Connect with us

Cannabis News

Michigan’s Marijuana Tax Experiment Should Be An Urgent Warning To Other States (Op-Ed)

Published

on

“Other states should also learn from Michigan’s experience, rather than repeating the same economic mistake when faced with a budget deficit.”

By Hirsh Jain, Verdant Strategies

In an effort to raise short-term revenue, Michigan recently adopted a cannabis tax structure that is already proving economically counterproductive and strategically short-sighted.

For many years, Michigan was one of the most successful legal cannabis markets in the United States. The explanation was simple. Michigan, understandably, adopted one of the lowest cannabis tax rates in the country.

The state imposed a 10 percent excise tax on adult use, shared between state and local governments, plus a standard 6 percent sales tax, for a total effective rate of 16 percent. By comparison, California’s cannabis tax burden was twice as high, approaching 40 percent in some cities.

The contrast was stark because California and Michigan share deep histories of medical cannabis. California was the first state in the nation to legalize medical cannabis in 1996. Michigan subsequently developed one of the strongest grower-based cannabis markets in the country in the 2000s and 2010s. Both states built strong cultural and political foundations around the idea that cannabis is medicine.

When it came to legalizing adult use, however, the two states went in different directions.

Michigan largely believed that cannabis should be treated as a medicine rather than a vice. He adopted a moderate tax structure that kept legal prices competitive. California, in contrast, imposed heavy taxes and regulatory costs that treated cannabis as a luxury or vice product rather than a therapeutic good.

Predictable results followed.

Michigan’s relatively modest taxes drove consumers out of the illegal market and into licensed stores. Legal sales rose quickly, reaching about $3.3 billion annually in a state of just 10 million people.

California’s market has hovered around $4 billion in recent years, despite nearly quadrupling its population. Per capita, Michigan became one of the strongest adult cannabis markets in America, while California became the weakest, driven by tax policies.

In July 2025, industry analytics firm Headset stated: “What’s so surprising about Michigan’s pace of sales is California’s population difference. With a population of 10 million, Michigan is on the verge of usurping America’s largest state, California, with a population of nearly 40 million.”

Cannabis became a major driver of employment in Michigan. According to industry recruiting firm Vangst, 47,000 Michiganders were expected to work in the industry in 2024, representing a staggering nearly 1 percent of the statewide workforce.

Even more striking, Crain’s Detroit Business reported that cannabis accounted for a staggering 52 percent of Michigan’s private sector net job growth from 2018 to 2024. At a time when many of Michigan’s traditional manufacturing industries have struggled and wage growth has stalled for many workers, cannabis has been the state’s most consistent source of job growth.

Then the tax structure changed.

From January 1, 2026. Michigan enacted a new 24 percent wholesale cannabis tax. This effectively doubled the tax burden on operators at a critical point in the supply chain. The effects were immediate.

According to New Cannabis Ventures, Michigan’s legal cannabis market generated just $226 million in sales in January 2026, the lowest monthly figure since late 2022. Sales fell a sharp 16 percent from December 2025, the month before the tax took effect, and were 8 percent lower than in January 2025.

The situation may worsen in the coming months. Many Michigan dispensaries stocked inventory at the end of 2025, before the tax went into effect, and are still selling product that was not subject to the new wholesale tax.

And even that temporary solution came with compromises. Retail analytics firm Happy Cabbage noted that high-demand items were often in limited supply by the end of 2025, while low-demand items were readily available. As a result, purchasing decisions increasingly reflected what suppliers had available, rather than what customers would buy.

The full impact of the tax increase will become clearer in the coming months as more inventory from the new taxes hits store shelves and higher costs are passed on to consumers.

But already the influence of the industry has been sobering. In January alone, several large operators in Michigan announced crop closures, retail consolidation and layoffs, citing falling margins after the tax hike.

Higher Love Cannabis announced the layoffs of 61 of its 213 employees, explaining that the cuts were necessary to deal with the new tax. C3 Industries said it would close its Webberville cultivation facility and lay off 62 workers, noting that it had warned lawmakers of this outcome if the wholesale tax were enacted. PinCanna put its operations up for sale, citing the new wholesale tax as the reason. The owner of The Greenhouse announced that 30 percent of Michigan dispensaries could close in the next year due to tax increases.

