Since the passage of Issue 2, Ohio Rep. Matt Huffman (R-Lima), former Ohio Senate president and newly elected speaker of the House, and other legislators have expressed interest in making some potentially drastic changes to the state’s marijuana laws.
As recently as December, Huffman said that he is still interested in pursuing a bill that would address some “fundamental flaws” in the voter-approved law — one similar to a bill that passed the Senate last year before stalling in the House.
Rep. Matt Huffman
But cannabis operators fret that some of the changes that have been discussed could negatively impact them, including raising marijuana tax rates and setting lower caps on THC potencies for consumer products. A recently introduced bill targeting the recreational marijuana program includes provisions that would alter both of those.
While medical marijuana is subject only to sales tax, adult-use products are subject to that plus a 10% excise tax. This creates an effective tax rate in Ohio for non-medical products of approximately 15.25% to 17.5%, depending on the tax where the sale takes place.
Senate Bill 56, however, introduced by Sen. Stephen Huffman (R-Tipp City) at the end of January, looks to increase the excise tax from 10% to 15%. If passed, that would bring the effective tax on adult-use marijuana to a range of 20.25% to 22.5%.
David Bowling, executive director of OHCANN, the trade organization representing cannabis businesses, said the concern is that an even higher tax rate could have a chilling effect on sales by discouraging cannabis consumers from participating in the state’s legal industry.
“We need to compete with these alternative sources of cannabis,” said Pete Nischt, a vice president with Akron-based Klutch Cannabis. “And we are talking not only about Michigan, but stuff imported from out West, illicit stuff and intoxicating hemp. We’ve been pretty clear that increasing the tax rate right now would be devastating.”
As far as whether Ohio’s tax rates should be increased or kept where they are, Speaker Matt Huffman said: “I don’t have an opinion on that right now.” He did acknowledge, however, concerns with taxes pushing away customers if set too high.
Tax rates are a topic that legislators will be discussing in more detail along with how those tax proceeds are distributed, which could be changed from the framework put in place by Issue 2, he said.
To that end, S.B. 56 calls for the elimination of the social equity and jobs fund created by Issue 2, which allocates 36% of tax proceeds from the adult-use program to that fund.
Aside from taxes, Bowling said that lowering potency limits could be equally “devastating.”
For the medical program, lawmakers imposed a THC cap on manufactured products like vapes and concentrates of just 70%. Issue 2 calls for a cap on potency of no lower than 90% on non-medical products.
It’s peculiar that the THC limit on medical products would be lower than adult use. Typically, medical products would carry a higher potency.
However, S.B. 56 would bring that 90% THC cap in the adult-use program down to 70%.
Operators worry how consumers would respond to these restrictive limits as products with lower THC potencies may be viewed as lower quality, Nischt said. And when customers can get marijuana without these same restrictions through other channels, restricting potency on legal products is another factor that could push customers away.
“There is a level of concern about the new structure in Columbus, and that level of concern is that the new speaker, Matt Huffman, who is a very reasonable and smart guy, has publicly declared that he wants to put corrections into Issue 2,” said Andy Rayburn, CEO of Eastlake-based Buckeye Relief and president of OHCANN.
“If they start to attack things like THC content, for example, which had been discussed across last year, that will of course affect consumers and greatly limit our ability to sell certain products,” he said. “That will push people back to the illegal market where they can buy the THC they prefer.”
Similar to the tax question, Huffman said that he doesn’t presently have a view of his own on THC potency restrictions and that it’s another question for legislators to mull.
“What limits are or shouldn’t be, I don’t think I have an opinion about that,” he said. “But I think we will come to a pretty good place through this process.”
Industry stakeholders remain hopeful they can continue to have a seat at the table when any legislative changes are discussed.
“We hope to continue to work with both bodies, the House and the Senate, and continue to explain the market realities of what certain actions would be, like changing THC content, which would be a return to a bunch of consumers going to illegal markets or driving to Michigan,” Rayburn said.
In terms of marijuana policies or related laws, “I don’t think cannabis evolution is going to be done in 2025,” Bowling said.
“That’s probably more of a five-year plan than a one-year plan,” he said. “But a year from now, I think we will be in a more settled state.”
A Nebraska legislative committee voted 5-3 against advancing a bill designed to implement and regulate the state’s medical cannabis program, leaving legislators and advocates searching for alternative paths forward, according to the Nebraska Examiner.
The General Affairs Committee rejected Legislative Bill 677, sponsored by State Sen. Ben Hansen of Blair, during a Thursday vote where committee members declined to offer amendments to the legislation, the publication reported.
“I don’t want to shut all the doors right now, but some doors are closing, and they’re closing fast, and so we have to act,” Hansen told reporters after the vote, according to the Examiner.
Nebraska voters approved medical cannabis in November 2024, with residents legally permitted to possess up to 5 ounces with a healthcare practitioner’s recommendation since mid-December. However, the regulatory commission created by the ballot initiative lacks effective power and funding to regulate the industry.
