Woodward previously served as trustee of the company’s predecessor in Canada, Hot House Growers. He also serves as chair or director of a number of private and public companies as well as charitable institutions, including the Mr. and Mrs. P.A. Woodward Foundation, Brentwood College, and SecondStreet.org. He currently serves as vice dhair of Cambie Surgery Corp and director of the Great Western Brewery. He is also honorary director at the Nature Trust British Columbia, a member of the Provincial Judicial Council of British Columbia, and past chair of the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority and Providence Health Care.

Key Takeaways: Cannabis Marketing & the 280E Windfall

• The tax shift: Reclassifying medical cannabis to Schedule III eliminates Internal Revenue Code Section 280E, ending an era where operators faced effective tax rates of 70% or more.
• The marketing challenge: Rescheduling does not lift paid-media advertising bans across Google, Meta, and TikTok.
• The solution: Operators must allocate their the 280E windfall to spend less on traditional channels and more on channels that compound over time.

When medical cannabis was reclassified to Schedule III, the largest single-day capital event in cannabis history hit the industry’s balance sheets. The elimination of Internal Revenue Code Section 280E ended the federal tax provision that has prevented cannabis businesses from deducting standard business expenses, taxing operators instead on gross revenue rather than net income. This vagary of the tax code contributed to effective federal tax rates of 70 percent or more for some companies. Maryland dispensaries alone will save an average of $805,000 per store annually.

That capital has to go somewhere. The default playbook says more billboards. More dispensary signage. A bigger field-sales team.

None of those channels are where the next decade of cannabis brand authority will get built.

Why rescheduling doesn’t solve the cannabis advertising ban

Cannabis remains banned from Google, Meta, TikTok ads, broadcast television, and most premium digital placements. Those bans are not lifting with rescheduling. Schedule III changes the tax code and the research pathway. It does not change paid-media policy at the platforms that dominate consumer attention. A $38.5-billion industry is still locked out of the advertising infrastructure other consumer packaged goods (CPG) companies take for granted.

This is the structural mismatch documented in The Cannabis Communications Gap, a 2026 research report 5W published last month. The findings are unforgiving: Cannabis brands spend 80 percent less on marketing as a percentage of revenue than CPG competitors, and the gap is widening.

Worse? Within that already-undersized budget, allocation skews toward the restricted channels and away from the ones where cannabis has no restrictions: earned media, search engine optimization (SEO), owned content, generative engine optimization (GEO), and compliant influencer marketing.

What are the best marketing vehicles for cannabis brands?

The brands that win the next 18 months will not be the ones that spend the most. They will be the ones that spend on the channels that compound over time.

1. Earned media: creating citable digital assets 

A Forbes feature, a Fortune profile, or a trade-press deep dive creates a permanent, indexable, citable artifact that AI engines will surface for years. Paid placements vanish the moment the budget stops.

2. Generative engine optimization (GEO): winning AI citation share 

ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, Gemini, and Google AI Overviews are now where consumers, retailers, and institutional investors research cannabis brands. The operators publishing structured, state-specific, credentialed content at scale today are accumulating “citation share” that late-movers cannot buy at any price. The math does not get more forgiving with a bigger budget; it gets harder.

3. Owned content: developing high-authority retrieval anchors 

Research reports, category indexes, and proprietary data sets become vital retrieval anchors for large language models (LLMs). They get cited in news coverage, in policy debates, and on earnings calls. They are the closest thing cannabis has to a paid-media equivalent that AI engines will actually surface. 

4. Compliant influencer marketing: leveraging ad-exempt channels 

Most social media platforms ban cannabis ads, but they do not ban creators operating under Federal Trade Commission disclosure rules and state-level regulations. The creator economy is the one of the few digital channels cannabis actually can buy at scale.

Now, contrast that with where the 280E tax savings are heading by default: expanded retail footprints, more sales reps, larger paid buys on the few channels that allow them, and capital returns to investors. Each is defensible. None build brand authority that survives the next downturn.

The critical 18-month window for cannabis brand authority 

Cannabis is in the narrow stretch between early-stage chaos and mature category consolidation. In that window, first-mover communications investments compound in ways they do not after every major operator has built brand infrastructure. The Gaming Trust Index 5W published late last year showed a category where earned media investment produced returns paid advertising could not replicate. Cannabis is a category in which almost no one has made that investment yet.

Eighteen months after the final rescheduling rule, the brands that built communications infrastructure will be the ones AI engines cite, journalists call, and institutional capital evaluates. The brands that spent the windfall on more of the same will be wondering why their customer acquisition cost kept climbing while a smaller competitor took the category.

Build the infrastructure before the crisis, not during it. The capital is coming. The question is whether cannabis operators will use it to earn the brand authority their ad-banned competitors had to build the hard way.

Schedule III is a tax event. What you do with it is a brand event.

Ronn Torossian is founder and chairman of 5W, an AI communications firm. An expert in crisis communications, Torossian has counseled blue-chip companies, public-company boards, founders, and public figures through ransomware incidents, data breaches, regulatory investigations, high-stakes litigation, activist investor campaigns, product recalls, and reputational crises. He has lectured on crisis public relations at Harvard Business School. A regular guest on CNN and CNBC, he is a contributing columnist for Forbes and the Observer, and the author of For Immediate Release: Shape Minds, Build Brands, and Deliver Results With Game-Changing Public Relations, now in its second edition. He is a recipient of the Stevie American Business Awards Entrepreneur of the Year and the American Business Awards PR Executive of the Year, twice over, and was named to Business Insider’s Top Crisis Communications Professionals.

Finkle, now chair emeritus, served as a board member for 18 years and chairman of the board of directors for 12 years. He will continue to serve as a board member, trusted advisor, and ambassador.   

“Jeff’s leadership has shaped WellLife Network in profound and lasting ways. His vision, strategic clarity, and unwavering belief in our mission have strengthened our organization and positioned us for a strong and innovative future,” said Chief Executive Officer Sherry Tucker. “As he steps into the role of chair emeritus, we honor not only his extraordinary past contributions but also his continued partnership and guidance. Jeff is deeply deserving of being the very first recipient of the WellLife Network Legacy Award, and we are privileged to celebrate him at this year’s gala”  on June 24.

After joining the board of directors in 2008, Finkle quickly became a catalyst for strengthening governance, leadership capacity, and strategic oversight across the organization. He was behind the recruitment of co-chair Brian Regan, now chairman of the board, and Tucker after identifying the need for enhanced financial oversight.    

Upon being elected chairperson of the board, he championed robust governance practices, long-range strategic planning, and the recruitment of leadership talent, providing consistent, mission-centered guidance through a period of growth and change. Under Finkle’s leadership, from 2014 to 2025, total assets grew 95 percent, while liabilities increased at a much slower 49 percent, resulting in a significantly stronger balance sheet. Net assets rose from just $1 million to more than $56 million, a dramatic 5,391-percent increase in organizational stability and reserves. Operating revenues grew 27 percent, outpacing expense growth of 15 percent, reflecting improved efficiency and responsible financial stewardship.    