This tax increase is quickly destabilizing perhaps Michigan’s most dynamic job-creating industry in recent history. An unmistakable reminder that cannabis does not operate in a closed legal market. It competes directly with a resilient illegal market with no excise taxes, no compliance costs and no regulatory burden.

This illegal market has operated for decades and can quickly absorb consumers if the price difference is too great. It is an intellectual fantasy to think that when policymakers raise taxes on cannabis, they are adjusting their revenue projections. In reality, market share and financial resources are being shifted to an unscrupulous and often violent illegal market.

Michigan’s early success showed that moderate taxation can expand the legal market and grow revenue organically. His latest shift suggests that aggressive taxation could quickly reverse that progress.

It is critical that other states take notice of what is happening in Michigan right now. In recent months, states such as Maine, Maryland and Minnesota have also increased tax rates on cannabis, hoping to cover several unrelated revenue gaps. But whether policy makers in these states appreciate it yet, these decisions will reduce legal sales and strengthen illegal operators.

In fact, California learned this lesson in the third quarter of 2025 when it raised its already high cannabis tax from 15 percent to 19 percent. Legal sales fell 5 percent from the previous quarter, falling to the lowest quarterly level in more than five years and prompting the state to quickly overturn and reset the tax rate to 15 percent. Michigan ignored this clear economic lesson.

Beyond its economic consequences, overtaxing cannabis runs counter to the spirit and logic of federal reprogramming. If cannabis is formally recognized at the federal level for medical use under Schedule III, states with a long history of medical cannabis should pause and reconsider whether their tax policies adequately reflect and respect their heritage.

Michigan and California pioneered the legalization of cannabis as medicine, creating the conditions for the dramatic shift in national attitudes reflected in the current rescheduling push. Taxing cannabis at rates that exceed those applied to alcohol and tobacco, products that kill hundreds of thousands of Americans each year, betrays this pioneering medical legacy.

If the lessons of reorganization are taken seriously, both Michigan and California should reexamine their punitive tax structures in light of their history.

And states like Pennsylvania and Virginia, which could vote to create new adult-use markets in 2026, also have a clear chance. They can achieve illusory short-term fiscal gains through higher taxes and risk repeating Michigan’s recent mistakes. Or they can design tax structures that support stable businesses, protect jobs, and align policy with the growing acceptance of cannabis.

Michigan’s tax experiment is unfolding, but early signs are troubling. The state still has time to change course, as California did, albeit modestly.

For the sake of the public, tens of thousands of cannabis workers, and the legal market it built, Michigan lawmakers should roll back this tax increase.

Other states should also learn from Michigan’s experience, rather than repeating the same economic mistake in the face of a budget deficit.

Hirsh Jain is the Director of Market Intelligence Green strategiesfinancial services and solutions company providing tax planning and accounting services to many of the nation’s leading cannabis brands and retailers. He is also the principal of Ananda Strategy, a consulting firm based in Los Angeles.

Marijuana Moment is made possible with the help of readers. If you rely on our pro-cannabis journalism to stay informed, consider a monthly Patreon pledge.

Continue Reading

Cannabis News

30MHz brings full-cycle climate tracking to cannabis cultivation

Published

on

By

Most greenhouse growers know the feeling: something has gone wrong somewhere, but by the time the last crop appears, it’s too late to know where. When a crop moves from a reproductive to a production compartment, each stage has its own climate goals and its own data. Until now, no single tool tied all of this together in a single view.

30MHz has built that tool. The Crop Strategy allows growers to set weekly climate targets for each crop and compartment, covering parameters such as total PAR and temperature bandwidth, before the start of the season. As the crop moves through each production phase, the dashboard monitors whether reality is following the plan. When it is not, an alert is issued in time for action.

Early adopters found deviations at the compartment level within days of going live. In one case, a grower caught a temperature drift that would have reduced final yield in the second week and corrected it the same week, something that would have gone unnoticed until harvest.

