HHS

sck178

Sounds about right. HHS probably stopped counting life loss due to RFK Jr's brain worm policies and announcements

hambone_83

Here is the link where all the fuss is about on this link: [https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/01/12/2026-00362/schedules-of-controlled-substances-placement-of-n-pyrrolidino-metonitazene-and-n-pyrrolidino](https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/01/12/2026-00362/schedules-of-controlled-substances-placement-of-n-pyrrolidino-metonitazene-and-n-pyrrolidino) >On April 11, 2024, the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) issued an opinion, which, among other things, concluded that HHS's two-part test would be sufficient to establish that a drug has a currently accepted medical use. Office of Legal Counsel, Memorandum for Merrick B. Garland Attorney General Re: Questions Related to the Potential Rescheduling of Marijuana at 3 (April 11, 2024). The poster of this is claiming this statement reduces risk of the 2 part HHS review being invalid (Since DOJ legal counsel issued an opinion they think its fine) To note, this person is the one that pushed the "gamma" squeeze with all the MSOS call options expiring friday. So he really is pushing lots blue sky narratives. But does seem overall positive that DOJ is on board with two-part test when SAM was saying it's not good enough

Mr_Snow___

>On April 11, 2024, the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) issued an opinion, which, among other things, concluded that HHS’s two-part test would be sufficient to establish that a drug has a currently accepted medical use. Office of Legal Counsel, Memorandum for Merrick B. Garland Attorney General Re: Questions Related to the Potential Rescheduling of marijuana at 3 (April 11, 2024). For purposes of this scheduling order, there is no evidence that health care providers have widespread experience with medical use of N-pyrrolidino metonitazene and N-pyrrolidino protonitazene or that the use of N-pyrrolidino metonitazene and N-pyrrolidino protonitazene are recognized by entities that regulate the practice of medicine, so the two-part test also is not satisfied. [https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2026-01-12/pdf/2026-00362.pdf](https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2026-01-12/pdf/2026-00362.pdf)

penniesandquarters

One of the last adults and real professionals in charge. From the DHS, to the FBI, to the SecDef, to the CIA, to the HHS, to the VP, and the Commander in Chief. They are headed by incompetent people. By looneys who believe conspiracies and peddle misinformation. Anyone with a grain of IQ can see this.

SuzyCreamcheezies

Agree with this sentiment. Still risky, but there are certainly safer companies to dabble in. I remember there was a huge pump on Cannabist during the initial HHS news… yikes. Which are the least bad, in your opinion? Green Thumb is the obvious top choice, I assume?

waerrington

Coke switched from corn syrup back to sugar thanks to new HHS guidelines. 

Old-Outside6894

I’m not sure we get S3 in January. I have evaluated everything I can find, ran through multiple AI’s and think Jan is a pipe dream like all the “close” dates after HHS report dropped. Market knows. I think this is q1-2, but not January.

hambone_83

https://vicentellp.com/insights/cannabis-rescheduling-explained/ The DOJ could immediately issue a Final Order rescheduling marijuana to Schedule III under 21 U.S.C. § 811(d). To do so, the Attorney General would rely on an Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinion concluding that the United States can satisfy its international treaty obligations by placing marijuana in Schedule III, provided that rescheduling is accompanied by specific regulatory controls (e.g., production quotas and import/export permitting). Unlike Epidiolex, botanical marijuana is not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”); however, Section 811(d) affords the Attorney General broad discretion to select the schedule deemed most appropriate to meet treaty obligations, independent of FDA approval status. By citing the need to comply with international treaties while acknowledging the scientific findings of the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”), the DOJ could issue a Final Order rescheduling marijuana to Schedule III without completing the administrative hearing process.

AverageNo130

DOJ has been sitting on S3 since HHS approved it Aug '23. So end of Jan is a reasonable deadline after 2.5 yrs of DOJ BS imo.

Many_Easy

I’m not disagreeing with you, but just the fact that we got HHS recommendation and an S3 EO despite not being finalized does show some progress and is positive news. Yes, still work to be done.

mr_molecular

Here is how this could play out. The "Expeditious" Path: Strategy and Timeline The administration's most likely path involves the Attorney General exercising her authority to bypass the DEA's stalled administrative hearings. Phase 1: Bypassing the Hearing (December 2025 – January 2026) • Action: The Attorney General (AG) can conclude that the administrative record—which already contains over 42,000 public comments and a comprehensive scientific review from the HHS—is sufficient to make a final determination. • Legal Basis: The AG may argue that a formal hearing is "unnecessary" or that the public interest in medical access outweighs the need for further oral testimony, especially since a federal judge already suspended the previous hearings in early 2025. • The "International Treaty" Shortcut: Legal experts suggest the AG could cite 21 U.S.C. § 811(d)(1), which allows for expedited scheduling to comply with international treaty obligations, bypassing the standard hearing requirements.  Phase 2: Drafting and OMB Review (January 2026 – February 2026) • Drafting the Final Rule: The DOJ and DEA would draft the "Final Rule." This document must address the major concerns raised in public comments to be legally "defensible" against future lawsuits.  • OMB Review: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) must review the economic impact. Under the Executive Order, this review would likely be fast-tracked to a matter of weeks rather than months. Phase 3: Publication and Effective Date (March 2026 – April 2026) • Publication: The Final Rule is published in the Federal Register.  • Cooling-off Period: Usually, a rule takes effect 30 to 60 days after publication.  • Final Result: By April 2026, marijuana would officially be Schedule 3.

Wan4trulove

While I agree that this pump may not have any substance to it, a.k.a administrative procedures can't be rushed as it may give legal headaches later via court orders. That being said , I do believe that DOJ will act in a expeditious manner because Trump is not Biden who will just let it slide, also , HHS seems to be planning some sort CBD initiate to start in Q2 2026. So I believe that final rule is coming at the end of Q1 2026. Also, I don't think final rule comes with FINCEL ruling as DOJ doesn't really care about existing medical programs at state level. SAFER may not be introduced as a Stand alone bill , in all likelihood, congress will push Schedule III banking (without mentioning Cannabis) for state level entities in the 'Fair Access banking act' (Currently in Committee stages in both house and Senate) . This way Republicans can claim it as Law & Order problem and Democrats can claim victory for cannabis industry. Also, Republicans need Democrats support for the legal Gun and Oil companies 'reputational risk' issue to be resolved. So , republicans will get Gun & Oil companies banking discrimination issue resolved and Democrats get their baking for cannabis industry. Finally , If stars do align in our favor and DOJ indeed acts fast on Trump's EO by end of Q1 , the banking will be done at a substantial pace which may become law by end of Q2.

noobstockinvestor

MSOS was trading at \~$3.8 USD before the leak - we're sitting at $4.63 USD today. We have almost given up all the EO gains. Incredible.. Sticking with the plan and holding CGC/TLRY and building out green thumb. Cannabis is currently 6% of my portfolio so the swings are not as violent as they used to be. During Biden era when HHS said they recommend S3, my portfolio was closer to 40-50% cannabis. After the election dump, I created strict rules to follow and one of them is no single sector over 7% weighting. Trading around a core has really helped me mitigate risk/secure profits and I suggest everyone here to consider doing the same. Even with MSOS sitting near lows again, my cannabis portfolio is near the highs we saw during the pump to $11. What really fucked me in 2021-2023 was believing politicians, having no risk management and diamond handing garbage stocks.

KAI5ER

Here's a summary why I'm still positive. The key difference this time is that the president has publicly taken ownership of the decision to move cannabis to Schedule III, rather than framing it as a review. By stating the outcome directly, any DEA delay now appears as bureaucratic resistance rather than neutral process. Given Trump’s history of reacting strongly to agencies that undermine or slow-walk his public directives, this creates additional pressure on the DEA to follow through. Obviously .... Schedule III is already supported by HHS science And the DEA is no longer operating in the background, meaning any effort to slow-walk or quietly obstruct the process would be exposed to public and political scrutiny (Cole answers to Trump).

GeoLogic23

More like Trump doesn't have the ability to just pick and choose a Schedule on his own? That is not within the powers of the President. If he could do that his EO wouldn't be directing the DEA to finish the process that was already started. If he could do that he would've just put Fentanyl on Schedule 1 on his own and claimed all the credit, instead of having Congress do it. But he couldn't just do that randomly because he doesn't have that authority. And he couldn't put Fentanyl through the HHS review because it would obviously come back at Schedule 2 because it has widespread medical uses. Just some spin from the Trump administration to make it seem like he is in control, and not just rubber stamping something Biden did.