Hansen described his legislation as “a must” for 2025 to prevent a “Wild West” scenario in the state’s cannabis market. The bill would have expanded regulatory structure through the Nebraska Medical Cannabis Commission and extended deadlines for regulations and licensing to allow more time for implementation, the Examiner noted.
Committee disagreements centered on proposed restrictions. A committee amendment would have prohibited smoking cannabis and the sale of flower or bud products while limiting qualified healthcare practitioners to physicians, osteopathic physicians, physician assistants or nurse practitioners who had treated patients for at least six months.
The amendment also would have limited qualifying conditions to 15 specific ailments including cancer, epilepsy, HIV/AIDS, and chronic pain lasting longer than six months.
State Sen. Bob Andersen of Sarpy County opposed allowing vaping due to concerns about youth drug use, while committee chair Rick Holdcroft suggested selling cannabis flower would be “a gateway toward recreational marijuana,” a claim Hansen “heavily disputed,” according to the Examiner.
Hansen now faces a difficult path forward, requiring at least 25 votes to pull the bill from committee and then needing 33 senators to advance it across three rounds of debate, regardless of filibuster attempts.
Crista Eggers, executive director of Nebraskans for Medical Marijuana, remained optimistic despite the setback.
“This will not be the end,” Eggers said, according to the outlet. “Giving up has never been an option. Being silenced has never been an option. It’s not over. It’s not done.”
The legislative impasse is further complicated by ongoing litigation. Former state senator John Kuehn has filed two lawsuits challenging the voter-approved provisions, with one appeal pending before the Nebraska Supreme Court. The state’s Attorney General is also trying to do something about the hemp question, akin to other states across the country.
Nevada’s cannabis lounge experiment faces some expected growing pains, with one of just two state-licensed venues closing its doors after barely a year in business, according to the Las Vegas Weekly.
“The regulatory framework, compliance costs and product limitations just don’t support a sustainable business model,” said Thrive Cannabis managing partner Mitch Britten, who plans to convert the space into an event venue until regulations loosen up.
The closure leaves Planet 13’s Dazed Consumption Lounge as the only operational state-regulated cannabis lounge in Nevada. Dazed manager Blake Anderson estimates the venue attracts around 250 customers daily, primarily tourists. One other establishment, Sky High Lounge, has operated since 2019 on sovereign Las Vegas Paiute Tribe land exempt from state regulations.
Even with Nevada regulators conditionally approving 21 more lounge licenses, potential owners are struggling to meet the $200,000 liquid assets requirement – particularly social equity applicants from communities hit hardest by prohibition.
Recreational marijuana has been legal statewide since 2017, but public consumption remains prohibited. That’s created an obvious disconnect for the millions of tourists who visit Las Vegas annually but have nowhere legal to use the products they purchase. The state recorded roughly $829 million in taxable sales during the 2024 fiscal year.
“It always comes down to money, and it’s difficult to get a space if you can’t afford to buy a building. On top of that, getting insurance and finding a landowner who’s willing to lease to a cannabis business is a challenge in and of itself,” said Christopher LaPorte, whose consulting firm Reset Las Vegas helped launch Smoke and Mirrors, told Las Vegas Weekly.
Many think the key to future success lies in legislative changes that would allow lounges to integrate with food service and entertainment – playing to Las Vegas’s strengths as a hospitality innovator. In the meantime, the industry will continue to adapt and push forward.
“Things take time,” LaPorte said. “There’s a culture that we have to continue to embrace and a lot of education that we still have to do. But at the end of the day, tourists need a place to smoke, and that’s what these places are.”
Psyence Group Inc. (CSE: PSYG) told investors that it will be consolidating all of its issued and outstanding share capital on the basis of every 15 existing common shares into one new common share effective April 23, 2025 with a record date of April 23, 2025. As a result of the consolidation, the issued and outstanding shares will be reduced to approximately 9,387,695 on the effective date.
This is the second time a Psyence company has consolidated shares recently. In November, its Nasdaq-listed associate, Psyence Biomedical Ltd. (Nasdaq: PBM), implemented a 1-for-75 share consolidation as the psychedelics company worked to maintain its Nasdaq listing.
Psyence Group reported earnings in February when the company delivered a net loss of C$3 million and was reporting as a going concern. At the end of 2024, the company said it had not yet achieved profitable operations, has accumulated losses of C$48,982,320 since its inception.
Total assets at the end of 2024 were C$11,944,478 and comprised predominantly of: cash and cash equivalents of C$10,611,113, other receivables of C$159,808, investment in PsyLabs of C$1,071,981 and prepaids of C$68,243.
Still, the company is pushing ahead. Psyence told investors that it has historically secured financing through share issuances and convertible debentures, and it continues to explore funding opportunities to support its operations and strategic initiatives. “Based on these actions and management’s expectations regarding future funding and operational developments, the company believes it will have sufficient resources to meet its obligations as they become due for at least the next twelve months,” it said in its last financial filing.
The company said it believes that the consolidation will position it with greater flexibility for the development of its business and the growth of the company.