Overview

This policy topic covers state statutes and regulations governing the cultivation, sale, possession, or use of cannabis for other than medical (hereafter referred to as “recreational”) purposes in states that have legalized cannabis.

In this context, “legalized" means that no civil or criminal penalties are imposed for the recreational use of cannabis by an adult. “Legalized” should not be confused with “decriminalized,” which means that no criminal penalties are imposed for certain activities, although some activities may result in civil penalties. Some States have decriminalized the recreational use of cannabis but have not fully legalized such use.

For purposes of this policy topic, “cannabis” refers to a genus of flowering plant of the Cannabaceae or hemp family, including Cannabis sativa, Cannabis indica, and Cannabis ruderalis, which together are also commonly known as marijuana. This policy topic covers legal provisions that pertain to the dried tops, leaves, stems, and seeds of the plant, as well as products derived from them, such as concentrates, oils, and edibles.

Cannabis contains chemical compounds called cannabinoids. One important cannabinoid is delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, which has a psychoactive effect and is the chemical commonly associated with recreational use. Another cannabinoid is cannabidiol, or CBD, which has a sedative and mildly analgesic effect and is the chemical often associated with medicinal use.

Note that APIS does not include information on the legal use of cannabis for medicinal purposes. For policy data regarding medical cannabis, researchers may wish to consult the National Institute on Drug Abuse’s “Prescription Drug Abuse Policy System,” available at: https://pdaps.org/ or the National Conference of State Legislatures’ “State Medical Marijuana Laws” page, available at: https://www.ncsl.org/health/state-medical-cannabis-laws.

Pricing Controls Imposed

APIS provides data on whether jurisdictions impose one or more restrictions on the pricing practices of those engaged in selling recreational cannabis. Mechanisms of price controls include banning the provision of free cannabis by retailers, banning the sale of cannabis below cost, and banning product bundling.

Taxes Imposed

APIS provides data on the rate of tax imposed by a jurisdiction on recreational cannabis sales or transfers, as well as the transaction level at which the tax is imposed. There is substantial variation in how states impose taxes; some states tax by weight, some by price, and others by THC content. Additionally, some states allow localities to impose an additional tax.  Local taxes are not tracked by APIS.

Explanatory Notes and Limitations Specifically Applicable to Recreational Use of Cannabis

1. The Recreational Use Legalized column displays a check mark for jurisdictions that have legalized the purchase, possession, or consumption of cannabis for recreational use by an adult resident. For purposes of this topic:

• "Legalized" means no civil or criminal penalties are imposed for at least one of following activities with respect to the recreational use of cannabis by an adult resident: purchase, possession, or consumption
• "Recreational" means for other than medical purposes
• "Adult" means a person 21 years of age or older

This topic does not address prohibitions or penalties that may exist in the jurisdictions that have not legalized recreational cannabis use as defined here.

Note that although a jurisdiction may have legalized recreational cannabis use as defined here, certain limitations may nevertheless be imposed, for example limits on the amount that a person may purchase or possess, or restrictions concerning the locations in which cannabis may be consumed. This topic does not currently address these limitations.

2. Some Recreational Use of Cannabis laws have different effective dates for various provisions. For example, the date establishing a licensing system for the cultivation, testing, manufacturing, processing, distribution, transportation, and retail sale of recreational cannabis may be a year or more earlier than the date when recreational cannabis may lawfully be sold to the public. If significant terms of a State's policy become effective on one date, even though full implementation or enforcement is not effective until a later date, the earlier date is displayed in the comparison tables. In such cases, a Row Note is included to indicate the date when the program is to be fully implemented and enforceable.

Explanatory Notes and Limitations Applicable to Cannabis Pricing

1. The Recreational Use Legalized column displays a check mark for jurisdictions that have legalized the purchase, possession, or consumption of cannabis for recreational use by an adult resident. For purposes of this topic: 

• "Legalized" means no civil or criminal penalties are imposed for at least one of following activities with respect to the recreational use of cannabis by an adult resident: purchase, possession, or consumption 

• "Recreational" means for other than medical purposes 

• "Adult" means a person 21 years of age or older 

This topic does not address prohibitions or penalties that may exist in the jurisdictions that have not legalized recreational cannabis use as defined here. 