AmDazed

I did read the article and I believe it said we don't know what mechanism they used. I would say it's more likely that they segregated their business in such a way that they claimed that that portion wasn't barred under 280E. Regardless they defended their claim against 280E successfully at least once already and received a refund. The point is there's already been some success in some way at reducing the 280E liability. As far as the argument after they move to schedule III, for pre 2023 taxes it would be that it was miscategorized as schedule I and rescheduling confirmed this. For 2023 and later it would be that it was declared to have medical value in 2023 by HHS and therefore they shouldn't be held responsible for the bureaucratic delays in rescheduling that directly resulted from that determination. Why they might actually win? The War of Attrition: If dozens of cannabis companies file $100M+ refund suits simultaneously, they create a litigation logjam. The IRS cannot realistically fight 50 high-level 280E cases at once with their current talent pool. The Political Off-Ramp: As more wealthy and politically connected people enter the industry, the political cost of the IRS being aggressive increases. If the administration wants the industry to succeed (to create jobs/tax revenue), they will eventually provide the IRS with an "administrative out" to stop fighting 280E. The Partial win: There are settlements options at the IRS's disposal and "offer-in-compromise" programs that they may allow as a way to avoid litigation. Final argument: Who was there at the signing? Kim Rivers of Trulieve; who has worked with the administration this past year, which included multiple meetings with Trump, to get this EO completed.

GeoLogic23

"Either cult" lol dude people on the left don't care about Biden. Democrats dumped him literally months before his reelection. Trump doesn't have the authority to just change a dug schedule. And he's not doing that here, because he doesn't have that authority. Trump is directing the DEA to simply sign off on the rescheduling review performed by Biden's HHS. He's directing the DEA to do something they can actually do. If there wasn't a review on the DEA's desk, he couldn't direct his admin to do anything other than start the HHS review. Very fortunate for him that Biden's admin already did the review, so that he is able to just say "finish it" and his admin can do no actual work but claim all the credit.

GeoLogic23

[https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/10/06/statement-from-president-biden-on-marijuana-reform/](https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/10/06/statement-from-president-biden-on-marijuana-reform/) >Third, I am asking the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Attorney General to initiate the administrative process to review **expeditiously** how marijuana is scheduled under federal law. Biden's review had to come first anyway. Trump can't just pick a schedule. The only reason he is saying Schedule 3 is because there is a completed HHS review sitting on the DEA's desk saying Schedule 3, thanks to Biden's order. Notice how Biden directed them to initiate the "administrative process" to review? That's because the President doesn't have the power to change drug schedules. The only administrative process through the executive branch to reschedule a drug is through HHS review.

randomusername0000

There is a difference. * **Biden basically said:** “HHS and DOJ, please *review* marijuana’s scheduling under existing law.” * **Trump’s EO says:** “DOJ/DEA, *move* it to Schedule III and do it on an expedited timeline Trumps directive specified an outcome and expedition.

RockyMountainSchrute

It's not about 'belief' bud, that's not how objective reality works. These are facts that are easily verifiable, you don't have to pretend like laws and legislation are mystical things. Biden ordered a review of the marijuana rescheduling back in Oct 2022. Followed by both the Department of Health and HHS recommendeding rescheduling in Aug 2023 after review. Do you not know what sub you're in? People here are aware of what's happening with weed legislation, you don't have to tell lies like this and expose yourself as a thoughtless half-wit and act like laws are some kind of 'belief' system.

CravenMH

I could be wrong but I think the EO are a bit more urgency to it. It looks like they are also going to still use the original HHS study that recommended the reclassification and not start a new one. So that's good.

King_Chron

**Trump's Executive Order: What Actually Changed** **The Direct Push:** Trump's order explicitly directs AG Pam Bondi to complete rescheduling in the "most expeditious manner" - legal experts call it a "big push forward" that uses presidential weight to override bureaucratic delays that stalled Biden's 2022 initiative. **Why This Is More Decisive Than Biden's Approach:** * Biden (2022): Launched multi-agency review dependent on HHS/DEA cooperation - criticized for slow pace * Trump (2025): Direct mandate to finalize existing proposal, treating it as priority vs. continued "study" * Biden-era process stalled by mandatory hearings (originally Jan 2025) and 43,000 public comments creating procedural pauses **Policy Framing Shift:** Trump frames it as "common sense" backed by 82% public support, explicitly stating "facts compel federal government to recognize marijuana can be legitimate for medical applications" - removing the federal position that cannabis has no accepted medical use. Unlike Biden's broader "equity" focus, includes targeted programs like Medicare pilot reimbursing seniors up to $500 annually for CBD (starts April 2026). **Immediate Industry Impact:** * **Taxation**: Schedule III eliminates IRS 280E penalty preventing state-legal businesses from deducting expenses (rent, payroll) * **Banking/Investment**: Expected to push Nasdaq/NYSE to reconsider listing U.S. cannabis companies and advance SAFER Banking Act **Bottom Line:** Order strategically timed for immediate financial relief and uses executive pressure to clear bureaucratic backlog.

King_Chron

\- **Trump's Executive Order: What Actually Changed** **The Direct Push:** Trump's order explicitly directs AG Pam Bondi to complete rescheduling in the "most expeditious manner" - legal experts call it a "big push forward" that uses presidential weight to override bureaucratic delays that stalled Biden's 2022 initiative. **Why This Is More Decisive Than Biden's Approach:** * Biden (2022): Launched multi-agency review dependent on HHS/DEA cooperation - criticized for slow pace * Trump (2025): Direct mandate to finalize existing proposal, treating it as priority vs. continued "study" * Biden-era process stalled by mandatory hearings (originally Jan 2025) and 43,000 public comments creating procedural pauses **Policy Framing Shift:** Trump frames it as "common sense" backed by 82% public support, explicitly stating "facts compel federal government to recognize marijuana can be legitimate for medical applications" - removing the federal position that cannabis has no accepted medical use. Unlike Biden's broader "equity" focus, includes targeted programs like Medicare pilot reimbursing seniors up to $500 annually for CBD (starts April 2026). **Immediate Industry Impact:** * **Taxation**: Schedule III eliminates IRS 280E penalty preventing state-legal businesses from deducting expenses (rent, payroll) * **Banking/Investment**: Expected to push Nasdaq/NYSE to reconsider listing U.S. cannabis companies and advance SAFER Banking Act **Bottom Line:** Order strategically timed for immediate financial relief and uses executive pressure to clear bureaucratic backlog.

AmDazed

You nailed it. The reason companies can fight for past tax money is that IRS Section 280E is a specific tax penalty tied to the Schedule. Since the "science" (the HHS review) now officially states that marijuana has medical use and was misclassified, companies argue that 280E was applied in error. Because tax years can be "re-opened" through amended returns or protective claims, they can legally claw back cash. (Note, before I get trolled: This is different than it would be for criminal offenses.)

AmDazed

Actually, this is one of those times an EO actually can do what it says. It isn't starting something new; it’s directing Pam Bondi to complete a process that Biden started that got stalled in bureaucracy. The HHS medical review and the 43,000 public comments are already 100% finished and part of the legal record. All that’s left is for the AG to sign the Final Rule, which she’s legally allowed to do and will obviously be happy to do for Trump to get him a 'Day 1' win. Once she signs, the 280E tax barrier falls automatically. We aren't waiting for a study or a review; we're just waiting for Bondi's signature.

AmDazed

Actually, this is one of those times an EO actually can do what it says. It isn't starting something new; it’s directing Pam Bondi to complete a process that Biden started that got stalled in bureaucracy. The HHS medical review and the 43,000 public comments are already 100% finished and part of the legal record. All that’s left is for the AG to sign the Final Rule, which she’s legally allowed to do and will obviously be happy to do for Trump to get him a 'Day 1' win. Once she signs, the 280E tax barrier falls automatically. We aren't waiting for a study or a review; we're just waiting for Bondi's signature.

GeoLogic23

Nothing has actually happened yet, and Trump is just having them sign off on the Biden HHS recommendation. Without Biden this wouldn't be happening.

K_t_ice

The main point is that the major work is done already, HHS prepared the science that recommends S3 and now it just needs final sign off from Bondi.

Many_Easy

I already gave Tang credit numerous times today for actually following through on S3 EO. I also gave credit to Biden for starting the HHS review.

AmDazed

She *could* wait, but why would she? This isn't a holdover from the last administration that she’s reluctantly finishing—today's EO effectively 're-branded' rescheduling as a Trump/Bondi priority. Here is why the signature is likely days, not months away: 1. **The 'Common Sense' Branding:** The President just stood in the Oval Office and called this 'common sense' for veterans and seniors. Bondi isn't going to let that headline go stale by sitting on it for 90 days. 2. **Administrative Cleanup:** The EO specifically directs her to 'cancel' the stalled Biden-era hearings. That was the only legal logjam. Since the 43,000 public comments and the HHS medical review are already in the bag, the 'work' is done. 3. **The Hemp/CBD Tie-in:** The EO also links this to Medicare coverage for CBD (starting April 2026). For that to work, the rescheduling needs to be finalized now to clear the legal path for the HHS to build those research models. In the cannabis world, we're used to 'Soon', but this is the first time we’ve had a President and an AG on the same page with a direct order to 'expedite and complete.'