“You always knew something wasn’t right, but you couldn’t pinpoint it,” says Lars van der Lely, Customer Success Manager at 30MHz. “Now you see exactly which compartment, which week and what to do.”

© 30MHz

The module includes weekly climate targets for each crop and compartment, real-time monitoring at multiple production stages, real alerts when deviations from targets, side-by-side comparison of two crops in different zones or seasons, inter-annual benchmarking in a single view and direct integration of sensor data to keep strategy and measurements in sync.

The tool has also been used in the cultivation of cannabis. “The parameters that matter most are temperature, including canopy and root zone differentials, RH and VPD, light intensity and DLI, and substrate moisture and EC, especially during transplanting,” explained the 30MHz team. “Propagation requires high RH, often 80 to 90 percent, to compensate for underdeveloped root systems, while flowering requires a much lower VPD to encourage transpiration and trichome development. What makes us unique is that all of our tools work for all types of crops: cannabis, flowers, and edibles.”

In terms of compliance, all sensor data is time-stamped, stored and retrievable. Custom dashboards and exports consolidate historical climate data for each location and zone, eliminating the manual work of extracting and combining records from multiple sources. The Crop Strategy adds a layer of structured monitoring of growing cycles on top of that. “Our honest response is that 30MHz already has the data infrastructure upon which a compliance workflow can be built,” says the 30MHz team. “Currently we don’t have GMP-style batch records or audit reports, but for a serious prospect of medical cannabis in the EU, this could be a co-development conversation, or a collaboration angle with a QMS or compliance software provider.”

Cultivation Strategy is also the data base for the next 30MHz build. Once a plant’s plan is structured and linked to actual sensor results, the platform can automatically generate personalized recommendations. The RTR module already does this for energy use, and is estimated to save producers 10 to 15 percent annually. Cultivation Strategy brings this same intelligence to the entire production journey.

For more information
30MHz
(email protected)
30mhz.com

Continue Reading

Cannabis News

Tariffs’ Impact On Some Cannabis Businesses May Erase Any Benefits They See From 280E Tax Relief Under Rescheduling (Op-Ed)

Published

on

By

“The revision removes a major structural penalty, but the tariffs will reshape who gets the profits. Everyone else, the big dispensary companies, could emerge as the main beneficiaries.”

By Justin Leiby, Cannabis Research Institute

With federal cannabis reorganization partially underway and the potential end of 280E tax penalties looming, it’s an open question how much relief the cannabis industry will get. Regardless of the future, 280E is a significant financial impact for cannabis operators.

I conduct an annual survey of cannabis operators for the Illinois Office of Cannabis Regulation, and in the most recent survey operators estimate that 44 percent of their operating expenses in 2024 were not deductible under 280E, Schedules I and II. That it only applies to the drugs listed. Assuming a 21 percent corporate tax rate, that means a penalty of $92 per $1,000 spent.

Under the Trump administration’s current process of moving cannabis to Schedule III, the pain of the 280E penalty has not been distributed equally, and those who suffered the most may reap greater benefits beyond the (hopefully) temporary importance of separating medical and adult operations.

Small operators report more 280E waivers than large firms (45 percent vs. 37 percent of operating expenses), while firms that rely entirely on dispensary operations do as well as those that do not (50 percent vs. 43 percent).

Comparing the impacts of 280E and tariffs

To put the financial impact of the reorganization into context, it should be noted that some of the benefits may never materialize to operators thanks to the impact of tariffs imposed over the past year.

I combine Illinois survey responses with public financial filings to better understand the relative impacts. Like all businesses, cannabis operators have two types of operating costs: the direct costs of acquiring and producing products such as raw materials (“costs of goods sold”) and the indirect costs of operating the business such as rent and insurance (“selling, general and administrative expenses” or “G&A”).

Tariffs primarily affect the larger portion of the former, while 280E primarily affects the latter.

Together, these costs consume 84 cents of every dollar of revenue generated by cannabis operators, paying creditors and non-280E taxes consumes another six cents. I calculate a 280E penalty of three cents on the dollar by multiplying an average write-off of 44 percent, an SG&A percentage of 35 percent, and a US corporate tax rate of 21 percent. Considering the small profit margins of cannabis, the economic benefit of removing the 280E penalty is undeniable.

