that no plants are currently controlled under the 1971 Convention, and it named magic mushrooms (Psilocybe), which contain psilocybine and psilocine, as an example. The Board recommended that governments consider controlling such plant material at the national level where necessary (INCB, 2010). That gap is one reason national laws differ. We read the 2010 report; we did not check whether the Board has said anything different since.

Article 32(4) also lets a state with wild plants containing Schedule I substances, traditionally used by small, clearly determined groups in magical or religious rites, make reservations about those plants when it signs, ratifies or accedes. The reservation concerns Article 7, except for the provisions on international trade (UNODC text). The UN Treaty Collection records such a reservation by Mexico. Canada’s and the United States’ entries concern peyote, not mushrooms (UN Treaty Collection).

What is the law on psilocybin in Canada?

Canada’s Controlled Drugs and Substances Act lists psilocin and psilocybin in Schedule III. The Act says that, except as authorized under the regulations, no person shall possess a Schedule I, II or III substance (section 4(1)), and that no person shall traffic in a Schedule I to V substance (section 5(1)). The consolidation we read is current to 21 September 2026 (Justice Laws).

Health Canada’s page, last modified on 20 October 2026 as shown on the page, states that the production, sale and possession of magic mushrooms are illegal in Canada. It adds that there are no approved therapeutic products containing psilocybin in Canada or elsewhere, and that the Special Access Program route for psilocybin was restored in January 2022 through regulatory amendments (Health Canada).

New federal Controlled Substances Regulations (SOR/2025-242) came into force on 1 October 2026 according to the Gazette text; the Justice Laws consolidations we read are current to 21 September 2026, before that date. They carry a schedule headed Restricted Drugs that lists psilocin and psilocybin. The accompanying analysis in the Canada Gazette lists two older routes among the instruments being repealed: Part J of the Food and Drug Regulations, with its mechanism for authorizing researchers to obtain restricted drugs for scientific purposes including clinical trials, and a section 56(1) class exemption for activities with psilocybin and MDMA where the drug’s sale has been authorized through the Special Access Program. It says that under the new Regulations, section 56(1) exemptions will be the mechanism for authorizing researchers to obtain controlled substances for scientific purposes (Canada Gazette, 17 December 2025). The Health Canada page above was updated on 20 October 2026 and now names the new Regulations as the authorization for selling psilocybin for clinical testing, but it does not otherwise explain the change, so check the live pages for how it works in practice (Health Canada).

Measured against the treaty’s baseline, Canada’s approach is that the compounds are controlled, offences cover possession and trafficking, and access runs through research and exceptional medical channels. For the detail, see our explainers on whether magic mushrooms are legal in Canada, penalties for psilocybin in Canada, the Special Access Program and section 56 exemptions, and for the history, how magic mushrooms became illegal in Canada.

What are the rules in the United States, Oregon and Colorado?

This section is a short version of our article on whether magic mushrooms are legal in the United States, which gives the federal, Oregon and Colorado sources in more detail. The two should be read together.

US federal law

Federal law lists psilocybin and psilocyn in Schedule I. Under the rule, Schedule I hallucinogens include any material, compound, mixture or preparation that contains any quantity of the listed substances, unless specifically excepted or listed in another schedule. The entries appear as items (29) and (30) in 21 CFR 1308.11(d) on the eCFR version dated 21 September 2026, the most recent version listed on 4 October 2026 (eCFR, 21 CFR 1308.11).

Oregon

Oregon’s Ballot Measure 109 passed in November 2020 and is codified in ORS 475A. It directs the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) to license and regulate psilocybin products and psilocybin services. The OHA began accepting licence applications on 2 January 2023, and service centres began opening to clients in the summer of 2023 (OHA, Oregon Psilocybin Services).

Under the OHA’s description, no prescription or referral is needed, but a client must be 21 or older and must complete a preparation session with a licensed facilitator. A client may only access psilocybin at a licensed service centre, during an administration session. The same page says that psilocybin is still a Schedule I substance under the federal Controlled Substances Act (OHA, What are Psilocybin Services?). The OHA pages do not describe personal possession, so we say nothing about it.

Colorado

Colorado voters passed the Natural Medicine Health Act in 2022. The state’s Department of Revenue says its Natural Medicine Division began accepting licence applications on 31 December 2024 and approved the first healing-centre licence in April 2025 (Colorado Natural Medicine Division, About Us). The division’s home page listed 11 standard and 35 micro healing-centre licences approved as of 25 September 2026 (Colorado Natural Medicine Division).

The division’s FAQ, which shows no date we could see, describes two tracks. Regulated natural medicine is available mostly through licensed healing centres, and in limited cases at other approved locations with a licensed facilitator. Separately, the law permits personal use by adults aged 21 and over, but not sale: the FAQ says the sale of any natural medicine is prohibited, payment for the medicine itself is not allowed (the law permits payment for bona fide harm reduction or support services used alongside sharing), and there may be no open and public display or consumption (Colorado Natural Medicine Division, FAQ).

The details moved in 2026. The division’s own summary of the year’s legislation says HB26-1325, signed on 4 June 2026, with an effective date of 12 August 2026 subject to a referendum-petition clause, created a “limited sales license” that lets healing centres partner with a licensee for transactions that precede an administration session. It also says the act amended the personal-use provisions to bar advertising natural medicine and using harm-reduction or support services as a front for sales (Colorado Natural Medicine Division, 2026 legislation summary). The division’s home page says emergency rule revisions implementing limited sales licences took effect on 12 August 2026 (Colorado Natural Medicine Division). We read the division’s summary, not the act’s own text, which our US article covers, and we did not check whether a referendum petition was filed. Because the FAQ may predate these changes, rely on the division’s current pages for anything that matters.