Resi86

We don’t need to repeat the HHS review though. Biden already got it to the 1 yard line. He’s ordering expediting the completion of the process. I disagree

Resi86

I think people are mistakenly viewing this as a repeat of the timeline that Biden already covered. No, the HHS will not need to make a new recommendation, he simply states that the AG will expedite the completion of the rescheduling process. I see how some view this as an indefinitive and uncertain timeline, but I view it as getting done in the near term, but at the latest with ample time leading up to the midterms. I don’t believe the GOP would campaign on this issue though, so it wouldn’t make sense to leave it till the midterms.

AverageNo130

If they don't get it, get em out of Congress. This is science, health, HHS approval and now S3. Not their backward politics.

GeoLogic23

Biden told the **HHS to initiate** the process of reviewing cannabis. >Third, I am asking the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Attorney General to initiate the administrative process to review expeditiously how marijuana is scheduled under federal law. That completed, and the the HHS recommended Schedule 3 to the DEA. Why are you complaining about executive orders? This process started immediately and the HHS did their recommendation. Exactly what it would've done if it was an executive order, or just him saying pretty please. Trump just did an executive order for the **DEA to finalize** the recommendation provided by the Biden administration. Trump is directing the DEA to finish, while Biden directed the HHS to start. The President can't reschedule a drug, whether through executive order or not. If Biden hadn't done this in 2022 there would be no way for Trump to tell the DEA to finalize Schedule 3. We wouldn't even know what schedule the DEA was considering, because there wouldn't have been an HHS review performed.

pearlCatillac

You might be right. On paper this is a nothingburger, but… For anyone not following the budget drama: Congress basically handcuffed DOJ earlier this year. House Republicans—specifically Appropriations—jammed a poison pill into the spending bills that flat-out says: “None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to reschedule marijuana.” No money means no staff time, no rulemaking, no nothing. The DEA is just staring at an empty stapler. But now things are a little different: • An EO can’t print money, but it can bully the people who do. When Biden pushed this, he was dealing with a GOP House actively trying to kill it. Now the guy signing the order is the head of that party. Trump just told Mike Johnson: “This is my win now.” It’s a lot harder for a MAGA Republican to block funding when it makes their president look weak. • By tasking RFK Jr. at HHS and Pam Bondi at DOJ with “expediting” this, Trump is clearly laying groundwork for a workaround. The argument will be that the research is already done, so no new spending is required—Congress just needs to stop actively slamming the door. • This isn’t being framed as “weed for stoners.” It’s Medicare, insurance coverage for CBD, and help for veterans. That makes the funding block politically radioactive. Explaining to voters that you’re blocking “cheaper meds for Grandma” just to keep a 50-year-old drug law alive is a bad look. It’s a nothingburger today because the bank account is frozen. But that EO is basically a flare gun aimed straight at the Appropriations Committee. If that no-funds language disappears in January, this gets very real, very fast.

GeoLogic23

What happened today is because of the Democrats lol Notice how Trump is just directing them to finalize rescheduling? There would be anything to finalize if Biden didn't already have his HHS do all the actual work. Good job for Trump for telling them to move on it after he also sat on it for a year, but let's not forget the only reason this is happening is because of Biden. Schumer has nothing to do with this. Rescheduling never had even the slightest chance to go through Congress. They won't even pass SAFE.

KAI5ER

Once the executive order is signed, it does not immediately reschedule cannabis but formally directs the DOJ and DEA to finish the process. The Attorney General transmits that order to the DEA, which then completes final rulemaking. Because public comments are already done, HHS has already recommended Schedule III, and OIRA review has already occurred, the DEA’s remaining step is largely administrative. It publishes a final rule in the Federal Register and sets an effective date, typically 30 to 60 days later. When that date hits, cannabis officially moves to Schedule III, triggering the real impact, including the end of 280E tax penalties, federal recognition of medical use, and easier access to research, with broader banking, institutional investment, and uplisting effects beginning to unfold afterward.

randomusername0000

The dump is artificial, this is what's mentioned in the briefing before the signing today. * Direct the attorney general to expedite the completion of the process of rescheduling marijuana to Schedule III of the CSA. * Direct top White House staff to work with Congress to give patients access to full-spectrum CBD products, “while still restricting the sale and access to products that cause serious and potentially life threatening health risks.” * Urge Congress to examine updating the definition of hemp to ensure that full-spectrum CBD is accessible to patients—a policy change that could mitigate some concerns in the sector about a recent spending bill Trump signed with provisions that would broadly ban consumable hemp products. * Direct the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to “develop research methods and models, to utilize real world evidence \[and\] to improve access to hemp-derived CBD products in accordance with federal law” while informing “standards of care.”

randomusername0000

If you want to sell, sell. But here's what were getting today. Which is huge. * **Direct the attorney general to expedite the completion of the process of rescheduling marijuana to Schedule III of the CSA.** * Direct top White House staff to work with Congress to give patients access to full-spectrum CBD products, “while still restricting the sale and access to products that cause serious and potentially life threatening health risks.” * Urge Congress to examine updating the definition of hemp to ensure that full-spectrum CBD is accessible to patients—a policy change that could mitigate some concerns in the sector about a recent spending bill Trump signed with provisions that would broadly ban consumable hemp products. * Direct the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to “develop research methods and models, to utilize real world evidence \[and\] to improve access to hemp-derived CBD products in accordance with federal law” while informing “standards of care.”

randomusername0000

Nope. Happening, includes all of this but rumor is doesn't mention anything about safe banking, which he has no control over, that's on congress. Take it as it is, I'm happy AF about it. * Direct the attorney general to expedite the completion of the process of rescheduling marijuana to Schedule III of the CSA. * Direct top White House staff to work with Congress to give patients access to full-spectrum CBD products, “while still restricting the sale and access to products that cause serious and potentially life threatening health risks.” * Urge Congress to examine updating the definition of hemp to ensure that full-spectrum CBD is accessible to patients—a policy change that could mitigate some concerns in the sector about a recent spending bill Trump signed with provisions that would broadly ban consumable hemp products. * Direct the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to “develop research methods and models, to utilize real world evidence \[and\] to improve access to hemp-derived CBD products in accordance with federal law” while informing “standards of care.”

UsedState7381

EO leaked on Marijuana Moment. Details: Orders the AG to finalize the rescheduling process to schedule 3. No details on Safe Banking, no details on Uplisting. >Direct the attorney general to expedite the completion of the process of rescheduling marijuana to Schedule III of the CSA. >Direct top White House staff to work with Congress to give patients access to full-spectrum CBD products, “while still restricting the sale and access to products that cause serious and potentially life threatening health risks.” >Urge Congress to examine updating the definition of hemp to ensure that full-spectrum CBD is accessible to patients—a policy change that could mitigate some concerns in the sector about a recent spending bill Trump signed with provisions that would broadly ban consumable hemp products. >Direct the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to “develop research methods and models, to utilize real world evidence [and] to improve access to hemp-derived CBD products in accordance with federal law” while informing “standards of care.” >Separate from Trump’s order, Mehmet Oz, administrator for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), will also be announcing “a model that will allow a number of CMS beneficiaries to benefit from receiving CBD under doctor recommendation at no cost,” the White House official said. Not everything about the EO has been leaked, but I would NOT assume it's much beyond this. Brace for dips.

volckerwasright

MMoment - Here are new details about Trump’s executive order on cannabis: Direct the attorney general to expedite the completion of the process of rescheduling marijuana to Schedule III of the CSA. Direct top White House staff to work with Congress to give patients access to full-spectrum CBD products, “while still restricting the sale and access to products that cause serious and potentially life threatening health risks.” Urge Congress to examine updating the definition of hemp to ensure that full-spectrum CBD is accessible to patients—a policy change that could mitigate some concerns in the sector about a recent spending bill Trump signed with provisions that would broadly ban consumable hemp products. Direct the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to “develop research methods and models, to utilize real world evidence [and] to improve access to hemp-derived CBD products in accordance with federal law” while informing “standards of care.”

KAI5ER

under "view profile" (PC) Unfortunately I think its a sell the news event. Comparable to the HHS S3 recommendation, but I'm going to hold on as I've been proven wrong more often than correct.

GeoLogic23

He can't change a drug schedule through an Executive Order. This Executive Order would just be directing the DEA to finalize the HHS review. If they didn't already have an HHS recommendation on their desk, he couldn't be doing an Executive Order to make cannabis Schedule 3. Executive Orders are just directives to take certain actions. You can't direct them to take actions they don't have the ability to do.

Competitive-Ant2876

That’s literally crumbs. HHS time it was always 7-8mill, 2019-2021 it was also consistently around 7-8mill.