“It has been an honor to take part in and witness firsthand the ways WellLife Network cares for some of the most vulnerable and in-need members of our communities,” said Finkle. “I am proud of this board, this staff, and the executive team for their contributions to the organization’s growth over these nearly two decades and look forward to seeing what can be achieved as the vision is passed to new board leadership.”   

Finkle is an entrepreneur and investor in early-stage and emerging sectors. He serves as CEO of The Arcview Group and Arcview Ventures and co-founded the Arcview Collective Fund, the first member-managed investment fund in the cannabis industry. He also serves as an advisor to the Reitler Advisory Group and is a frequent panelist and judge in venture competitions. He also mentors across leading incubators and accelerators, including the Start-up Leadership Program, 37 Angels, NYU Polytech Incubator, DreamIT Ventures, and FashInvest. 

Hosted by Proven Media, in collaboration with RW Navis & Associates and CannaPac, the exclusive, invitation-only event officially recognized the Arizona and Southwest cohort of The Most Influential Executives of Cannabis (IEC).

The IEC is a national leadership awards series founded by Proven Media Chief Executive Officer Kim Prince and designed to recognize a select group of visionaries and power players whose leadership has advanced the professionalization, stability, and long-term trajectory of the cannabis industry. During the intimate evening reception, each honoree was presented with a trophy and an award certificate to commemorate their contributions to industry excellence, integrity, and stewardship.

The Southwest region continues to serve as a critical anchor for the national cannabis landscape as the market matures. The awards were specifically designed to cut through the noise and recognize those moving the regional industry forward through sophisticated, future-focused leadership.

The Arizona honorees were selected by a panel of business experts based on their measurable impact, operational excellence, and commitment to the maturation of the global cannabis trade.

The 2026 Arizona / Southwest IEC honorees

• Laura Bianchi, Bianchi & Brandt.
• Justin Brandt, Bianchi & Brandt.
• Demitri Downing, MITA.
• Adelia Fakhri, Event Hi.
• Barbara Garganta, Wana Brands.
• Sara Gullickson, Cannabis Business Advisors.
• John Haugh, Sunday Goods.
• Ryan Hermansky, Noble Herb.
• Lori Hicks, Arizona Natural Concepts Marijuana Dispensary.
• Susan Hwang, Best Dispensary.
• Ronnie Kassab, JARS Cannabis.
• Josh Kesselman, RAW.
• Ryan Legace, Dispensify.
• Andrew Meister, Bud’s Glass Joint.
• Raul Molina, Mint Cannabis.
• Lauren Niehaus, Trulieve.
• Bran Noonan, OGeez!
• Michael O’Brien, Sonoran Roots/Arizona Dispensaries Association.
• Sara Presler, JARS/Mohave Cannabis.
• Parisa Rad, Blunt Brunch/IMA Insurance.
• Caroline Riggs, Copperstate Farms.
• Thomas Rimbach, Baked Bros.
• Arvin Saloum, Greenpharms.
• Marie Saloum, Greenpharms.
• Kathy Senseman, Policy Development Group.
• Eivan Shahara, Mint Cannabis.
• Revan Shahara, Mint Cannabis.
• Steve Shapiro, Superior Dispensary.
• George Thimsen, Timeless.
• Ann Torrez, Arizona Dispensaries Association.
• Jason Vedadi, Story Cannabis.
• Vernell Varnado.
• Brian Warde, Prime Leaf.
• Sarah Warraich, Nirvana.

All regional honorees are entered into consideration for the national IEC awards to be distributed in Las Vegas in December. The 2026 IEC awards tour continues with its next stops in Chicago on June 13 and Las Vegas on December 1.

To nominate an executive for an upcoming region or to learn more about the program, visit Proven Media.

Hosted annually by INCBA, CLI helps cannabis attorneys, regulators, compliance professionals, executives, and policymakers navigate one of the most dynamic legal environments in the country. This year’s event arrives at a pivotal moment for the industry, as practitioners grapple with federal rescheduling, emerging hemp policy battles, cross-border legal developments, heightened compliance expectations, and the maturation of cannabis businesses themselves.

“Cannabis law is no longer an emerging practice area. It is now a highly sophisticated legal discipline intersecting with healthcare, finance, technology, international trade, intellectual property, litigation, and administrative law,” said INCBA Chairman David Ruskin. “CLI2026 was intentionally built for practitioners who are ready to move beyond introductory conversations and engage with the complex realities shaping the future of this industry.”

The first day of the conference will feature a full day of plenary programming around the most consequential legal and regulatory developments impacting cannabis and hemp. Sessions will examine federal cannabis policy, including movement around medicinal marijuana, state regulatory perspectives, international cannabis law, developments in cannabis capital markets, and lessons from other highly regulated industries including alcohol and gaming.

Highlighted plenary sessions include:

• Progress Without Parity: Federal Cannabis Policy at a Crossroads.
• Okay, There’s A Proven Medical Benefit… Now What?
• Regulated, Rescheduled, and Reimagined: State Regulators on the New Federal Reality.
• Cannabis Capital: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.
• Beyond Borders: International Cannabis Law Developments.

On June 18, attendees will choose between two concurrent educational tracks focused on legal practice management and emerging policy developments.

The “Practice of Law” track, led by Jill Cohen of Verrill, will explore ethical and operational challenges facing cannabis attorneys, including AI compliance risks, alternative dispute resolution, and the growing corporate sophistication required of cannabis businesses.

Sessions include:

• What Are You Smoking? AI Hallucinations, Ethics, and Compliance.
• Business Disputes Better Left Out of Court: ADR in the Cannabis Industry.
• Startups No Longer: Corporate Practice at a Cannabis Company.

The “Current Legal Developments” track, led by Daniel Molina of Vicente LLP, will focus on rescheduling, prohibitionist backlash efforts, and the increasingly complicated legal environment surrounding cannabis hardware and vaporization technology.

Sessions include:

• After the Reschedule: Navigating the New Federal Cannabis Landscape.
• The Recriminalization Mirage: Federal and State Backtracking, and the New Prohibitionist Playbook.
• Understanding why Hardware is Hard: Legal Issues for Cannabis Vapes.

The “Running Businesses” track, led by Kyle Finnegan of Ice Miller LLP, will focus on the increasingly sophisticated legal and operational risks facing cannabis operators and their counsel. Sessions will provide practical guidance for attorneys advising clients on regulatory investigations, data security threats, and complex real estate negotiations unique to the cannabis industry.

Featured sessions include:

• Whistleblowers, Subpoenas, Demand Letters, oh my! Best Practices for Responding to Notice of Potential Infractions and Non-Compliance.
• Data Privacy, Data Security, and the Cannabis Business.
• Advanced Playbook for Negotiating Cannabis Leases: Navigating Landlords, Zoning, and Industry-Specific Challenges.

The “Adult Use Hemp: Trajectory” track, led by Steve Schain of Smart Counsel, will examine the rapidly evolving hemp product marketplace. The track will explore how hemp-derived cannabinoids have outpaced existing regulatory frameworks, the implications of proposed federal hemp redefinitions, and the growing litigation battles between licensed cannabis operators and hemp-derived cannabinoid businesses.

Sessions include:

• Forbidden Fruit: Hemp Derived Ingredients and How Science Outpaces Legislation.
• What is Hemp’s Restrictive Redefining? Is it Here to Stay?
• Hatfield and McCoys Litigation – Will Big Cannabis Crush Hemp.

