Cannabis in 2026: Where Financial Risk Is Rising as Federal Policy Shifts

For much of the past decade, cannabis operators have lived in a paradox: rapid market expansion alongside a frozen federal policy framework. In 2026, that paradox starts to move. But it won’t move cleanly.

Rescheduling may reduce some federal friction. It may also raise the compliance bar across banking, tax, data, and product controls. In other words, relief in one area could come with more scrutiny in others.

The market that emerges will look more institutional. That’s good for disciplined operators. It’s punishing for the rest.

Rescheduling: Not a Simplification

In December 2025, the White House directed the Attorney General to expedite the process of moving marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act. That’s a major political signal, but it’s not the finish line. Rescheduling still has to run through formal DEA rulemaking, and that means procedural steps, timelines, and legal risk. 

If S3 is finalized in 2026, it could be the most important federal shift since state legalization began. It would also change what “compliance” means.

S3 doesn’t make your products FDA-approved. But it does move cannabis into a federal medical category — and that shift tightens expectations around documentation, controls, and defensibility overnight.

Schedule III substances live inside the federal controlled-substance regime. That puts more weight on recordkeeping, auditability, chain-of-custody expectations, and product controls, especially as federal agencies and financial institutions recalibrate what “acceptable risk” looks like in a Schedule III world.

The key issue isn’t whether rescheduling is “good” or “bad.” It’s that implementation will be uneven. Guidance will arrive in pieces. Enforcement will vary by agency and context. Multi-state operators should plan for fragmentation, as of course, Schedule III does not automatically federalize today’s state markets. 

So oversight fragmentation will probably be a greater challenge. 

Also, if marijuana becomes Schedule III, the 280E penalty would stop applying to the federal tax returns of cannabis businesses going forward, which materially changes cash flow, margins, and valuation for plant-touching operators. But it’s not retroactive, and it doesn’t erase exposure from prior years. Transition periods like this often increase audit pressure, as companies rush to position deductions, restructure entities, or clean up books, and the IRS might want to look harder while the rules are in motion.

Cannabis Banking: A Door to Higher Standards

Rescheduling may make more institutions in the banking system willing to engage with cannabis companies. It might also open up the conversation for more financing support for cannabis operators. But Schedule III by no means equals legalization, so it does not promise safe banking as such. Without a true safe-harbor law like the SAFER Banking Act, financial institutions remain exposed.

The bottom line is that banking in 2026 will still be defined by compliance risk pushing standards up.  That may mean tighter Anti-Money Laundering (AML) controls. Banks and payment partners might lean harder on:

• beneficial ownership transparency
• source-of-funds verification
• transaction monitoring and anomaly detection
• related-party transaction clarity
• indirect exposure risk (vendors, landlords, affiliates)

This could translate into tougher onboarding, more frequent reviews, and deeper documentation requests. Just “clean books” might not cut it, and they probably won’t be enough if the structure of the business is messy, reporting doesn’t tie out across systems, or controls are informal.

In 2026, the businesses that get stable banking relationships will be the ones that look bankable on paper and in process.

From Seed-to-Sale to Evidence-to-Sale

Data in cannabis is also changing roles from inventory tracking to evidence.

Seed-to-sale systems were built to prevent diversion and satisfy state reporting. In a more institutional market, those logs become the backbone of defensibility in terms of inventory-to-revenue reconciliation, chain-of-custody clarity, and audit-ready records.

A simple question drives this section:

If someone challenges your numbers, whether it is a regulator, bank, investor, or buyer, can you prove their accuracy?

Operators relying on fragmented tools, manual workarounds, weak reconciliation, or inconsistent reporting are taking a growing risk. 

Not because they’re “noncompliant” in a dramatic way but because their financial statements and records are not defensible.

AML, Cybersecurity, and the Cost of Visibility

AML compliance and cybersecurity are linked concerns. Banks, payment processors, and regulators increasingly view them both as part of the same control environment. Weak data governance can translate directly into AML red flags.

As cannabis operations become more data-intensive, they also become more exposed to penetration by hostile actors. The risk of cyberattacks is not hypothetical. In 2025, a breach at a third-party software provider used by dispensaries for online ordering and loyalty programs exposed data from hundreds of thousands of customers. Incidents like this are becoming more common as ransomware attacks rise across the cannabis sector, which remains an attractive target due to high transaction volumes, fragmented systems, and uneven security practices.

A cybersecurity incident can trigger enhanced bank reviews, delayed transactions, temporary account restrictions, or revised lending terms. Poor internal governance doesn’t always lead to enforcement action, but it can raise a firm’s perceived risk profile just enough to limit access to capital or increase its cost.

Competition, Efficiency, and the Post–Schedule III Squeeze

If S3 goes live, the market will also get tighter. 

Lower tax friction and greater institutional participation will reduce some barriers to entry, exposing all sorts of inefficiencies that many operators have been able to carry under the old regime. 

As margins normalize and capital becomes more selective, competition is likely to intensify around cost structure, execution, and operational discipline rather than simple market access.

In an S3 environment, efficiency, transparency, and repeatable processes become the differentiators that determine who can compete and who gets priced out.

Hemp, Rollbacks, and Regulatory Whiplash

Another federal shift with sharper points is the hemp ban.

Congress has moved toward strict limits that effectively wipe out much of the delta-8/intoxicating hemp category as currently sold. One key feature is a container-level THC cap scheduled to take effect in 2026, which would make many existing products unlawful as “hemp” and push them back into controlled-substance territory.

This matters for finance because it hits:

• Revenue assumptions for hemp-adjacent operators
• Inventory valuations
• Distribution models that relied on national hemp sales
• Risk exposure for banks and payment processors supporting those flows

At the same time, political risk to already-established recreational cannabis markets is back in the conversation. 

Massachusetts is moving a 2026 ballot initiative forward that would repeal adult-use cannabis sales. Even if it fails, it signals that legalization is not immune to backlash, and political volatility is now part of bank and other investor underwriting. 

Preparing for a More Institutional Cannabis Market

The cannabis industry is entering a new phase, as federal policy is evolving but not necessarily becoming more simple. Banks may become more open to doing business with cannabis operators, but standards will also rise.

All of it points in the direction of making cannabis finances less forgiving.

For founders, CFOs, and investors, this is the moment to build systems that can withstand scrutiny.

As cannabis moves into a more institutional, closely monitored phase, the businesses that succeed will be the ones that plan early, document thoroughly, and integrate compliance into financial strategy.

At Verdant, we help cannabis operators and investors build that readiness: audit-proof books, bank-ready reporting, and finance structures designed for a market where scrutiny is rising. In 2026, informed preparation it’s a competitive advantage.