Ok-Replacement9595

So he will order a new HHS review, like Biden, then take credit for it when it comes back done? I could totally see that narcissist doing that.

Many_Easy

- FFS - false equivalence logical fallacy - incorrect information as Joe Biden started S3 process with HHS - assumptions in many of your comments such as the part about pandering - DOJ is supposed to be an independent department

ivigilanteblog

> I could very much see a scenario where the EO is “I’m forcing congress to look at this”  He can't *force* Congress to do much of anything, but this is sort of what I'm hoping for. Our best-case scenario, which is incredibly unrealistic IMO, is just a direct order to the AG to deschedule cannabis, permitting time for Congress to update related laws and the FDA to issue regulations. The stocks will go absolutely nuts if this happens, because nobody expects it. Our best-case *realistic* scenario is basically what you said: an executive order to reschedule to S3 and a statement that he either wants Congress to look into descheduling/legalizing, or a statement that he is forming a descheduling commission of sorts to propose rules for that purpose. I give this decent odds, but I'm not confident he'll take it this far. Our most realistic scenario is that he will just order the AG to continue the process of rescheduling to S3, bypassing the DEA process (which is *not* mandatory, since Congress delegated the authority to schedule drugs to the AG; they have just traditionally deferred to DEA and, more recently, the combined recommendations of HHS and DEA). Our worst-case scenario, other than absolutely nothing occurring, is an order that does something like reschedule to S2. We'd likely crash as a result.

GeoLogic23

Dude, Trump is just signing off on Biden's HHS review that started in late 2022. So it did happen three years ago. The only reason what Trump is doing is possible is because of what Biden already did during the second half of his term. If Biden hadn't already done the review we wouldn't be talking about Schedule 3 at all. We'd have no idea what Schedule. But since his administration put in the work we have an HHS recommendation for Schedule 3 sitting on the DEA desk. Trump is just saying "hey sign off on that". Could Biden have forced the DEA to sign off on it immediately? Probably. Though that's a terrible idea to have the President do that. Who knows if we could get a President that is for prohibition. This is all Executive Branch stuff though. The issues in Congress are a separate discussion. But Biden, for all his faults, is literally the only person to have taken concrete action on cannabis by getting us the Schedule 3 recommendation. Credit to Trump if he signs off on it, but he's taking credit for the Biden admin's work.

UsedState7381

MSOS at $55.21 would be enough to me to buy my own house and get a cool ass car to celebrate...But that would be for later though. I'm so fucking grateful for being able to jump on this train only after the HHS rescheduling letter leak in 2023, and massively averaging down back in the dumps between February all the way to July this year.

1_FCKTRD

As the leader of the U.S. federal government's executive branch, President Trump controls the branch's narrative surrounding marijuana rescheduling through his appointments to the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). I understand that everyone, myself included, suffers from PTSD when it comes to any type of marijuana legislation. Ten years is a long time to wait for common-sense legislation. The following timeline details the executive branch's involvement in the reclassification of marijuana. On October 6, 2022, President Biden directed federal agencies to "expedite the review" of marijuana's classification. On August 29, 2023, the director of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) made a formal recommendation to reclassify marijuana. On March 15, 2024, Vice President Kamala Harris hosted a White House roundtable discussion on marijuana with Fat Joe, during which she questioned why the DEA Director was taking so long to publish. On May 21, 2024, the Department of Justice published the proposed rule in the Federal Register, opening a public comment period that ended in July 2024. On December 2, 2024, the preliminary administrative hearing for the proposed rescheduling of marijuana was held. On January 21, 2025, the evidentiary hearings were canceled pending an interlocutory appeal. The appeal arose from allegations that the DEA was biased and communicated improperly with those opposed to rescheduling. On August 1, 2025, Judge Mulroney retired, leaving the DEA without an administrative law judge to preside over the case. On August 11, 2025, President Trump said his administration was looking into the matter and would have an update in a few weeks. On September 28, 2025, President Trump posted a video declaring CBD a "game-changer" that could revolutionize senior healthcare by alleviating pain, promoting better sleep, and reducing stress. On December 15, 2025, President Trump announced that he was strongly considering rescheduling marijuana. On ........... you fill in the blanks.

GeoLogic23

Biden actually started this process, and his HHS did a comprehensive review and recommended S3. But Trump is the "only person" to do anything even though he hasn't even done anything yet? How does this make sense?

GeoLogic23

Democrats are the only reason there is anything for Trump to direct the DEA to finalize... Trump would just be directing them to sign off on the work done by Biden's HHS because of Biden's executive order. Trump again doing no work, and taking the credit. With comments like yours helping his PR. We have more than just Schedule 3 we need. We need Congress to do several things. Ignoring who has gotten us to where we are will just set us up to be taken advantage of in the future. Congressional Republicans have been openly hostile to high dose cannabis products.

ShittyUsernane1222

A simple question. Do you think 🥭 is really that enthusiastic about hiring scientists when he put rfk.jr as HHS secretary. They are going to hire rfk. jr's of machine learning.

SwordfishOk504

I think people expecting it this coming week may be disappointed. While CNBC ran an article that said "as soon as Monday", the original WaPo article gave no indication of timeline and Axios reported it would be sometime next year. Also worth remember: The president cannot just wave his magical wand and make it rescheduled (or legal). What he is expected to do (and all he can do) is issue an executive order that directs federal agencies to pursue reclassification. This would be aimed at the DEA which is the agency that has been holding this process up since 2023 after HHS already approved it. If he issues this EO this would be huge news but would not actually change anything until if and when the DEA follows said order. So while markets will rally at said news, it won't actually benefit the sector for some times after. Which means, imo, that the time to take profits would be fairly soon (days) after that news while all the normies else jumps in after the news.

Methodill

The image you sent appears to be a screenshot of a Reddit post, likely from the r/pennystocks subreddit, discussing a potential executive order (EO) related to marijuana rescheduling and CBD coverage, speculating on its impact on the "Cannabis-Industrial Complex." As of today, December 14, 2025, here is an assessment of the key claims mentioned in the post: 🔍 Marijuana Rescheduling Status The claim that "Trump marijuana rescheduling" is expected "Monday" or that he will "sign this EO" is highly speculative and based on rumors unless a specific official announcement has been made very recently, which is not confirmed as a fact. * The Process: Marijuana rescheduling is a complex, multi-agency process, not typically decided by a single Executive Order (EO) from the President alone. * In 2023, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recommended that the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) move marijuana from Schedule I to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). * The DEA is the final authority to decide whether to reschedule the drug after reviewing the HHS recommendation and conducting its own scientific and legal review. This process is time-consuming and its exact timeline is unknown. * The Claim: A post suggesting a market-moving event like this is set to happen on a specific "Monday" without citing a reliable source should be treated as speculation, especially when posted on a penny stock forum, which is known for hype. 🌿 CBD Coverage The post also mentions "CBD coverage." * CBD Status: Cannabidiol (CBD) derived from hemp (cannabis with less than 0.3\% THC) was federally legalized under the 2018 Farm Bill. * Coverage: However, there is still significant regulatory uncertainty regarding CBD's use in food, beverages, and dietary supplements, as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not fully established a clear regulatory pathway. "Coverage" (likely referring to insurance or broader market acceptance) would be indirectly affected by the FDA's eventual actions, which are separate from the DEA's rescheduling process. 💼 Impact on the Cannabis Industry The post claims this action would "set in motion a cascade of follow-on catalysts." * Rescheduling Impact: Moving marijuana to Schedule III would be a massive change. * It would mainly impact taxation, making cannabis businesses eligible for normal business tax deductions (as they would no longer be subject to the IRS's Section 280E rule). This would significantly boost profitability. * It would also reduce some federal penalties and potentially open the door for more scientific research. * Profitability Barrier: The post correctly identifies that legislative/regulatory uncertainty (especially regarding interstate commerce, banking, and 280E taxation) has been a primary barrier to industry profitability. Rescheduling to Schedule III would solve the tax issue, which is a major profitability hurdle. 🎯 Conclusion The core claim that marijuana rescheduling would be a "HUGE symbolic effect" that addresses the industry's "primary barrier to growth and profitability" (280E taxes) is analytically sound. However, the specific timeframe and the notion of a President signing a definitive "EO" to complete the rescheduling on a given day are unverified and highly suspect hype. In summary, treat the post as: * True on the premise: Rescheduling to Schedule III would be a massive positive catalyst for the industry. * False/Unverified on the specifics: There is no confirmed, reliable information that a final rescheduling EO will be signed on "Monday" or that the process is complete. Would you like me to look up any official statements or news from the DEA regarding the status of marijuana rescheduling?

GeoLogic23

No he can't. This would just be directing the DEA to sign off on the HHS review. Trump can't just sign an EO and change the the schedule of a drug to whatever he wants. Why bother having Congress deal with Fentanyl scheduling if Trump could have just signed an EO and taken the credit?

