Thanks!
I was wondering if that was where the conclusion came from. So far the only attorney's opinion I've seen does not agree with it (it was actually published in the Summer 1998 Entheogen Review). It would also seem rather foolhardy to want to test this but having clarity actually does matter to all of us in a larger way.
If, based on those two quoted sections, this is the legal status in the USA for ibogaine and iboga, the living plant and seed, then all species containing any of the schedule 1 indolic molecules would also be illegal as Schedule 1 plants and seeds (as all of those molecules are mentioned within the same list as ibogaine in that section rather than it being just about ibogaine).
I don't believe that is true but will try to find out more.
Thanks again.

The pertinent bit is
"Some trade and other names: 7-Ethyl-6,6β,7,8,9,10,12,13-octahydro-2-methoxy-6,9-methano-5H-pyrido [1′, 2′:1,2] azepino [5,4-b] indole; Tabernanthe iboga"

That is my conclusion, I just don't see any way around it. Entropymancer argued the point effectively here: https://www.dmt-nexus.me...aspx?g=posts&t=21527

Of course it is ridiculous for such a wide swath of plants to be illegal. And there's always room in the law to argue "legislative intent" -- the idea that what the law says is less important than what legislators meant.

But in any case, it really comes down to enforcement. You're apt to be arrested for growing psilocybin mushrooms, but not buying a low-mescaline cactus at home depot.

Do the seeds contain ibogaine?


(c) Unless specifically excepted or unless listed in another schedule, any material, compound, mixture, or preparation, which contains any quantity of the following hallucinogenic substances, or which contains any of their salts, isomers, and salts of isomers whenever the existence of such salts, isomers, and salts of isomers is possible within the specific chemical designation:

(1) 3,4-methylenedioxy amphetamine.

(2) 5-methoxy-3,4-methylenedioxy amphetamine.

(3) 3,4,5-trimethoxy amphetamine.

(4) Bufotenine.

(5) Diethyltryptamine.

(6) Dimethyltryptamine.

(7) 4-methyl-2,5-diamethoxyamphetamine.

(8 ) Ibogaine.

(9) Lysergic acid diethylamide.

(10) Marihuana.

(11) Mescaline.

(12) Peyote.

(13) N-ethyl-3-piperidyl benzilate.

(14) N-methyl-3-piperidyl benzilate.

(15) Psilocybin.

(16) Psilocyn.

(17) Tetrahydrocannabinols.

(18 ) 4-methylmethcathinone (Mephedrone).

(19) 3,4-methylenedioxypyrovalerone (MDPV).

(20) 2-(2,5-Dimethoxy-4-ethylphenyl)ethanamine (2C–E).

(21) 2-(2,5-Dimethoxy-4-methylphenyl)ethanamine (2C–D).

(22) 2-(4-Chloro-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl)ethanamine (2C–C).

(23) 2-(4-Iodo-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl)ethanamine (2C–I).

(24) 2-[4-(Ethylthio)-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl]ethanamine (2C–T–2).

(25) 2-[4-(Isopropylthio)-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl]ethanamine (2C–T–4).

(26) 2-(2,5-Dimethoxyphenyl)ethanamine (2C–H).

(27) 2-(2,5-Dimethoxy-4-nitro-phenyl)ethanamine (2C–N).

(28 ) 2-(2,5-Dimethoxy-4-(n)-propylphenyl)ethanamine (2C–P).
http://www.deadiversion.....gov/21cfr/21usc/812.htm

So, I've found the compound "ibogaine" as being listed as schedule one, but no mention of "tabernanthe iboga" itself...

With psilocybin mushrooms, only psilocybin/psilocin are mentioned, never any specific mushroom, the compounds are schedule one and the plant is considered a container for scheduled compounds, now since spores contain no psilocybin/psilocin, and since no mushroom is mentioned in the laws, spores are legal...

Tabernanthe iboga May actually be listed, and if it is the seeds would be schedule one as well...

I've never heard of a person being arrested for marijuana seeds, and the whole plant is listed as scheduled...

So I'm not sure where iboga seeds stand...

-Eg

You are correct, the plant doesn't appear to be federally scheduled. I think some states have added it to their own controlled substances acts, but I may be misremembering.

If iboga seeds do not contain ibogaine or another controlled substance, then they are legal (as is the case with psilocybin/psilocin mushroom spores). I found a paper that discusses iboga seed alkaloids, but it's in French and I'm on my mobile, so I'm not having success checking it out at the moment:

Ann Pharm Fr. 1974 Sep-Oct;32(9-10):521-4.
[Constituents of seeds of Tabernanthe iboga Baillon. I. Alkaloids].
[Article in French]
Goutarel R, Poisson J, Croquelois G, Rolland Y, Miet C.

Iboga seeds are reported to contain only alkaloids other than ibogaine.
That might cause the prosecution to fail to secure a conviction for seed possession but any person serving as the test case would experience a lot of waste of their time and money.

Something to remember is that there was a time in history when a person being found innocent meant it was the end of their ordeal. Changes occurred granting the prosecution the "right" to appeal the verdict (on the notion that if the accused had a right to appeal it would only be fair if the prosecutor did also) so it can be the case that an accused person can be found innocent up to three times before being able to walk away. It is up to the prosecution whether they will accept an innocent verdict or appeal it.
Few people can invest in maintaining that sort of level of defense.

In digging into this (and asking three attorneys for their thoughts) I've been struck by several things. Unlike other scheduled plants iboga actually lacks a specific entry in the CSA. Certainly, the species name is listed so illegality can be logically inferred but it also appears only as a synonym within the entry for the drug ibogaine rather than being actually specified to be an illegal plant within its own passage as is the case for all other schedule 1 plants.
A conviction for the plant iboga or its parts would therefore be based on the ibogaine content which might not actually make the seeds LEGAL but certainly would mitigate against anyone being convicted for the seeds due to their apparently lack of ibogaine.
It will take an actual court case to clarify what is real or not real so right now it seems premature to draw conclusions about the seeds being legal or being illegal. It appears that at the least they would not produce a conviction but only a fool would want to run that through the courts. So far with the DMT containing plants I've noticed they are not uncommonly seized and destroyed but very many times they are opened, inspected and then delivered to the purchaser along with a note that they have been inspected by Customs.
I'm also aware of a raid in which DEA took a variety of DMT-containing plant materials away from someone (no charges were filed) but DEA also deliberately left that same person with a large quantity of clearly labelled Tabernanthe iboga seeds.

Were the confiscated materials live plant material or dried?

Dried.