However, this will be partially or fully offset by tariffs that increase input costs such as packaging, vape hardware and building materials. One in six operators reported increases of 20 percent or more in input costs and more than half reported increases of 5 percent or more.

In my example, even a modest 5 percent increase wipes out most of the gain from 280E penalty relief, and an 18 percent increase wipes out all gains entirely.

Variable and deferred benefits

Like 280E, the fare load is heavier on some operators than others; in this case, cultivation and brewing operations that rely on imported packaging products, construction, and high-tech hardware. One in six cultivation and infusion companies (17 percent) reported input cost increases of more than 20 percent, while dispensary-only companies reported no such impact.

Because dispensary-only operators experience greater tax distortions from 280E and report lower tariff impacts, they will benefit the most from ending the 280E penalty.

Replanning Changes Competitive Landscape

The reorganization removes a large structural penalty, but the tariffs will reshape who takes the profits. All else being equal, large dispensary companies may be the main beneficiaries.

That’s right, observations like this start the debate instead of solving it. Some of the benefits of the rescheduling will not be realized immediately because operators have made long-term strategic choices based on the 280E tax cuts and cannot immediately release those choices.

For example, in the Illinois survey, more than half of operators reported that 280E led them to cut discretionary investments in product development, research, and sustainable technologies necessary to reach a market. Similar percentages indicate a shift to leaner staffing patterns, from security protocols to customer experience and changing facility designs for tax reasons, such as more difficult to limit retail space.

“Who wins” depends on how well operators can adapt to the new landscape.

Justin Leiby, Ph.D., is a professor of accounting at the University of Illinois Gies College of Business and faculty-in-residence at the Cannabis Research Institute. His research and teaching focuses on audit, governance and risk management, and includes extensive collection and analysis of operational and financial data from the cannabis industry.

Marijuana Moment is made possible with the help of readers. If you rely on our pro-cannabis journalism to stay informed, consider a monthly Patreon pledge.

Become a patron on Patreon!

Continue Reading

Cannabis News

Custom Cones USA launches Cones Canada

Published

on

By

Custom Cones USA has announced the launch of Cones Canada, a wholly Canadian operation designed to meet the growing needs of Canadian pre-roll producers, processors and brands.

With a stocked warehouse in Ontario and a dedicated Canadian e-commerce platform, Cones Canada eliminates the complication that Canadian businesses have historically faced in sourcing pre-rolled cones: no import fees, no customs delays and no currency conversion headaches. Orders are billed in Canadian dollars (CAD) and shipped from Ontario to anywhere in Canada.

Why Cones Canada, why now?
The legal cannabis market in Canada continues to grow, and pre-rolls are a $1.4 billion market. In 2024, pre-rolls passed as the top category in the country, and retained their title in 2025 with 77.2 million units sold, again the highest of any category, according to cannabis analytics firm Headset.

Canadian growers and processors have long relied on Custom Cones USA’s reputation for quality. Its cones have been tested to Health Canada standards for flowers and are trusted by leading pre-roll manufacturers worldwide. However, cross-border orders came with additional cost, time and logistical complexity.

“We’ve been supplying Canadian cannabis brands for years, and the demand from our Canadian customers made this next step an easy decision,” said Harrison Bard, co-founder and CEO of Custom Cones USA. “With Cones Canada, we’re bringing the same products, the same quality standards, and the same expert support that our customers have always trusted. Only now we’re doing it without limits.”

Cones Canada’s Ontario facility carries four of the most popular pre-rolled cone sizes from the Custom Cones USA catalog, each in two types of European-sourced paper: Refined White and Natural Brown.

In addition to ready-to-ship bulk cones, Cones Canada offers access to Custom Cones USA’s machine, packaging and custom branding options, including full-color filter tip printing, cigar bands and outer wraps. and custom packaging, Canadian brands can build a distinctive, shelf-ready product line backed by Pre-Roll Experts.

For more information:
Cones Canada
conescanada.ca/

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2021 The Art of MaryJane Media