Many_Easy

You’re likely correct. Also remember that most of us thought (as in fact) that an HHS recommendation meant a quick rubber stamp by the DEA according to existing laws.

Critical_Concert_689

Not that I believe you, personally, are literate - but for any other reader who is interested in a source. https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/scheduling-recommendation.pdf > On October 6, 2022, President Joseph R. Biden released a statement asking the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Attorney General “to initiate the administrative process to review expeditiously how marijuana is scheduled under federal law.” tl;dr: There's a significant number of required administrative steps in order to reschedule illicit substances - the process usually takes anywhere from 3 to 5 years to complete. Biden expedited ("expeditiously") the process and it was scheduled to complete in early 2025, but was then delayed due to DOGE placing much of the administrative staff required to process these changes on leave - and then the gov shutdown further delayed the completion. Should Trump not *directly and intentionally* interfere with this process, the reschedule will automatically complete by early 2026.

Tiaan

Well technically the actual rescheduling will have been a 4+ year long administrative process backed by a 252 page HHS report. This EO is just Trump telling his DEA head and AG to issue the final rule and complete the process

Electrical_You_7615

Agreed - more importantly… it is insane to think the Trump is the person doing this….  Think back to watching the HHS recommendation die when we found out he was getting elected.  Let’s just be grateful - most of us have been through a great deal of stress and deserve a win.  But agree with the points made below, have a strategy, pigs get slaughtered.  

Spirited-Print-1097

Ironically we have a junkie as the head of HHS now.

no-snoots-unbooped

Biden initiated rescheduling in October 2022. HHS agrees with the Biden administration’s recommendation, and it’s up to the DEA for final approval. The DEA has just say on it since there’s no deadline.

no-snoots-unbooped

Biden initiated it in October of 2022. HHS approved the recommendation to reschedule and sent it to the DEA who has final approval. The DEA has sat on it since.

King_Chron

**📊 280E Tax Relief – Cannabis MSO Estimates (Rescheduling → Schedule III)** Rescheduling could remove 280E, letting companies deduct normal expenses. Analyst research (Zuanic, Water Tower, Whitney) shows potential annual savings: |Company|2025 Revenue|Est. 280E Savings| |:-|:-|:-| |Curaleaf (CURLF)|$1.3–1.5B|$150–200M| |Trulieve (TCNNF)|$1.1–1.3B|$120–180M| |Green Thumb (GTBIF)|$1.0–1.2B|$100–150M| |Verano (VRNOF)|$900–1,000M|$80–120M| |Cresco (CRLBF)|$800–900M|$70–100M| |Jushi (JUSHF)|$250–500M|Up to \~$514M| |Cannabist / Columbia Care|$300–360M|$35–50M| |Planet 13 (PLNHF)|$95–110M|$9–15M| |MariMed (MRMD)|$150–180M|$15–25M| **Takeaways:** * Total U.S. MSO tax savings could reach **$2–3B+ annually**. * Largest absolute beneficiaries: Curaleaf, Trulieve, Green Thumb. * High % upside: Jushi, Planet 13, MariMed. * Retroactive refunds are speculative; cash depends on DEA/HHS action & IRS guidance.

King_Chron

**Trump Cannabis EO Leak (Dec 11, 2025)** WaPo reports Trump is preparing an **executive order directing HHS + DEA to move marijuana to Schedule III**. This would **end 280E**, recognize medical use, and align with Biden’s 2024 rescheduling push. White House says “no final decision yet,” but sources expect announcement soon. **Market / Sentiment:** * X: **#TrumpWeed** trending (500k+ mentions). * $MSOS up **8% after-hours**. * Reddit: 65% positive, heavy hype around **280E tax relief**. * Industry-wide benefit: **$2–3B/yr** in saved taxes. # Big Winners if Schedule III happens (280E gone) **Company | 2025 Rev | Est. Annual 280E Savings | Impact** * **Curaleaf** – $1.4B | $150–200M | Major cash unlock * **Green Thumb** – $1.1B | $100–150M | Margins 25%+ * **Trulieve** – $1.2B | $120–180M | Huge FCF reversal * **Verano** – $950M | $80–120M | Major EBITDA lift * **Cresco** – $850M | $70–100M | Debt relief + expansion * **Jushi** – \~$260M | $25–35M | Big % improvement * **Cannabist (Columbia Care)** – \~$350M | $35–50M | Margin recovery * **Planet 13** – \~$95M | $9–14M | Small cap, high % benefit * **Marimed** – \~$160M | $15–25M | Thin margins → strongest lift **Why it’s huge:** * Current effective tax rates are **60–70%** for many operators. * Schedule III removes 280E → normal 21–30% corporate tax. * Every MSO becomes more profitable **instantly** once the rule is finalized. **Bottom line:** If this EO drops and DEA confirms Schedule III, this becomes the **biggest single catalyst** the industry has ever had. Massive for MSOs and cash-strapped tier-2 players. 🚀

King_Chron

**Trump Cannabis EO Leak (Dec 11, 2025)** WaPo reports Trump is preparing an **executive order directing HHS + DEA to move marijuana to Schedule III**. This would **end 280E**, recognize medical use, and align with Biden’s 2024 rescheduling push. White House says “no final decision yet,” but sources expect announcement soon. **Market / Sentiment:** * X: **#TrumpWeed** trending (500k+ mentions). * $MSOS up **8% after-hours**. * Reddit: 65% positive, heavy hype around **280E tax relief**. * Industry-wide benefit: **$2–3B/yr** in saved taxes. # Big Winners if Schedule III happens (280E gone) **Company | 2025 Rev | Est. Annual 280E Savings | Impact** * **Curaleaf** – $1.4B | $150–200M | Major cash unlock * **Green Thumb** – $1.1B | $100–150M | Margins 25%+ * **Trulieve** – $1.2B | $120–180M | Huge FCF reversal * **Verano** – $950M | $80–120M | Major EBITDA lift * **Cresco** – $850M | $70–100M | Debt relief + expansion * **Jushi** – \~$260M | $25–35M | Big % improvement * **Cannabist (Columbia Care)** – \~$350M | $35–50M | Margin recovery * **Planet 13** – \~$95M | $9–14M | Small cap, high % benefit * **Marimed** – \~$160M | $15–25M | Thin margins → strongest lift **Why it’s huge:** * Current effective tax rates are **60–70%** for many operators. * Schedule III removes 280E → normal 21–30% corporate tax. * Every MSO becomes more profitable **instantly** once the rule is finalized. **Bottom line:** If this EO drops and DEA confirms Schedule III, this becomes the **biggest single catalyst** the industry has ever had. Massive for MSOs and cash-strapped tier-2 players. 🚀

King_Chron

**Trump Cannabis EO Leak (Dec 11, 2025)** WaPo reports Trump is preparing an **executive order directing HHS + DEA to move marijuana to Schedule III**. This would **end 280E**, recognize medical use, and align with Biden’s 2024 rescheduling push. White House says “no final decision yet,” but sources expect announcement soon. **Market / Sentiment:** * X: **#TrumpWeed** trending (500k+ mentions). * $MSOS up **8% after-hours**. * Reddit: 65% positive, heavy hype around **280E tax relief**. * Industry-wide benefit: **$2–3B/yr** in saved taxes. # Big Winners if Schedule III happens (280E gone) **Company | 2025 Rev | Est. Annual 280E Savings | Impact** * **Curaleaf** – $1.4B | $150–200M | Major cash unlock * **Green Thumb** – $1.1B | $100–150M | Margins 25%+ * **Trulieve** – $1.2B | $120–180M | Huge FCF reversal * **Verano** – $950M | $80–120M | Major EBITDA lift * **Cresco** – $850M | $70–100M | Debt relief + expansion * **Jushi** – \~$260M | $25–35M | Big % improvement * **Cannabist (Columbia Care)** – \~$350M | $35–50M | Margin recovery * **Planet 13** – \~$95M | $9–14M | Small cap, high % benefit * **Marimed** – \~$160M | $15–25M | Thin margins → strongest lift **Why it’s huge:** * Current effective tax rates are **60–70%** for many operators. * Schedule III removes 280E → normal 21–30% corporate tax. * Every MSO becomes more profitable **instantly** once the rule is finalized. **Bottom line:** If this EO drops and DEA confirms Schedule III, this becomes the **biggest single catalyst** the industry has ever had. Massive for MSOs and cash-strapped tier-2 players. 🚀

dissentmemo

Biden initiated a formal process to move marijuana from a Schedule I to a Schedule III drug under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), though the change was not finalized. This process is ongoing and involves several steps, including a public comment period and an administrative hearing. In October 2022, President Biden directed the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) to review marijuana's scheduling. Trump would be completing Biden's changes.