The conference will feature leading attorneys and subject matter experts from across the cannabis legal ecosystem, including practitioners from major law firms, in-house counsel, regulators, policy strategists, and industry operators.

CLI2026 attendees will also receive on-demand access to all CLE sessions following the conference, allowing practitioners to revisit sessions and access programming they may have missed live.

Repurchases under the program will be executed in accordance with applicable securities laws and regulations. While the company intends to proceed with the repurchase program, the program does not obligate the company to acquire any specific number of subordinate voting shares and may be suspended, modified, or discontinued at any time at the company’s discretion. The repurchase program will expire June 16, 2027.

Key Insights

• The economic crisis: Abrupt policy shifts and prohibitionist language inserted into the Farm Bill reauthorization (H.R. 5371) risk stalling a mature, multibillion-dollar market and devastating multi-generational family farms.
• The alcohol model solution: Instead of outright federal bans, the U.S. should regulate hemp-derived cannabinoids using a state-controlled framework modeled after the 21st Amendment.
• Funding the future: Implementing a state-by-state regulatory model would allow the federal government to tax finished cannabinoid products, with revenues earmarked to expand industrial grain and fiber infrastructure.
• Preserving leadership: Lawmakers must reject unexpected policy reversals to ensure American farmers aren’t placed at a competitive disadvantage, preserving the agricultural innovation originally championed in the 2014 and 2018 Farm Bills.

Kentucky helped lead the return of hemp production through the 2014 Hemp Research Pilot Program championed by Senator Mitch McConnell. The federal Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (also known as the 2018 Farm Bill) removed hemp from the Controlled Substances Act, reopening the door for American farmers to participate in a $10-billion global industry. Hemp is a broad agricultural and industrial ecosystem including grain for food and nutrition, fiber and hurd for industrial applications, and the expansive hemp-derived cannabinoids market.

Kentucky moved to build this industry quickly and responsibly. Farmers, processors, universities, regulators, and entrepreneurs invested in cultivars, agricultural practices, processing infrastructure, supply chains, and compliance standards designed to support a safe and legal industry. With common-sense legislation and a fair regulatory framework, hemp can  strengthen rural economies and support both large scale agriculture for fiber and grain and small family farmers engaged in cannabinoid production.

Today, that progress is at risk. Recent federal restrictions and uncertainty surrounding hemp-derived cannabinoids — specifically driven by changes in the Farm Bill reauthorization (H.R. 5371) — have created instability throughout Kentucky agriculture. 

Disruption in any hemp sector will negatively impact farmers, processors, and industrial development potential. This is not necessary, and the hemp industry will rely on our legislative delegation in Washington to make the correction.

The economic toll on Kentucky family farms

Brian Furnish is an eighth-generation Kentucky farmer, growing tobacco and other crops, including hemp. He has worked closely with the Kentucky Department of Agriculture, state and federal regulators, law enforcement, and policymakers for years. Furnish supports regulation, but the unexpected cannabinoid prohibition has had a significant effect on his family farm and risks stalling an industry that is just beginning to mature.

“We see the potential of our hemp crop for food, fiber, and dietary supplements,” he said. “Since legalization, we’ve invested considerable time and money to develop this agricultural ecosystem. Hemp cannabinoids are a cutting-edge agricultural product and are not going away. Regulatory issues can be thoughtfully addressed, and Kentucky has been a leader in this area. Unfortunately, this abrupt policy change created so much uncertainty that markets dried up. On our farm alone, at current prices, we’ll lose about $450,000 on last year’s crop.”

A regulatory alternative: the 21st Amendment model

Annie Rouse, is a longtime hemp advocate, researcher, entrepreneur, and former Fulbright Scholar studying hemp fiber potential in Canada. She formulates, tests, and markets cannabinoid products, including canned beverages, which are sold in liquor stores and at Cannabuzz, her Kentucky retail outlet.

Rouse recommends a clear alternative: state-controlled regulation of cannabinoids, modeled after the 21st Amendment’s framework for alcohol.

“This new regulatory prohibition was inserted into the Farm Bill (H.R. 5371), which is not intended to regulate this type of finished product,” Rouse said. “A better solution is to have states regulate cannabinoids similar to how Kentucky and Minnesota do now, then federally tax it and earmark a portion of the revenue for expanding the grain and fiber markets.”

The 2018 Farm Bill was intended to encourage innovation and economic development across hemp’s full agricultural and industrial spectrum. Since the 2014 Hemp Pilot Program, Kentucky has consistently demonstrated leadership in responsible oversight of cannabinoids. Concerns involving youth access and product safety should be addressed through clear regulations, testing standards, labeling requirements, and enforcement — not by undermining an agricultural sector with broad economic potential. Lawmakers in Kentucky and our delegation in Washington have an opportunity now to return to the simple language of the Farm Bill and continue to implement and improve on thoughtful state-by-state regulation.

Preserving Kentucky’s agricultural leadership

Kentucky has demonstrated leadership in responsible hemp oversight. U.S. Congressman James Comer and Kentucky Agricultural Commissioner Jonathan Shell have respectfully called for assurance that “Kentucky’s farmers are not placed at a disadvantage because of abrupt policy changes.”

Washington should more quickly to ensure a stable hemp market and allow Kentucky farmers to continue innovating, competing, and growing.

Joe Hickey has spent more than three decades helping rebuild America’s industrial hemp industry and serves as the executive director of the Kentucky Hemp Growers Cooperative Association (KHGCA). He lives in Lexington, Kentucky.

Finalizing the list of approved participants is not a mere procedural detail. It is the first real signal of what kind of record the government wants to build, whose arguments it wants to hear, and how seriously it intends to grapple with the business reality of a market that is split between medical and adult use, multistate and independent operators.

Executive Analysis: The Roster Fight

• The core issue: The DEA’s selection of the final hearing roster on June 22 will dictate whether the official record focuses purely on medical/pharmacological data or reflects the practical, commercial realities of the current multi-billion-dollar state industries.
• The main factions: Pro-reform advocates push to acknowledge existing adult-use frameworks, anti-cannabis groups leverage underage-access arguments, and commercial operators seek relief from tax burdens like Internal Revenue Code Section 280E.

The 2026 DEA rescheduling hearing: timeline and mechanics

Under the Justice Department’s April 2026 notice, the hearing will begin June 29 at the DEA Hearing Facility in Arlington, Virginia, and conclude no later than July 15. Electronic notices of intent to participate were due by May 24; paper notices by May 20. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has said he plans to finalize the list by June 22. That means the industry is now in the narrow window where the filing phase is over, but the official roster remains unknown.

That gap matters, because the roster is not just about optics. In a DEA rulemaking hearing, participant selection shapes the factual record, the witness mix, and the arguments that become part of the administrative file. For cannabis businesses, that affects more than headline politics. It can influence how the government weighs tax consequences, compliance burdens, market structure, medical versus adult-use distinctions, and the practical effect of moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III.

Key participants and petitions: Who shapes the rescheduling record?

Even before DEA publishes the list, the fight for representation is already visible.