Note that although a jurisdiction may have legalized recreational cannabis use as defined here, certain limitations may nevertheless be imposed, for example limits on the amount that a person may purchase or possess, or restrictions concerning the locations in which cannabis may be consumed. This topic does not currently address these limitations. 

2. Some Recreational Use of Cannabis laws have different effective dates for various provisions. For example, the date establishing a licensing system for the cultivation, testing, manufacturing, processing, distribution, transportation, and retail sale of recreational cannabis may be a year or more earlier than the date when recreational cannabis may lawfully be sold to the public. If significant terms of a State's policy become effective on one date, even though full implementation or enforcement is not effective until a later date, the earlier date is displayed in the comparison tables. In such cases, a Row Note is included to indicate the date when the program is to be fully implemented and enforceable. 

3. The Tax Imposed variable addresses State-level taxes imposed on the sale or transfer of recreational cannabis. Local taxes imposed by city, county, or tribal authorities are not included. Row or jurisdiction notes are used to indicate whether or not the State’s general sales tax applies to recreational cannabis sales, as well as the rate of that general sales tax. 

Explanatory Notes and Limitations Applicable to All APIS Policy Topics

1. State law may permit local jurisdictions to impose requirements in addition to those mandated by State law. Alternatively, State law may prohibit local legislation on this topic, thereby preempting local powers. For more information on the preemption doctrine, see the About Alcohol Policy page. APIS does not document policies established by local governments.

2. In addition to statutes and regulations, judicial decisions (case law) also may affect alcohol-related policies. APIS does not review case law except to determine whether judicial decisions have invalidated statutes or regulations that would otherwise affect the data presented in the comparison tables.

3. APIS reviews published administrative regulations. However, administrative decisions or directives that are not included in a State's published regulatory codes may have an impact on implementation. This possibility has not been addressed by the APIS research.

4. Statutes and regulations cited in tables on this policy topic may have been amended or repealed after the specific date or time period specified by the site user's search criteria.

5. The operation or enforcement of statutes or regulations affecting the policies addressed on APIS may have been suspended or modified by executive or administrative orders issued in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.  With the exception of the COVID-19 Digest and Dataset, APIS research does not address these orders or the effects they may have on the policies covered by APIS.

6. Policy changes in APIS are presented as of the date these changes take effect as law. Users should be aware that in some situations there may be a delay between the effective date of a law and the time a corresponding policy change occurs in practice. Because APIS research is based entirely on primary legal source materials (codified statutes and regulations and, on rare occasions, published court opinions), APIS is unable to accurately determine when policy changes may appear in practice.

7. If a conflict exists between a statute and a regulation addressing the same legal issue, APIS coding relies on the statute.

8. A comprehensive understanding of the data presented in the comparison tables for this policy topic requires examination of the applicable Row Notes and Jurisdiction Notes, which can be accessed from the body of the table via links in the Jurisdiction column.

APIS reviews federal law pertaining to the use of cannabis, including its classification as a Schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. Discussion of this law and its implications, as well as the interplay of federal law and state law on cannabis, is available at this link.

FEDERAL CITATIONS AND RELEVANT TEXT EXCERPTS

21 U.S.C. § 812

§ 812. Schedules of controlled substances

(a) Establishment

There are established five schedules of controlled substances, to be known as schedules I, II, III, IV, and V. Such schedules shall initially consist of the substances listed in this section. * * *

21 U.S.C. § 841

§ 841. Prohibited acts A

(a) Unlawful acts

Except as authorized by this subchapter, it shall be unlawful for any person knowingly or intentionally--

(1) to manufacture, distribute, or dispense, or possess with intent to manufacture, distribute, or dispense, a controlled substance; or

(2) to create, distribute, or dispense, or possess with intent to distribute or dispense, a counterfeit substance.