GeoLogic23

If Biden hadn't already done things the "right way" then Trump would have to ask the HHS to start the rescheduling review process, because that's all he has the power to do. Fortunately for him Biden did already do things the "right way" so Trump's agencies can now do zero work and still take all the credit. You criticizing Biden for doing things the right way is a great example of what is wrong with our current politics. Biden actually following procedures is why this is even possible to be happening. But all people care about is the final headline. Not what it actually takes to create policy in our government. I know the GOP has done a lot of work to de-legitimize regulatory bodies. But most of these strict procedures are there for very important reasons. Many of our regulations are written in the blood of the people who died because they didn't exist. The billionaires in this country will sacrifice the blue collar workers in a heartbeat if it makes them a few extra % gains. This should never even be in the hands of the DEA, but the GOP have refused to do anything whatsoever in Congress. What I really want is for Congress to reclaim their authority. They should have solved this problem years ago. But the GOP have convinced people they are for "small government" when they really mean "small Congress and BIG executive branch".

SavageApricot37

Trump cant "legalize it" with executive order. He can only direct HHS and DOJ to reschedule, deschedule or de-prioritize prosecution. Congress and judiciary can counteract these actions. Congress has already shown by closing loopholes in the 2018 Farm Bill that they do not want to see it legalized or controlls reduced. Also, bottom line, he never once said he would "legalize it"...ever.

Imaginary_Rooster622

According to AI: Sara Carter is the nominee for the Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), a role known informally as the "drug czar". She has not yet been confirmed by the full Senate. If confirmed, she would be involved in cannabis policy discussions, but the authority to make changes to federal cannabis scheduling rests with the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), not the ONDCP Director.

douggilmour93

$AI 40% float short $AI AI), the Enterprise AI application software company, today announced that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has selected C3 AI to create a unified, secure, and scalable data foundation across the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS).

RexSueciae

Eh, I put a few dollars into Moderna stock a while back. I figured that with RFK Jr and company at HHS, there'd be a bunch of government shitting on vaccines and whatnot, which would temporarily depress the share price but eventually it'd go back up because they're doing neat things and the next presidential administration won't be full of antivaxx weirdos. But that's just me. Six of one, half dozen of the other.

C_B_Doyle

Congress can pass a simple statutory directive ordering the DEA to remove cannabis from Schedule I within a fixed window, and because scheduling authority ultimately comes from the Controlled Substances Act, lawmakers can override the agency with a single amendment that bypasses the slow administrative process. Once removed from Schedule I, the FDA immediately gains freedom to run full clinical evaluations, allowing cannabis to enter the same medical review pipeline used for any other therapeutic, which reshapes how investors view long-term regulatory clarity. A congressional mandate would also trigger automatic coordination between the DEA, FDA, and HHS, because descheduling forces these agencies into a compliance posture rather than a discretionary one, eliminating the political bottleneck that normally stalls progress. That fast alignment is exactly what markets tend to reward, since it takes the uncertainty premium off U.S. cannabis operators and opens the door for mainstream institutions that have been waiting for a clear federal rule. Once the FDA enters the picture with formal pathways, insurers can legally reimburse cannabis-based treatments through standard medical benefit structures, and hospitals or major retail pharmacies can dispense products sourced from established operators. That shift converts cannabis from a fragmented state-only model into a federal healthcare product, positioning companies like MRMD, CURLF, and TCNNF to plug directly into the national distribution chains they’ve been structurally built for. Congress can also attach descheduling to a broader health or appropriations bill, a tactic used constantly to move policy changes without relying on standalone votes. That approach makes passage much easier, because it folds cannabis into routine legislative cycles, sidestepping headline political fights and letting the reform ride through on a must-pass vehicle—something markets interpret as near-guaranteed execution once language is included. All of this creates a straightforward pathway: congressional directive → DEA compliance → FDA evaluation → insurance coverage → mainstream pharmacy distribution → national scale for operators. For lawmakers, it’s one of the cleanest federal reforms available; for the sector, it’s a regulatory unlock that allows U.S. cannabis stocks to function like normal consumer-health companies instead of siloed state-restricted plays.

georgecopafeel

JUST IN: Elon Musk has announced that xAI will now begin designing their own custom chips to compete with NVIDIA and Google. He claims that the new "XPUs", to be released in Q1 of 2026, will be 6-7 times faster than GPUs and will be "free from all woke ideology." RFK Jr. immediately chimed in and lauded XPUs as "the most promising cure for autism" and that he has directed the HHS to begin investigating fast-tracking its FDA approval. NVIDIA also responded, releasing a brief statement: "We are delighted for xAI’s success — however, we’d like to remind investors that GPUs are, as of yesterday, now two generations ahead of the industry."

theduderino38

HHS already did their part and confirmed medical use - just waiting on other executive branch and or Congress to do anything….

theduderino38

HHS already confirmed medical use and I’m not holding my breath for Congress to do anything proactive here….

C_B_Doyle

Congress could require the DEA to move cannabis out of Schedule I within 90 days, instantly opening the door for a full scientific review. Once it’s descheduled, the FDA would run a complete evaluation—clinical data, therapeutic applications, dosing ranges, safety profiles, manufacturing standards, purity requirements, and how cannabis fits into existing classes of regulated medicines. HHS would take those findings and issue a formal medical determination, creating a nationally recognized foundation for regulated therapeutic use. That shift unlocks insurance coverage because FDA and HHS recognition allows CMS and private insurers to treat cannabis like any other approved treatment. Hospitals, integrated health networks, and major pharmacy chains could then stock and dispense standardized, FDA-compliant formulations. Operators like MRMD, CURLF, and TCNNF—already functioning in tightly regulated state systems—could transition into federally compliant production, scaling supply across state lines and eventually into international medical markets under unified standards. The sequence becomes: Congress directs DEA → DEA deschedules → FDA defines medical standards → HHS certifies medical use → insurers reimburse → pharmacies and hospitals dispense → regulated producers supply a national and global market.

Ok-Needleworker1964

You are better to buy puts on Semler Scientific SMLR they are also leveraged bitcoin play but unlike MSTR are way overvalued. They have basically gave up on their medical business and have secured financing to buy BTC above 100k and have excessive legal costs i have done some basic research see below Legal actions and expected cash costs - DOJ/HHS settlement: A large, near-term cash obligation (commonly cited around the low‑$30M range). Timing in late 2025 tightened liquidity precisely as operating performance was weakening. - Class actions and defense costs: Additional exposure likely in the mid‑eight figures when combining potential damages and defense/admin expenses. Even if ultimate damages land lower, cash defense costs are real and front‑loaded. - Merger-related litigation: Incremental legal spend adds friction to already limited cash resources, raising the aggregate legal burden. - Bear implication: Legal cash outflows arrive ahead of or regardless of operating recovery, creating forced liquidity events (BTC sales or financing) during unfavorable market windows. --- Bitcoin position and unrealized losses - Holdings concentration: BTC dominates the asset base; holdings scaled rapidly in 2025 via convertibles and ATM issuance. - Average purchase cost: New 2025 tranches clustered near the high‑$90Ks to ~$100K per BTC. That’s materially above long‑run Bitcoin acquisition averages seen at peers. - Current mark vs. cost: At BTC in the mid‑$80Ks USD, unrealized losses accumulate in the tens of millions (commonly estimated around $50M–$65M depending on tranche weighting and exact holdings). - Earnings impact: Fair‑value changes run through the P&L, adding volatility and potential headline risk when BTC trades below cost basis. - Bear implication: High-cost BTC plus fair‑value accounting amplifies drawdowns, weakens reported results, and increases the chance of selling into weakness to meet cash needs. --- Insider sales and governance signals - Insider selling: Management has filed and executed notable sales, including authorizations suggesting intent to reduce exposure. - Ownership concentration: Institutions dominate the float; concentrated holders can accelerate downside via block sales or reduced support. - Bear implication: Insider divestment during stress periods undermines confidence in near‑term recovery and increases perceived governance risk. --- Merger outlook and strategic execution risk - Likely failed merger narrative: Ongoing legal scrutiny, liquidity strain, and market skepticism point to low probability of successful, value‑accretive merger execution. - Integration and distraction risk: Even if a deal were pursued, legal overhangs and treasury volatility impair focus and balance‑sheet flexibility. - Bear implication: Without merger relief, Semler remains a leveraged BTC proxy with shrinking healthcare revenue contribution, limiting strategic optionality. --- Cash flow profile and liquidity stress - Operating revenue vs. expenses: Healthcare revenue trends are soft; quarterly revenue (~single‑digit millions) has been barely covering operating expenses (SG&A + R&D + COGS). - Cash balance: Around ~$10M mid‑2025, insufficient for legal settlements plus ongoing operations. - Debt service: Convertible notes at 4.25% imply ~$4.25M annual interest, paid semiannually (~$2.125M). With conversion far out‑of‑the‑money, cash repayment obligation persists. - Runway math: Combining operating burn, interest, and legal outflows yields > $50M cash need in H2 2025 into early 2026, far exceeding on‑hand cash. - Bear implication: Liquidity gap necessitates asset sales (BTC), further dilution (ATM), or expensive refinancing—each negative for equity holders. --- Debt structure and creditor dynamics - Instrument: Convertible senior notes due 2030, issued to fund BTC acquisitions, held by institutional buyers. - Conversion economics: Initial conversion near ~$76/share; with stock around ~$19, conversion is deeply out‑of‑the‑money. - Creditor options: Hold for coupon, trade notes at a discount if credit risk rises, or negotiate early exchanges/buybacks if liquidity tightens. - Bear implication: Equity is structurally subordinated to cash debt service; in stress, creditors gain leverage while equity faces dilution or forced BTC sales. --- Likely BTC sales to meet obligations - Estimated liquidation need (Jul 2025–Jan 2026): Roughly ~625–720 BTC at an average ~$86.5K price to fund interest, operating expenses, and legal settlement cash calls, assuming minimal external financing. - Sensitivity: At $80K BTC, sales rise toward ~750–800 BTC; at $90K BTC, sales could drop toward ~600 BTC. - Bear implication: Forced selling into weakness compounds unrealized losses, reduces treasury optionality, and may trigger negative feedback loops in reported results. --- Bear thesis triggers and monitoring signals - Near-term cash events: Confirmation of payment timing for large settlements; any 8‑K signaling added financing or asset sales. - Debt market signals: Pricing of the convertibles in secondary markets; indications of exchange offers or covenant pressure. - Insider and institutional flows: Additional insider selling; large holders reducing positions. - BTC price sensitivity: Sustained trading below the company’s blended cost increases P&L volatility and liquidation needs. - Operational traction: Any continued decline in healthcare revenue widens the cash burn and heightens reliance on treasury maneuvers. --- Counterpoints to pressure-test the thesis - BTC rally: A sustained move above the company’s blended cost (~$100K) flips unrealized losses to gains, improving optics and potentially enabling opportunistic financing. - Financing access: Successful, non‑punitive refinancing or sizable ATM proceeds could bridge cash needs without heavy BTC sales. - Legal resolution below expectations: Lower-than-feared damages or extended payment schedules reduce immediate liquidity strain. --- Bottom line The bear case centers on stacked liquidity stress: high-cost BTC with sizable unrealized losses, insider selling, a weak probability of merger relief, and legal cash outflows colliding with limited operating cash and debt service obligations. In practice, that means ongoing BTC sales, dilution via ATM, or costly refinancing—each unfavorable for equity holders unless BTC materially rallies or legal burdens ease.