NORML is seeking participant status, arguing the hearing record would be incomplete without the perspective of adult-use consumers. The organization also believes reclassifying cannabis to Schedule III would be, at most, an interim correction rather than a final answer. The move indicates at least one reform-side filer is not content to let the hearing be framed solely as a medical or financial issue. NORML wants the record to acknowledge the adult-use market that already exists under state law and the consumers who live in that system.

“Marijuana cannot lawfully remain in Schedule I,” said attorney Joseph A. Bondy, chair of NORML’s board of directors and counsel to the organization. But “[a]dult cannabis consumers do not become patients because federal law lacks a better category for them. They are not abusing medicine. They are participating in state-regulated adult-use systems enacted by voters and legislatures.” 

On the other side, Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM) also filed a notice of intent to participate, but the notoriously anti-cannabis group intends to oppose any rescheduling. SAM’s public statement framed rescheduling as an unjustified benefit for what it called “Big Marijuana.” The organization’s push to ensure its voice is part of the debate indicates the opposition is organized, message-disciplined, and prepared to hang its arguments on the perils of underage access.

“This fight is not over, and we will not sit on the sidelines while the federal government hands Big Marijuana its biggest political win in history,” said Chief Executive Officer Kevin A. Sabet. “Rescheduling marijuana to Schedule III has no scientific basis and would hand the industry billions of dollars in rewards for targeting children.” 

A third publicly visible filing came from Jason Karimi, a longtime cannabis-policy advocate and co-founder of the WeedPress blog. Karimi submitted a notice of intention to participate on his own behalf. He is not a trade association or a major operator, but his filing underscores a broader point: The field is not just government versus industry. Individuals, advocacy organizations, and ideologues all want a role in shaping the record.

“My interest in this proceeding is direct and substantial: I am a sincere practitioner whose religious exercise of cannabis use is substantially burdened by the current federal classification,” Karimi’s petition states. “My participation would materially assist the administrative law judge and the record by providing focused evidence and testimony on the practical interaction between federal scheduling classifications and state [Religious Freedom Restoration Act] implementation frameworks.”

Others who have publicly revealed their intention to participate include:

• The American Trade Association for Cannabis and Hemp.
• MMJ International Holdings, an anti-rescheduling biopharma company.
• Doctors for Drug Policy Reform, an organization of medical professionals and scientists.

Roster selection: how the DEA chooses factions and defines the narrative

The publicly available filings make the emerging pre-roster field more complicated than a simple pro-versus-anti count. The real fight is over which pro-reform voices get heard and which do not.

A hearing roster dominated by national advocacy groups and general policy organizations would tell one story. A roster that also includes actual operators, especially businesses that can describe the day-to-day effects of Internal Revenue Code Section 280E, registration, inventory control, capital constraints, and state-by-state compliance, would tell a much more useful one. And there is a further split inside the operator class itself. Large multistate operators can speak to scale, public-market expectations, and sophisticated compliance systems. Smaller operators can speak more credibly about margin pressure, banking scarcity, and how partial federal reform can still leave independent businesses structurally boxed in.

That is why the big question is not only who filed but also whether DEA is willing to hear from a cross-section of the real market. The roster for the aborted 2025 rescheduling hearing may provide a clue: The 25 coveted seats were allotted primarily to professional associations and governmental and law-enforcement agencies. Although pro- and anti-rescheduling voices were represented evenly, only two participants were licensed operators: multistate operator Village Farms International and medical card facilitator The Doc App. Among the others were:

• National Cannabis Industry Association.
• American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine.
• State of Connecticut Office of Cannabis Ombudsman.
• Massachusetts Cannabis Advisory Board.
• Smart Approaches to Marijuana.
• National Transportation Safety Board.
• State of Nebraska.
• International Association of the Chiefs of Police.
• Drug Enforcement Administration of Federal Narcotics Agents.
• Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America.
• Tennessee Bureau of Investigation.
• National Sheriffs’ Association.
• National Drug and Alcohol Screening Association.

The 2025 lineup illustrates two things. First, it shows the last serious version of a DEA rescheduling hearing assembled a broad and adversarial field. Second, it gives operators a baseline for comparison. When the 2026 roster arrives, the industry will be able to ask whether the same camps returned, whether the field got narrower or broader, and whether actual operators receive meaningful representation.

The practical takeaway: why the roster predicts the final rescheduling rule

The process question is arguably bigger this time because the January 2025 hearing never actually reached the merits. Administrative Law Judge John J. Mulrooney’s cancellation order paused the proceeding after disputes over DEA’s conduct, participant status, and the agency’s handling of evidence. In other words, the last hearing track did not fail because the cannabis policy debate was settled. It failed because the process broke down. That history makes the 2026 roster a credibility issue, not just a scheduling issue.

The hearing roster will tell the market what kind of evidence DEA wants in the record before it moves toward any broader final rule. If DEA favors medical and institutional voices, the record may focus on public health, pharmacology, and formal regulatory structure. If it includes operators, adult-use advocates, and smaller businesses, the record is more likely to reflect the practical consequences of partial federal reform in an already functioning commercial market.

The practical takeaway is simple: Do not treat the roster as a footnote when it drops. Treat it as an early read on how broad, or how narrow, the federal government intends this rescheduling conversation to be.

Because by the time testimony starts on June 29, the first important fight may already be over: the fight over who gets to define cannabis for the record.

Fast Facts

• The milestone: Trulieve is the first U.S. plant-touching cannabis operator approved to list on a major American exchange.
• The date: Trading begins June 10 under the ticker TRLV.
• The strategy: Restructured by spinning off adult-use assets to comply with NYSE consolidation rules under the new Schedule III framework.

The listing, previously unavailable to U.S. plant-touching operators because cannabis was a Schedule I controlled substance, became possible after Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s April 2026 order moved FDA-approved marijuana products and qualifying state-licensed medical marijuana products to Schedule III under treaty authority pursuant to the United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs.

Trulieve’s path to the NYSE required significant corporate restructuring. Because current exchange policy does not permit listed companies to consolidate businesses involved in non-medical marijuana, Trulieve deconsolidated its operations in markets serving both medical and adult-use customers, transferring the adult-use portion of the business to a separate entity in which Trulieve holds only non-voting, non-participating units. The arrangement includes a provision allowing the units to convert into common stock if and when NYSE policy permits listed companies to consolidate businesses involved in non-medical marijuana, though Trulieve’s ownership would be capped at 90 percent upon conversion.

The company’s remaining consolidated footprint consists of 206 medical marijuana dispensaries and 3.5 million square feet of production capacity registered with the Drug Enforcement Administration.

The Schedule III reclassification carries financial stakes well beyond the listing itself. As a Schedule I substance, cannabis subjected state-licensed operators to Section 280E of the federal tax code, which bars businesses trafficking in controlled substances from deducting ordinary operating expenses. That leaves many cannabis companies taxed on gross profit rather than net income and saddles the industry with effective tax rates that routinely run well above 50 percent. Schedule III drugs are not subject to 280E, meaning Trulieve’s medical operations stand to retain significantly more of their earnings. The relief helps explain both the urgency behind the broader wave of uplisting maneuvers and the appeal of a medical-only structure to institutional investors that previously could not, or would not, buy U.S. plant-touching cannabis operators.