21 U.S.C. § 844

§ 844. Penalties for simple possession

(a) Unlawful acts; penalties

It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly or intentionally to possess a controlled substance unless such substance was obtained directly, or pursuant to a valid prescription or order, from a practitioner, while acting in the course of his professional practice, or except as otherwise authorized by this subchapter or subchapter II of this chapter. * * *

* * *

21 U.S.C. § 846

§ 846. Attempt and conspiracy

Any person who attempts or conspires to commit any offense defined in this subchapter shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense, the commission of which was the object of the attempt or conspiracy.

Source for all citations on this page: www.govinfo.gov/, a service of the U.S. Government Publishing Office (GPO). Excerpts from the United States Code are current as of 2024. Excerpts from the Code of Federal Regulations are current as of 2025. Excerpts from Public Laws of Congress are current as of the year of enactment. The GPO’s Public Domain & Copyright Notice is available at https://www.govinfo.gov/about/policies#copyright.

​Legalization

1. Carlini, B. H., Kellum, L. B., Garrett, S. B., & Nims, L. N. (2024). Threaten, Distract, and Discredit: Cannabis Industry Rhetoric to Defeat Regulation of High-THC Cannabis Products in Washington State. Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs, 85(3), 322-329.
2. Schauer, G. L., Johnson, J. K., Rak, D. J., Dodson, L., Steinfeld, N., Sheehy, T. J., ... & Collins, S. P. (2023). A research agenda to inform cannabis regulation: how science can shape policy. Clinical therapeutics, 45(6), 506-514.

Selected References for Tax Imposed

1. Ball, W. D. (2014, April 17). A new approach to marijuana regulation: In support of a potency tax. Jurist. Retrieved from: http://jurist.org/forum/2014/04/david-ball-marijuana-potency.php
2. Barry, R.A., Hiilamo, H., & Glantz, S.A. (2014). Waiting for the opportune moment: The tobacco industry and marijuana legalization. Milbank Quarterly, 92(2): 207-242.
3. Carnevale, J.T., Kagan, R., Murphy, P.J., & Esrick, J. (2017). A practical framework for regulating for-profit recreational marijuana in US States: Lessons from Colorado and Washington. Int J Drug Policy, 42, 71-85. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2017.03.001. Epub 2017 Mar 31. PMID: 28366598.
4. Caulkins, J.P., Hawken, A., Kilmer, B., Kleiman, M.A.R., Pfrommer, K., Pruess, J., & Shaw, T. (2013). High tax states: Options for gleaning revenue from legal cannabis. Oregon Law Review, 91: 1041-1068.
5. Caulkins, J.P., Morris, E., & Ratnatunga, R. (2010). Smuggling and Excise Tax Evasion for Legalized Marijuana: Lessons from Other Excise Taxes. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation
6. Gravelle, J.G., & Lowry, S. (2014). Federal Proposals to Tax Marijuana: An Economic Analysis. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.
7. Hansen, B., Miller, K., & Weber, C. (2017). The taxation of recreational marijuana: Evidence from Washington state. NBER Working Paper No. 23632, Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. doi: 10.3386/w23632.
8. Hansen, B., Miller, K., Seo, B., & Weber, C. (2020). Taxing the potency of sin goods: Evidence from recreational cannabis and liquor markets. National Tax Journal 73, no. 2.
9. Miller, K., & Seo, B. (2021). The effect of cannabis legalization on substance demand and tax revenues. National Tax Journal 74, no. 1: 107-145.
10. Roche, Jr., E.J. (2013, Winter). Federal income taxation of medical marijuana businesses. Tax Lawyer, 66(2). Retrieved from: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2308946
11. Veligati, S., Howdeshell, S., Beeler-Stinn, S., Lingam, D., Allen, P., Chen, L.-S., & Grucza, R. (2019). Changes in alcohol and tobacco consumption in response to medical and recreational cannabis legalization: Evidence from U.S. state tax receipt data. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3337354