Ok-Needleworker1964

Did some reseach and found below info .... not looking good unless taking on more debt or selling btc they dont have cash flow to pay legal costs Estimated legal exposure and bitcoin drawdown overview Below is a consolidated, best‑effort estimate of Semler Scientific’s current legal cost exposure (government settlement, class actions, and merger litigation) and the drawdown attributable to Bitcoin price movements, grounded in disclosed figures and typical ranges for comparable cases. --- Legal costs and damages requested - Government settlement (DOJ/HHS): - Amount: Approximately $30.1 million settlement finalized in September 2025. - Timing: Payment obligation within weeks of announcement; already committed, not contingent on court outcome. - Securities class actions (shareholder suits): - Nature: Damages for investor losses over the class period (March 10, 2021–April 15, 2025), plus interest, attorneys’ fees, and costs. - Requested amounts: Not disclosed in press notices; plaintiffs typically seek full loss recovery (purchase price minus “truth‑revealed” price), which can run into tens of millions, depending on trading volumes and claim participation. - Best‑estimate range (benchmarked): - If a modest participation rate and median loss figures apply, a settlement could plausibly fall in the $15–$40 million range (exclusive of defense costs), with wide uncertainty given overlapping suits and any insurance coverage. - Legal defense and administration costs frequently land at $5–$12 million across multi‑firm consolidated actions, depending on duration and discovery intensity. - Deadlines indicating scale: Multiple firms’ involvement and class period breadth suggest material exposure. - Merger litigation (injunctive/disciplinary relief): - Nature: Seeks to delay/block the merger or amend disclosures; compensatory damages are less typical than injunctive relief in deal challenges. - Best‑estimate costs: Legal fees for defense and potential settlement of disclosure claims often run low‑to‑mid single‑digit millions if resolved pre‑trial; highly variable and contingent on deal timing. - Note: This track adds incremental cost rather than headline damages unless a court awards rescissory damages (rare). Direct answer on totals - Committed government settlement: ~$30.1M. - Best‑estimate shareholder class action settlement + defense/admin costs: ~$20–$52M (wide range, case‑specific). - Merger litigation incremental defense/settlement costs: ~$2–$6M (estimate, contingent on resolution). - Aggregate ballpark (non‑binding): ~$52–$88M including the DOJ settlement, assuming mid‑range outcomes for securities class actions and merger litigation. This is an estimate, not a forecast, and could move meaningfully with case consolidation, insurance recoveries, and court rulings. > Sources: Press notices and deadlines for class actions; DOJ settlement reporting. --- Bitcoin holdings drawdown and sensitivity - Reported unrealized drawdown (Q1 2025): - Semler disclosed an unrealized loss of ~$41.8 million in Q1 2025 as Bitcoin fell roughly 12% over the quarter (from about $93,500 to $82,350). - The company noted holdings of ~3,182 BTC at quarter‑end in April filings. - Holdings expansion and later valuation (Q2 2025): - By Q2 2025, Semler reported 5,021 BTC with total value near $586.2 million and sizable unrealized gains later in the period. - This highlights the high sensitivity of earnings to BTC price swings. Practical sensitivity illustration (holding 5,021 BTC) - BTC −10%: Approximate mark‑to‑market loss of ~$58.6M (if starting from ~$586M portfolio value). - BTC −20%: ~$117.2M loss. - BTC −30%: ~$175.9M loss. - These are directional, period‑end fair‑value marks rather than realized cash losses; actual reported unrealized gains/losses will depend on precise period‑end prices and any interim purchases/sales. > Sources: Q2 2025 holdings and valuation; Q1 2025 unrealized loss and price movement. --- Context and implications - Earnings volatility: The Q1 2025 unrealized loss (~$41.8M) underscores that quarterly net income can be dominated by BTC marks rather than operations. - Balance sheet concentration: With 5,021 BTC reported and value near $586M, equity market perception and reported profit/loss are highly correlated with BTC price. - Legal cash demands vs. treasury strategy: A large government settlement (already committed) plus uncertain civil litigation could require cash or financing amid crypto volatility, tightening liquidity planning. --- Summary - Semler has a committed $30.1M DOJ/HHS settlement. - Shareholder class actions likely target tens of millions in damages; a reasonable consolidated estimate including defense and admin costs is ~$20–$52M, with merger‑litigation incremental costs ~$2–$6M, for a ballpark aggregate of ~$52–$88M. - Bitcoin drawdowns are substantial and recurring: a ~12% BTC drop in Q1 2025 generated an ~$41.8M unrealized loss when the firm held ~3,182 BTC, and with 5,021 BTC later valued at ~$586M, each 10% BTC move implies ~$58.6M swing in fair value.