“As the first U.S. cannabis company to list on a major U.S. exchange, we are excited for the opportunity to expand our shareholder base, increase liquidity, and raise awareness for the benefits of medical marijuana,” said founder and Chief Executive Officer Kim Rivers.

Trulieve got to the exchange by taking a different route from its multistate-operator peers. Curaleaf Holdings announced a 1-for-3 reverse stock split in late May to meet share-price thresholds required by major exchanges, and Verano Holdings approved a 1-for-5 reverse stock split expected to take effect around June 11. Vireo Growth consolidated shares at a ratio of 30-to-1, effective June 5. All three companies operate in both medical and adult-use markets and are positioning for uplisting. Curaleaf has acknowledged uplisting will only be possible once additional regulatory guidance is in place, while Trulieve’s decision to surgically separate its medical and adult-use operations gave it a cleaner path under current rules.

Trulieve reported Q1 2026 revenue of $287 million with a 59-percent gross margin and $100 million in adjusted EBITDA. Rivers cited expansion in Georgia and Texas as near-term growth catalysts.

The company’s shares will continue trading on the Canadian Securities Exchange under the symbol TRUL and on the OTCQX under TCNNF through the close of market on June 9. Existing shareholders do not need to take any action.

The Medical Advisory Board unites experts spanning emergency medicine, pain management, palliative care, oncology, and cannabinoid therapeutics, reflecting the breadth of clinical experience needed to shape meaningful policy.

Their collective work spans decades of patient-centered care, peer-reviewed research, and direct engagement with the medical community. By focusing on shared decision-making, standardized dosing, and the generation of real-world evidence, the board will help the NCCC convert clinical momentum into durable legislative reform and patient care.

Members include:

• Dr. Leigh Vinocur, NCCC Chief Medical Advisor & Society of Cannabis Clinicians
• Dr. Bonni Goldstein, Canna-Centers
• Dr. Gladstone McDowell, American Pain Consortium
• Dr. Robert Marks, Diagnostic Pain Clinic
• Dr. Jordan Tishler, Association of Cannabinoid Specialists
• Dr. David Casarett, Duke University
• Dr. Joseph Rosado, Panacea Alliance
• Dr. Chanda Macias, National Holistic Healing Center
• Dr. Leslie Mendoza Temple, University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine
• Dr. Genester Wilson-King, Society of Cannabis Clinicians
• Dr. George Valdez, Agevantx
• Dr. Mikhail Kogan, GW Center for Integrative Medicine

“For over five decades, federal cannabis policy has been shaped more by regulatory barriers than by therapeutic potential. Cannabis policy in Washington is finally beginning to move toward the kind of evidence-based, physician-guided approach that patients and clinicians have long advocated for,” said Vinocur. “This advisory board represents an important step toward ensuring that real-world evidence and clinical expertise remain central to medical cannabis reform. The caliber of physicians involved reflects the growing urgency within the medical community to bridge the gap between clinical reality and federal regulation.”

“Federal cannabis policy has, until very recently, lagged the science by decades — and the cost of that gap has been borne by patients, veterans, researchers, and the clinicians attempting to provide evidence-based care,” said Shawn Hauser, partner at Vicente LLP and NCCC Chair.

The National Compassionate Care Council (NCCC) is dedicated to modernizing the standard of care and bridging the gap between slow-moving regulations and the patients who need relief now. By prioritizing patients over paperwork, NCCC leverages real-world evidence and expert collaboration to advocate for safe, immediate access to physician-guided cannabinoid therapies for those who lack the benefit of time. The mission is simple: more healing, less waiting.

Senate Bill 270, authored by State Sen. Katrina Jackson-Andrews (D), now awaits action from Republican Gov. Jeff Landry. The governor has until June 10 to sign, veto, or allow the bill to become law without his signature. If it clears his desk, the law will take effect August 1.

Key Insights: Louisiana’s Hospital Cannabis Bill

• Timeline: Louisiana SB 270 is on Gov. Jeff Landry’s desk. If signed or left unsigned by June 10, it takes effect August 1.
• Hospital mandate: The bill requires hospitals to establish written guidelines allowing terminally ill patients to use non-smoking, non-vaping forms of medical cannabis on-site.
• Patient responsibility: Patients or primary caregivers are solely responsible for acquiring, storing (in a locked container), and administering the medicine. Healthcare staff are legally prohibited from touching it.
• Federal escape clause: Hospitals can immediately opt out of the policy if federal officials take cannabis-related enforcement action against any healthcare facility in the state.
• Narrow scope: The law is strictly tailored to end-of-life comfort and does not create an institutional B2B sales channel.

“This bill was brought at the request of constituents who believe therapeutic medical marijuana, which is already legal in this state, should be offered in hospitals when patients are terminally ill or otherwise in need of the comfort of this medicine,” Jackson-Andrews told the Senate Health and Welfare Committee.

Unless Landry issues an outright veto, Louisiana will become only the second U.S. state to protect end-of-life care for hospital patients. Since January 2022, California’s Compassionate Access to Medical Cannabis Act (“Ryan’s Law”) has required acute care hospitals, hospices, skilled nursing facilities, and congregate living facilities to permit terminally ill patients and some chronically ill seniors to self-administer. Similar measures are moving through legislatures in Colorado, Hawai’i, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Washington.

Importantly, the Louisiana bill does not create a new product category, licensing tier, or retail model. Instead, it systematically removes a specific, heartbreaking barrier: the forced choice between inpatient end-of-life care and legal cannabis therapy.

What SB 270 requires

Under the bill, hospitals must create written protocols permitting covered patients — those with terminal and irreversible conditions, a prognosis of one year or less, and a valid medical marijuana registration — to use medical cannabis on-site. The products must be consumed in forms other than smoking or vaping. Emergency rooms and outpatient departments are explicitly exempt.

Operationally, the compliance burden stays entirely off the hospital’s books. Patients must source their own products and store them securely in a locked container they provide. Healthcare professionals are explicitly banned from “administering, storing, retrieving, or assisting” with the cannabis.

This strict boundary was no accident. It was shaped in part through collaboration between the bill’s sponsor and the Louisiana Hospital Association, which participated in drafting the Senate committee amendment that finalized the legislation’s scope. Hospitals are merely required to permit the policy, not manage the inventory.

The federal opt-out clause

The most consequential provision for the medical industry — and the one most likely to dictate the bill’s real-world footprint — is the sweeping opt-out clause.

Under the finalized language, a hospital may instantly halt its medical cannabis policy if federal regulators take enforcement action against any healthcare facility in the state. This is a significantly broader safety valve than earlier drafts, which allowed only an individual, targeted facility to opt out.

The practical reality? If federal authorities move against a single Louisiana facility over cannabis compliance, the entire state hospital network can dismantle their programs overnight. Whether that trigger ever is pulled depends heavily on how the Department of Justice and the Department of Health and Human Services manage enforcement priorities amid the ongoing federal rescheduling process.

What SB 270 means for operators

Louisiana dispensaries and product manufacturers serving sensitive patient demographics should carefully note what this legislation opens — and what it keeps locked down.