Neither state’s programme changes the federal listing above, as Oregon’s agency itself notes. The Colorado pages we read do not discuss federal law.

What is the law on psilocybin in Australia?

Australia’s national Poisons Standard, made by a delegate of the Secretary of the Department of Health under the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989, is the main source. The October 2026 instrument (dated 28 September 2026, registered on the Federal Register of Legislation on 30 September 2026) lists psilocybine in Schedule 8 (controlled drugs) only “in preparations for human therapeutic use for the treatment of treatment-resistant depression”. Outside that entry, psilocybine and psilocine are in Schedule 9 (prohibited substances) (Poisons Standard, October 2026).

Appendix D of the same instrument (clause 9) says psilocybine in preparations for human use may be supplied only for the treatment of treatment-resistant depression, and only if it is prescribed, or its supply is authorised, by a specialist psychiatrist for whom an authority under subsection 19(5) of the Therapeutic Goods Act that covers psilocybine is in force, or if it is for use in a clinical trial approved by or notified to the Secretary. The Standard describes Schedule 9 as covering substances that should be available only for teaching, training, medical or scientific research, including clinical trials, and notes that States and Territories may implement it differently (Poisons Standard, October 2026).

The Standard names the compounds. A search of its text found no entry that names mushrooms or the genus Psilocybe, and we draw no conclusion about how it applies to whole mushrooms; state and territory law may also matter. We could not open the Therapeutic Goods Administration’s own explanatory pages from our network, so we cite only the legislation and do not describe how the scheme works in practice, how many prescribers hold authorities, or when it began.

How do the Netherlands treat mushrooms and truffles?

The Dutch Opium Act has two lists. In the consolidated version in force from 17 September 2026, psilocine and psilocybine are on List I. List II carries a heading, “Paddo’s”, covering mushrooms that naturally contain psilocine or psilocybine, and it names species one by one (Opium Act, wetten.overheid.nl). Articles 2 (List I) and 3 (List II) prohibit, among other things, bringing the substances into or out of the country, growing, preparing, processing, selling, supplying, transporting, possessing and making them (Opium Act).

The mushroom listing was a deliberate decision. In a letter to Parliament dated 19 October 2007, the Minister of Health, Welfare and Sport said, after consulting the Minister of Justice, that unprocessed mushrooms would be placed on List II, so that all mushrooms containing psilocine and psilocybine would fall under the Act. The active substances of processed mushrooms were already on List I. The letter said the position differed from the advice of the Coordination Point for Assessment and Monitoring of New Drugs (Dutch government letter, 2007).

Truffles are the complication. The Opium Act text we opened does not mention truffles or sclerotia. The only official government statement we found is a written answer received on 28 December 2011, in which the Health Minister, also answering for the Justice Minister, said psychedelic truffles, or sclerotia, are not covered by the Opium Act, and that this was known when 186 mushroom species were placed on List II on 1 December 2008. The answer called them legal products under the Commodities Act (Warenwet) (Dutch government answer, 2011). A 2023 factsheet from the Trimbos Institute, a Dutch addiction and mental-health institute, repeats the point in a footnote: truffles fall outside the Opium Act because they are not mushrooms (Trimbos Institute, 2023). That is a secondary source, not a government statement. We found no recent official page restating the position, so treat the 2011 answer as dated and check before relying on it.

How do these jurisdictions compare side by side?

Why do psilocybin laws differ if there is one treaty?

Our sources point to a few reasons, and we avoid guessing beyond them:

• The treaty lists compounds, not plants. The INCB said in 2010 that no plants are controlled under it and told governments to consider national controls where needed, so each country decides how to treat mushrooms and other plant material.
• Article 7 leaves room for scientific and very limited medical use. The Australian and Canadian routes described above are both built around medical or scientific supply: a restricted prescribing route and clinical trials in Australia, and research authorizations, the Special Access Program and exemptions in Canada.
• Federal systems layer rules. In the United States the federal listing and the state programmes sit side by side, and Oregon’s health authority says psilocybin remains Schedule I federally. We did not examine how Canadian provinces or Australian states apply their own rules.
• Countries draw different lines. The Dutch government chose in 2007 to list unprocessed mushrooms, and by 2011 it was saying truffles fell outside the Act.

Canada’s position is closest to the treaty’s baseline: the compounds are controlled nationally, and legal access is through narrow research and exceptional-access channels. It differs from Oregon and Colorado, where state-licensed programmes exist beside federal prohibition, and from Australia, where a named medical condition and a specialist prescriber are written into the Poisons Standard itself.

What could we not verify?

• The TGA’s own pages: they did not load from our network, so we cite the Poisons Standard instead and say nothing about the start date, uptake or the scheme’s practical operation.
• Whether the Dutch government has restated its position on truffles since 2011, and how the Dutch authorities enforce List II in practice.
• Oregon’s rules on personal possession, the text of Colorado’s statutes (we read the agencies’ pages and the division’s summary), and whether a referendum petition was filed against HB26-1325.
• Whether the INCB has said anything different about plants since its 2010 report.
• Australian state and territory laws, Canadian provincial rules, penalties in any jurisdiction, court decisions and any country not named here.

This is a snapshot of 4 October 2026. For Canada, the Justice Laws consolidation and Health Canada’s page are the places to re-check; for the others, use the links in the sources list.

Shroomverse sells mushroom products. This article is general information about psilocybin law in several countries. It is not legal, medical or purchasing advice, and it does not encourage anyone to use drugs.