Ok-Needleworker1964

Deep a bit deeper dive into company and found there were a number of legal issues including shareholder loss due to lack of disclosure and representation of information a DOJ settlement and on going legal disput on the merger. Also balance sheet cashflow issues in terms of having enough for settlement and legal disputes. They dont disclose sell of bitcoin but would imagine this will be required to meet ongoing operations using only public info and estimates i found the following: Estimated legal exposure and bitcoin drawdown overview Below is a consolidated, best‑effort estimate of Semler Scientific’s current legal cost exposure (government settlement, class actions, and merger litigation) and the drawdown attributable to Bitcoin price movements, grounded in disclosed figures and typical ranges for comparable cases Legal costs and damages requested - Government settlement (DOJ/HHS): - Amount: Approximately $30.1 million settlement finalized in September 2025. - Timing: Payment obligation within weeks of announcement; already committed, not contingent on court outcome. - Securities class actions (shareholder suits): - Nature: Damages for investor losses over the class period (March 10, 2021–April 15, 2025), plus interest, attorneys’ fees, and costs. - Requested amounts: Not disclosed in press notices; plaintiffs typically seek full loss recovery (purchase price minus “truth‑revealed” price), which can run into tens of millions, depending on trading volumes and claim participation. - Best‑estimate range (benchmarked): - If a modest participation rate and median loss figures apply, a settlement could plausibly fall in the $15–$40 million range (exclusive of defense costs), with wide uncertainty given overlapping suits and any insurance coverage. - Legal defense and administration costs frequently land at $5–$12 million across multi‑firm consolidated actions, depending on duration and discovery intensity. - Deadlines indicating scale: Multiple firms’ involvement and class period breadth suggest material exposure. - Merger litigation (injunctive/disciplinary relief): - Nature: Seeks to delay/block the merger or amend disclosures; compensatory damages are less typical than injunctive relief in deal challenges. - Best‑estimate costs: Legal fees for defense and potential settlement of disclosure claims often run low‑to‑mid single‑digit millions if resolved pre‑trial; highly variable and contingent on deal timing. - Note: This track adds incremental cost rather than headline damages unless a court awards rescissory damages (rare). Direct answer on totals - Committed government settlement: ~$30.1M. - Best‑estimate shareholder class action settlement + defense/admin costs: ~$20–$52M (wide range, case‑specific). - Merger litigation incremental defense/settlement costs: ~$2–$6M (estimate, contingent on resolution). - Aggregate ballpark (non‑binding): ~$52–$88M including the DOJ settlement, assuming mid‑range outcomes for securities class actions and merger litigation. This is an estimate, not a forecast, and could move meaningfully with case consolidation, insurance recoveries, and court rulings. > Sources: Press notices and deadlines for class actions; DOJ settlement reporting. Bitcoin holdings drawdown and sensitivity - Reported unrealized drawdown (Q1 2025): - Semler disclosed an unrealized loss of ~$41.8 million in Q1 2025 as Bitcoin fell roughly 12% over the quarter (from about $93,500 to $82,350). - The company noted holdings of ~3,182 BTC at quarter‑end in April filings. - Holdings expansion and later valuation (Q2 2025): - By Q2 2025, Semler reported 5,021 BTC with total value near $586.2 million and sizable unrealized gains later in the period. - This highlights the high sensitivity of earnings to BTC price swings. Practical sensitivity illustration (holding 5,021 BTC) - BTC −10%: Approximate mark‑to‑market loss of ~$58.6M (if starting from ~$586M portfolio value). - BTC −20%: ~$117.2M loss. - BTC −30%: ~$175.9M loss. - These are directional, period‑end fair‑value marks rather than realized cash losses; actual reported unrealized gains/losses will depend on precise period‑end prices and any interim purchases/sales. > Sources: Q2 2025 holdings and valuation; Q1 2025 unrealized loss and price movement. Context and implications - Earnings volatility: The Q1 2025 unrealized loss (~$41.8M) underscores that quarterly net income can be dominated by BTC marks rather than operations. - Balance sheet concentration: With 5,021 BTC reported and value near $586M, equity market perception and reported profit/loss are highly correlated with BTC price. - Legal cash demands vs. treasury strategy: A large government settlement (already committed) plus uncertain civil litigation could require cash or financing amid crypto volatility, tightening liquidity planning. Summary - Semler has a committed $30.1M DOJ/HHS settlement. - Shareholder class actions likely target tens of millions in damages; a reasonable consolidated estimate including defense and admin costs is ~$20–$52M, with merger‑litigation incremental costs ~$2–$6M, for a ballpark aggregate of ~$52–$88M. - Bitcoin drawdowns are substantial and recurring: a ~12% BTC drop in Q1 2025 generated an ~$41.8M unrealized loss when the firm held ~3,182 BTC, and with 5,021 BTC later valued at ~$586M, each 10% BTC move implies ~$58.6M swing in fair value.

Many_Easy

I appreciate your POV even though I disagree on many items. Saying and running on reforms is just talk. He’s done nothing specific with medical, only used his one personal vote for A3 in Florida, and has been very anti-drug with Venezuela and hemp ban. I’m not convinced he is pro-medical. Just a few comments and no promises. He actually sounds like he wants to do more research despite HHS recommendation. Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad he banned hemp. However, he didn’t offer an alternative when hemp ban was announced. Also, he said a few weeks and we’re now going on 3+ months. This delay, even from a politician, should give anyone pause. States rights is really a hands off, do nothing approach. There’s a reason why the non-recreational states are red. We need more GOP voters to favor recreational cannabis.

manualCAD

HHS: we recommend S3. DEA: neat, thanks for the report. (Puts it in the trash) This is where we are right now in the process.

Gambit2112

well i must say. the last year has been an absolute rollercoaster … both presidential candidates mentioning the plant and how it needs reform.. to trump and republicans winning the election , created a strong bear case… trump then wanting matt gaetz as his AG , robert kennedy as head of HHS . trump reiterating the plant shouldn’t. be criminal , now to this hemp ban… meanwhile a lot of the companies in the sector are starting to turn into decent scenarios..:: i’m scared , im excited and in seconds it can pop…..that’s how i felt when i lost my virginity and 22 years later i feel it again

Unaphotobomber

I totally agree, but I will say, as time has proven again and again (biden HHS request, trump random comments) it’s hard to know when news will come.

Many_Easy

The Dems started the HHS review, pushed for SAFE that was blocked by McConnell & not enough GOP votes. Tired of hearing that Biden did nothing. It’s simply untrue.

ivigilanteblog

No need to direct HHS. They are already on board! Need to direct the AG, who can step in and finish the job. Our hopes lie on Pam Bondi's desk...God help us.

skyplt29

DJT To Do List: 1. Sign Executive Order directing DOJ to release Epstein files; 2. Sign Executive Order directing HHS to reschedule cannabis to S3. Too much to ask?

Own_Fold_5212

2026 resolution - stop googling “marijuana rescheduling” every day to see if updates 😂😭 Seems like just yesterday that HHS report in full was released (thank you again Matt Zorn for that gift). 🎁

infamous_merkin

He’s destroying the dollar, screwing up FAA, Whitehouse looks wrecked, courts are tampered with, HHS discredited, climate data deleted, massive unemployment, SNAP benefits cancelled, war is coming.

Many_Easy

Why do you think that **”everything points to S3 under Trump”**? Also, assuming he actually does anything with Schedule 3, do you think it will be finalizing S3 or canceling S3? The longer we move past what he said on August 11th, the more doubtful I become that a positive S3 decision will be made. Remember, most of us were literally believing that HHS recommendation over a year ago would just be a rubber stamp approval by the DEA due to law. Apparently, we were incorrect.

SpongEWorTHiebOb

Same here, when I saw mine I bolted from my computer, much like the HHS secretary.

Relax_Dude_

secretary of HHS quickly flees, just lol

artgarfunkadelic

We live in a world where Dr. Oz would be a more qualified head of HHS.

Austin_Destroyer

RFK was afraid the fainting was contagious. Should you ever see someone faint, you should also run away. He is after all our HHS Secretary and we should follow his example. Now, who wants some heroin?

Retarded_Flu

Palantir is bordering on being irreplaceable. Current government initiatives lean toward centralization, rapid deployment, and data exploitation- Palantir’s exact strength. Gotham is already embedded in DHS, ICE, HHS, and DoD. Rip it out, and the system stalls (i.e. vendor lock-in). Combining these agencies will give Palantir even greater leverage, so keep that in mind.

Gigawatts

“Consult your physician before taking it if you absolutely need to” How is that any different compared to how pregnant women were taking it before? You think pregnant women were taking Tylenol flippantly? What evidence warranted the POTUS and Secretary of HHS hyping up a “historic announcement” about autism leading up to this?

fruitloop00001

Not zero data - https://hsph.harvard.edu/news/using-acetaminophen-during-pregnancy-may-increase-childrens-autism-and-adhd-risk/ This study shows a tentative connection. Certainly nothing that should be receiving this amount of attention from the HHS secretary and President.

hambone_83

>You said Biden's plan was to use it for the election. But then it was not used for the election. I don't understand this. But it was, Harris ran on a platform to continue the process to get it rescheduled and then even went a step further saying she would fully legalize it when it looked like she was going to lose. >Either Biden didn't actually have that power (and thus blame lies with the DEA) or he did have that power and just chose to not execute the plan you are saying he put into motion. This just does not make logical sense. HHS and the science was in favor of rescheduling. The comment period was overwhelmingly in favor of rescheduling. Then DEA sabotages it when the process had evidence it should be done. A DEA that Biden's administration is in charge of. I could understand if HHS doesn't recommend and the comment period was bad that the DEA drags their feet or whatever. But in a process that was looking good they purposefully got in the way. Biden doesn't have to step in and control the outcome but he sure as shit should have controlled that the DEA was unbiased and treated it fairly. Adding unnecessary steps, limiting advocacy witnesses, allowing SAM to put language in what goes onto the record. Biden definitely has power over the conduct of his agencies. >It's your opinion what you think was going on internally in Biden's administration. You are expressing an opinion on where the blame should belong. >When you express a political position in a public forum, you can expect others to chime in with their own opinion. Go ahead I'm not stopping you. Just pointing out that Biden has fault in the process not being finalized (either good or badend result) under his watch. Whether it was used for votes is right or wrong does not matter, what matters is it wasn't done and he and his administration have contributed to that.