Selected References for Pricing Controls Imposed

1. Amlung, M., Reed, D., Morris, V., Aston, E., Metrik, J., & MacKillop, J. (2018). Price Elasticity of Illegal vs Legal Cannabis: A Behavioral Economic Substitutability Analysis. Addiction. doi: 10.1111/add.14437.
2. Barry, R.A., Hiilamo, H., & Glantz, S.A. (2014). Waiting for the opportune moment: The tobacco industry and marijuana legalization. Milbank Quarterly, 92(2): 207-242.
3. Ben Lakhdar, Christian, Nicolas G. Vaillant, and François-Charles Wolff. (2016). Price elasticity of demand for cannabis: does potency matter?. Addiction Research & Theory 24(4), 300-312. doi.org/10.3109/16066359.2016.1139699.
4. Caulkins, J.P., Bao, Y., Davenport, S., Fahli, I., Guo, Y., Kinnard, K., & Kilmer, B. (2018). Big data on a big new market: Insights from Washington State’s legal cannabis market. International Journal of Drug Policy, 57, 86–94. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2018.03.031
5. Caulkins, J.P., Bao, Y., Davenport, S., Fahli, I., Guo, Y., Kinnard, K., Najewicz, M., Renaud, L., & Kilmer, B. (2018). Big data on a big new market: Insights from Washington State's legal cannabis market. Int J Drug Policy, 57, 86-94. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2018.03.031. Epub 2018 Apr 27. PMID: 29709847.
6. Childs, J., & Stevens, J. (2021). A cannabis pricing mistake from California to Canada: government can’t tax cannabis optimally. Applied Economics Letters 28, no. 9: 779-783.
7. Coughlin, L. N., Jennings, C. J., Hellman, L., Florimbio, A. R., Jannausch, M., & Bonar, E. E. (2024). Development and Pilot Testing of an Experimental Cannabis Marketplace: Toward Evaluating the Impact of Cannabis Policy on Consumer Choices. Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research, 9(3), e870-e877.
8. Davenport, S. (2019). Price and product variation in Washington's recreational cannabis market. International Journal of Drug Policy, 102547.
9. Grossman, E. R., Deeds, B., & Blanco, C. (2024). Tax Policy—An Understudied Approach to Reducing Cannabis Use. JAMA psychiatry, 81(9), 851-852.
10. Hunt, P., & Pacula, R.L. (2017). Early impacts of marijuana legalization: An evaluation of prices in Colorado and Washington. Journal of Primary Prevention, 38(3): 221-248. doi: 10.1007/s10935-017-0471-x.
11. Ours, V., Jan, C., & Williams, J. (2007). Cannabis prices and dynamics of cannabis use. Journal of Health Economics, 26(3): 578-596.
12. Ours, V., & Williams, J. (2012). The effects of cannabis use on physical and mental health. Journal of Health Economics, 31(4): 564-577.
13. Pacula, R.L., & Lundberg, R. (2014). Why changes in price matter when thinking about marijuana policy: A review of the literature on the elasticity of demand. Public Health Reviews, 35(2): 1-18.
14. Shi, Y., Cao, Y., Shang, C., & Pacula, R. L. (2019). The impacts of potency, warning messages, and price on preferences for Cannabis flower products. International Journal of Drug Policy, 74, 1-10.
15. Smart, R., Caulkins, J. P., Kilmer, B., Davenport, S., & Midgette, G. (2017).  Variation in cannabis potency and prices in a newly legal market: Evidence from 30 million cannabis sales in Washington state. Addiction, 112(12): 2167–2177. doi: 10.1111/Add.13886.

For Selected References pertaining to Cannabis Legalization and Public Health Effects of Cannabis Use, click here.

Cannabis Retail Access

Cannabis Policy Taxonomy

How to Measure Law for Quantitative Research – A Resource Guide 

Sources of Data to Measure the Outcomes of Policy Change

Report to Congress on the Prevention and Reduction of Underage Drinking 

Peer-Reviewed Publications Using APIS Data 

Federal Cannabis Law