A new product environment

Because smoking and vaping are strictly prohibited inside hospital walls, this segment relies entirely on non-combustible product formats. Operators should optimize inventory for high-potency, predictable delivery formats like tinctures, capsules, precise edibles, and transdermal patches.

A logistical patient shift

The bill opens a legal channel inside hospital rooms, allowing families to maintain palliative care regimens without fear of security intervention. It turns inpatient rooms into a legal consumption zone for pre-purchased products.

Zero institutional B2B access

The bill does not create a hospital supply chain. There will be no state hospital formularies, institutional purchasing orders, or bedside hospital dispensing. The supply chain still begins at the independent dispensary counter and ends with the patient or caregiver.

What depends on Landry

The governor hasn’t signaled a position publicly. Louisiana’s medical cannabis program has grown under his administration without major executive interference, but SB 270’s bipartisan legislative support doesn’t guarantee a signature. Advocates and operators should watch for action — or, alternatively, inaction — in early June.

The broader Louisiana picture

SB 270’s progression is remarkable given the broader context of the current legislative session, which advanced multiple bills pointing in opposite directions. The same session yielded House Bill 568 (signed into law in May), which mandates harsh felony penalties for smoking or vaping cannabis near school zones or college campuses. Conversely, lawmakers also approved HCR111, which authorizes a task force to study adult-use legalization, and SB 43, a psychedelic-assisted therapy pilot program funded by opioid settlement dollars. The latter unanimously passed the legislature in late May and awaits the governor’s signature.

The through-line is not ideological consistency; it is constituent pressure on specific, narrow issues. Jackson-Andrews’ bill succeeded, in part, because it is difficult to vote against a dying patient’s comfort. Operators should view SB 270 as a massive win for compassionate care in a deeply conservative state but avoid reading it as a green light for broader adult-use reform in the future.

On April 28, 2026, federal cannabis policy changed when the Department of Justice issued AG Order No. 6754-2026, placing FDA-approved cannabis products and cannabis products regulated by qualifying state medical cannabis licenses into Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act. For the first time, federal law recognizes state medical cannabis programs as part of the healthcare landscape and recognizes patients participating in those programs as using cannabis under a lawful medical framework.

ASA’s new guide explains what this change means for patients, caregivers, providers, advocates, and institutions that continue to rely on outdated policies treating medical cannabis patients as categorically engaged in illegal drug use.

“Medical cannabis patients have waited decades for federal recognition, but recognition alone does not protect someone from losing housing, employment, healthcare, benefits, or custody,” said Steph Sherer, ASA founder and executive director. “Patients now have new federal protections and privileges, but they must be ready to claim them. ASA created this guide because rights do not enforce themselves, and stigma will not disappear just because the law changed.”

Federal laws affect far more than whether a patient can possess cannabis. For years, medical cannabis patients were excluded from basic protections in housing, employment, healthcare, federal services, public programs, and other areas of daily life. The new legal framework validates the real-world experiences of patients and medical professionals and creates a foundation for patients to demand fair treatment.

The guide explains that protections under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Housing Act, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act now apply to medical cannabis patients participating in state-approved programs. However, ASA warns that agencies, employers, landlords, healthcare facilities, and public programs may not automatically update their policies simply because federal law has changed. The guide provides tools patients and caregivers can use to assert their rights, request written explanations, document discrimination, and demand individualized review.

“Federal medical cannabis laws have changed. Stigma will delay implementation,” Sherer said. “Some systems will move slowly. Some will resist. Some may try to ignore this change altogether. That is why patients, caregivers, providers, advocates, and allies must act now.”

The guide includes resources such as a “Notice of Federal Legal Status & Nondiscrimination Rights of Medical Cannabis Patients” one-pager to help educate employers, housing providers, healthcare providers, government agencies, federally funded programs, and service providers. It also includes guidance on documenting discrimination, maintaining current patient or caregiver registration, requesting policies and decisions in writing, and educating communities about the new federal framework.

ASA launches campaign to end medical cannabis patient discrimination

As part of the campaign, ASA is collecting collecting reports from patients, caregivers, veterans, workers, tenants, parents, service members, and others who have experienced discrimination because of medical cannabis.

“Documentation is not just paperwork,” Sherer said. “It is how individual experiences become evidence for policy change. Every denial letter, drug testing policy, housing notice, or refusal of care helps show federal agencies and lawmakers where outdated systems are still harming patients.”

ASA is working to ensure that no medical cannabis patient is punished for using cannabis as medicine. Reports submitted to ASA will help identify patterns, educate policymakers, support legal and administrative advocacy, and push agencies, institutions, and private actors to update harmful policies.

The campaign also includes a call on the White House, the Department of Justice, and federal agencies to ensure the new federal cannabis framework has practical meaning for patients. ASA is asking federal agencies to review and update policies, forms, enforcement practices, program rules, grant conditions, and guidance documents that still rely on outdated Schedule I assumptions.

Federal policy must now move from automatic exclusion to individualized review, reasonable accommodation, patient safety, clinical judgment, and actual evidence of risk. A cannabis-positive test alone should not be treated as proof of impairment, misconduct, unsafe conduct, poor performance, or lack of fitness for duty.

ASA is also urging Congress to oversee implementation and to finish what the DOJ started by requiring federal agency cooperation through the appropriations process and by passing comprehensive medical cannabis legislation.

“AG Order No. 6754-2026 is historic, but it is not the finish line,” Sherer said. “Patients need every federal agency to update its policies, and Congress must create a national medical cannabis program that protects patients, supports research, improves product safety, integrates cannabis into healthcare, and ends the patchwork of conflicting rules that leaves patients vulnerable.”

About Americans for Safe Access

Americans for Safe Access is a leading medical cannabis patient advocacy organization. Founded in 2002, ASA works to ensure safe and legal access to cannabis for therapeutic use and research. ASA advances patient rights, product safety, healthcare integration, patient protections, research, and federal and state policies that recognize cannabis as medicine.

In connection with the closings, the company’s Florida operations have been transferred into Arboretum Florida LLC and related entities, New Jersey operations have been transferred into Arboretum New Jersey LLC and related entities, and Nevada operations have been transferred into Arboretum Nevada LLC and related entities. All requisite state regulatory approvals for the transfer of the Florida, New Jersey, and Nevada operations were obtained prior to the transfers.

The hearing, scheduled to begin June 29, will consider a proposed rule moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III under the Controlled Substances Act. LPP supports removing cannabis from Schedule I, but argues that rescheduling alone does not go far enough. The organization is calling on the DEA to remove marijuana from the Controlled Substances Act entirely and to confront the ongoing consequences of criminalization for people still incarcerated, on supervision, or living with cannabis convictions.

“The federal government cannot claim to be modernizing cannabis policy while leaving behind the people who paid the highest price for prohibition,” said Executive Director Stephanie Shepard. “If cannabis no longer belongs in Schedule I, then people should no longer be in prison, on probation, or carrying criminal records because of it.”

Adrian Rocha, Director of Policy for Last Prisoner Project, added, “Any federal conversation about cannabis reform that does not include the people punished under these laws is incomplete. For decades, people have been arrested, incarcerated, separated from their families, denied jobs and housing, and blocked from accessing medical cannabis because of marijuana’s federal status. Rescheduling may be a step forward, but it will not repair the harm or free people still living under the consequences of prohibition.”

In its filing, LPP says its perspective has been largely absent from the rescheduling debate. While much of the federal conversation has focused on medical use, business implications, and regulatory questions, LPP seeks to bring attention to the people who remain incarcerated for cannabis offenses, people under community supervision who risk technical violations for medical cannabis use, and people facing lifelong collateral consequences because of cannabis convictions.

The petition highlights the case of Michael Pelletier, an LPP constituent who was sentenced to life in prison for importing marijuana, later received a presidential commutation, and still faces barriers to accessing medical cannabis for chronic pain because of federal law and supervision restrictions.

LPP’s petition argues that continued federal criminalization has created lasting public health harms, especially in communities of color that have been disproportionately targeted by marijuana enforcement. The organization also notes that people impacted by the criminal legal system can still be denied meaningful access to medical cannabis, even when it could help treat chronic pain or other health conditions.

LPP is one of the only national organizations focused specifically on the intersection of cannabis reform and criminal justice. The organization has advocated for retroactive relief, resentencing, clemency, record clearance, and policy reforms aimed at ending the punishment of people for conduct that is now legal in much of the country.

At the annual general and special meeting of shareholders on May 29, 2026, the company’s shareholders, on a class basis, approved a proposal to allow the board to proceed with a share consolidation at not less than 20-for-1 and not more than 40-for-1 with the exact ratio of the consolidation to be determined by the board.

The number of issued and outstanding subordinate voting shares will be reduced from 1,455,017,319 to approximately 48,500,577, subject to minor adjustments resulting from rounding, and the number of issued and outstanding multiple voting shares will be reduced from 232,490 to approximately 7,749. There are currently no super voting shares issued or outstanding. Each shareholder’s respective percentage ownership in the company and proportional voting power will remain unchanged as a result of the consolidation, except for minor adjustments resulting from rounding.

No fractional shares will be issued as a result of the consolidation. The number of post-consolidation shares will be rounded down to the nearest whole number of post-consolidation share. No cash or other compensation will be paid in respect of fractional shares. The exercise or conversion price and the number of shares issuable under any of the company’s outstanding convertible securities will be proportionately adjusted in connection with the consolidation.

Upon the effectiveness of the Share Consolidation, the subordinate voting shares will continue to trade on the Canadian Securities Exchange and on the OTCQX, on a post-consolidation basis, under a new ISIN/CUSIP number.

When effected, the consolidation will reduce Verano’s total issued and outstanding shares of common stock and is expected to deliver an increase in the price per share. Management also believes the split may provide additional benefits, including increasing institutional investor interest and access.

The company will not be issuing fractional post-consolidation shares. Stockholders who would otherwise hold a fractional share will receive a cash payment in lieu thereof at a price equal to that fractional share multiplied by the closing sale price on Cboe Canada on the trading day preceding the effective date of the reverse stock split.

The company currently has 364,381,806 shares of common stock outstanding, and assuming no additional shares of common stock are issued, the consolidation will reduce the issued and outstanding shares of common stock to approximately 72,876,361 shares. Any shares issued prior to the consolidation will be adjusted. Upon completion of the reverse stock split, the company anticipates its common stock will continue to trade on Cboe Canada and OTCQX.

That is why freshness should not be treated as a back-office detail. It should be evaluated and accounted for alongside sales, labor, cash, compliance, and shrink.

Key Takeaways for Dispensary Operators

• Freshness is a financial metric: Treat cannabis flower freshness as a critical operating variable alongside labor and shrink.
• Adopt grocery tactics: Utilize cold-chain control, strict rotation, and preventive promotions to protect profit margins before quality degrades.
• Update inventory workflows: Shift from basic FIFO (First-In, First-Out) to FEFO (First-Expired, First-Out) to mitigate margin risk.
• Prioritize compliance: Monitor use-by dates and water activity (like ASTM D8197) to avoid downstream sales bottlenecks.

Borrow from the produce aisle

Grocery retailers have managed this problem for decades in produce departments, where the product is perishable, quality is visible, shrink is expected, and timing determines margin. The best operators do not wait until lettuce wilts or berries soften before acting. They manage the category through disciplined receiving, cold-chain control, rotation, shrink tracking, and promotions timed to protect velocity before quality declines.

Flower is not produce, but the retail levers are similar. Both categories reward operators who understand the remaining selling window. Both punish overbuying. Both require storage discipline. Both depend on staff execution. And both can turn from premium inventory into discounted inventory when buyers miss the timing.

For dispensaries, the lesson is to start treating freshness as an operating variable that can be managed well before it becomes a margin problem.

Stale inventory has a carrying cost

Every unsold unit ties up cash, occupies shelf space, and absorbs labor. In flower, those costs are amplified by a product whose value depends on maintaining quality from harvest through sale. The longer product sits, the fewer options remain available for protecting margin.

Recent research reinforced what operators already know from experience: Drying and storage conditions matter. A study published in Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry found postharvest handling and storage can affect aroma compounds and cannabinoid profiles, both of which contribute to marketability and perceived quality.

That does not mean buyers should treat older product as defective. It should be a flag indicating more attention is needed before inventory becomes a sales problem.

Freshness is becoming a compliance issue

Regulators also are beginning to formalize freshness expectations. Colorado requires use-by dates for inhaled products, including flower, shake, trim, and pre-rolls. The state caps those dates at no more than nine months from harvest or production unless shelf-stability testing supports a longer period. Cannabis retail operations also must inform patients or consumers when a product is past its use-by date.

This applies to all retailers, regardless of location. While the rules may vary by state, the direction is clear: Package age, storage conditions, and product stability are now visible parts of the retail conversation.

Water activity offers another practical benchmark. ASTM International’s D8197 standard identifies 0.55 to 0.65 aw as the recommended range for dry cannabis flower. The range is useful not only as a quality-control measure but also as a purchasing and receiving standard. Flower that falls outside expected parameters may create downstream problems in handling, consumer experience, sell-through, and markdown exposure.

Build freshness into procurement

A productive program starts well in advance of the product reaching the sales floor. Buyers should adhere to a disciplined process and require suppliers to provide the harvest date, package date, test date, certificate-of-analysis access, and water-activity data when available. Intake standards should define the oldest acceptable package date by category and price tier.

This is where bargain buying can become expensive. A discounted wholesale lot may look attractive on paper, but if the store has to discount it again to create velocity, the buy may erode margin instead of improving it. The better question is not “How cheap is it?” but “How much full-margin selling time remains?”

Freshness is not just a merchandising promise. It is a margin discipline.

Vendors need to be held accountable to the same disciplined process. Brands that want shelf space should be able to provide product age, storage conditions, batch consistency, expected sell-through, and promotional support. Growers, manufacturers, distributors, and retailers share responsibility for maximizing the commercial life of the product at every stage.

Manage exceptions, not reports

A weekly flower-aging system should help managers make decisions, not create another layer of administrative noise. A well-defined system should surface products approaching age thresholds, SKUs with weak sell-through, items with repeated markdowns, and inventory that no longer matches its intended price tier. Those products should be evaluated quickly and, when necessary, discontinued from future buys.

At minimum, retailers should track harvest date, package date, received date, use-by date where applicable, days on hand, units on hand, sell-through rate, gross margin, markdown history, and menu placement. The goal is not to perfect the perfect data system. The goal is to identify margin risk early enough to do something about it.

First-in, first-out is a good starting point, but it is not always enough. Stores also should use first-expired, first-out (FEFO) workflows because the first product received is not always closest to its use-by date. A more disciplined system considers age, velocity, and margin together.

Promote before the product feels old

Markdowns work best when they protect velocity, not when they rescue inventory. A preventive promotion at the right moment may preserve more margin than a clearance sale after a product has lost momentum.

This is another lesson from grocery. Produce managers use price reductions, display priority, and cross-merchandising while product still has appeal. The same thinking applies to flower. Feature a cultivar while its terpene profile still has a strong story. Use staff picks to call attention to products that need velocity. Bundle slower-moving flower with complementary items. Deploy loyalty offers to move inventory quietly instead of training the entire market to wait for discounts.

The timing matters. Once a product has crossed from “needs attention” to “must go,” the retailer has fewer options and less leverage.

Storage discipline should reinforce the same objective. Cool, dark, stable conditions; limited oxygen and light exposure; separate sample inventory; and regular package inspections all help protect the selling window. These practices are not new, but in a margin-compressed market they deserve renewed attention.

Freshness is cash management

Retailers cannot control wholesale volatility, price compression, or every shift in consumer preference. They can, however, control purchasing discipline, vendor expectations, tracking systems, storage conditions, and the timing of promotions.

This process should not depend on memory, staff habit, or a manager noticing old package dates during a slow shift. It should be proactively managed as a financial control.

In a market where every margin point matters, freshness is not just about delivering a better customer experience. It is about protecting cash flow, preserving trust, and making sure premium products do not become discounted inventory before their time.

And from my vantage point into customer data at Cova, I’m seeing that shift happen in real time.

Many of Cova’s customers are actively acquiring dispensaries to expand their footprint across states and provinces. Some of the acquired stores already are running on high-end point-of-sale (POS) systems, making integration and operational alignment with existing corporate frameworks much easier. Others are replacing legacy systems after acquisition to standardize and improve visibility at the headquarters office, streamline reporting, tighten compliance, and create more consistency at the store level.

Through these cannabis retail acquisitions, and transitions, we have gathered insights directly from both buyers and sellers. We’ve studied what buyers actually look for during due diligence, what increases risk, and how operators can position themselves to maximize business value before an exit.

How to calculate cannabis dispensary valuation 

Most dispensary valuations use a combination of three methods:

• The income approach: determines profitability and future earnings using seller’s discretionary earnings or earning before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA).
• The market approach: compares recent sales of other similar dispensaries.
• The asset approach: values inventory, equipment, licenses, and brand assets.

Profitable dispensaries commonly are valued between three and six times EBITDA, but that number can vary dramatically depending on profitability, license scarcity, market competition, compliance history, operational maturity, and regulatory risk.

In other words, two dispensaries with similar revenue can sell for very different prices.

A dispensary in a limited-license market with strong tech and process, healthy margins, and clean compliance records may command a premium valuation. Meanwhile, a store in an oversaturated market with inconsistent operations and shrinking margins may struggle to attract serious buyers at all.

The industry has matured enough that acquirers are becoming far more disciplined. A few years ago, operators sometimes could sell “potential.” Today, buyers want proof.

• Proof of profitability.
• Proof of operational systems.
• Proof of compliance.
• Proof the business can scale without the founder personally holding everything together with caffeine and anxiety.

Why operational maturity matters to dispensary buyers

One of the more interesting insights from our research is how much weight buyers place on operational infrastructure during due diligence.

A surprising number of dispensaries still operate with disconnected systems, inconsistent reporting, undocumented workflows, or inventory processes held together by spreadsheets and tribal knowledge.

That may work during the startup phase, but it becomes a major liability during acquisition. When buyers evaluate a dispensary, they ask a simple question: “Can this business scale without breaking?”

Modern buyers look closely at:

• Dispensary POS and inventory integrations.
• Compliance records.
• Standard operating procedures and processes.
• Financial transparency.
• Inventory reconciliation accuracy.
• Dependency on the owner.
• Technology stack maturity.

The irony is the operational details many retailers consider “back-office stuff” often become the exact reason a buyer increases — or decreases — their offer.

A flashy brand can attract attention. A disciplined operation closes deals.

The role of compliance in cannabis business valuation 

Compliance history directly impacts cannabis business valuation.

Cannabis acquirers are highly sensitive to regulatory risk because license transfers already take time and scrutiny. Add unresolved violations, messy reporting, or poor inventory controls, and a deal can lose value quickly.

Buyers do not acquire just revenue. They also inherit the dispensary’s operational history. That is especially true in limited-license states, where the license itself may represent a major portion of the business’s value.

For years, the industry glorified growth at all costs. Today, buyers reward something far less exciting: stability, predictability, and audit readiness.

How a dispensary’s POS anf tech stack impact sale price 

Technology is no longer just a back-office tool. Today, tech is the foundation of a scalable cannabis operation.

Disconnected systems create operational friction everywhere, from inventory inaccuracies and compliance gaps to reporting inconsistencies, manual work, and difficult store transitions during acquisitions.

To buyers, fragmented tech often signals hidden risk.

On the other hand, dispensaries running integrated systems across POS, payments, ecommerce, inventory, and compliance create a far stronger acquisition story. A sophisticated tech stack shows operational maturity, reduces transition headaches, and makes scaling significantly easier.

Across retail industries, businesses with scalable infrastructure tend to command stronger valuations because they are easier to grow, manage, and acquire.

Beyond EBITDA: building a scalable cannabis operation 

Cannabis operators sometimes assume valuation is purely mathematical. It is not. Yes, financial performance matters enormously. But buyers also evaluate narrative.

• What market opportunity does the business own?
• How defensible is the customer base?
• Is the store positioned for growth?
• Does management have systems in place?
• Can the business survive market compression?

The best acquisition targets tell a compelling operational story backed by data. That story becomes especially important as more buyers enter the market and compare opportunities side by side.

A dispensary with average margins but exceptional systems may outperform a higher-revenue competitor drowning in operational complexity.

Planning a dispensary exit strategy 

The dispensaries that command premium valuations rarely are built overnight. They are built years before the owner ever decides to sell.

The operators who maximize value usually are the ones who run their business like it could be acquired at any time, focusing on clean financials, scalable systems, strong compliance habits, integrated technology, stable teams, and consistent operations.

The bottom line: The “boring” operational details often become the most valuable part of the business.

Faai Steuer is vice-president of marketing at Cova Software, an award-winning cannabis retail platform serving more than 2,000 stores across North America. Recognized as Retail Software of the Year at the 2024 Emjay Awards, Cova helps dispensaries launch strong, stay compliant, and grow with confidence through its point-of-sale, e-commerce, payment, and analytics solutions. With twenty years of experience in retail technology and consumer packaged goods across the spectrum from startups to Fortune 500 companies in North American and Asia Pacific markets, Steuer was part of the team that built Cova’s valuation from zero to $90 million in four years. She is passionate about helping cannabis entrepreneurs build successful, sustainable businesses.