Stati Uniti pronti a riclassificare la marijuana, Axios

The U.S. federal government signalled a potentially transformative policy shift on Apr 22, 2026 when Axios reported the Biden administration is set to move to reclassify marijuana from Schedule I under the Controlled Substances Act, possibly as soon as that week (Axios / Investing.com, Apr 22, 2026). The Classification change — if formalized by the Department of Justice/Drug Enforcement Administration — would end more than five decades of Schedule I status established under the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 and trigger immediate downstream effects across taxes, banking access, and capital markets. Institutional investors should treat this as a policy catalyst with measurable balance-sheet implications for U.S.-listed cannabis operators and ETFs, while recognizing substantial legal and implementation risk that could alter timing and market impact. This report synthesizes the available public data, regulatory mechanics, and market channels that would transmit a federal reclassification into financial outcomes for multi-state operators (MSOs) and related service providers.

Context

The Controlled Substances Act placed cannabis in Schedule I in 1970, a classification denoting substances the federal government deems to have no accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse; this legal status is the proximate cause of several commercial constraints that have shaped the sector for decades (Controlled Substances Act, 1970). On Apr 22, 2026 Axios reported that federal agencies are preparing to reclassify marijuana — a move that would not equal full federal legalization but would lower criminal penalties and potentially enable different regulatory and tax treatments (Axios / Investing.com, Apr 22, 2026). For investors, the key mechanics to watch are whether reclassification removes cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III (or another schedule), how the DEA implements the change in rulemaking, and whether Congress or the IRS acts in parallel to adjust tax code sections such as 280E.

Reclassification is not binary. Schedule III status, the most frequently discussed destination in market commentary, would recognize accepted medical use while still imposing controls. Operationally, this would likely remove some barriers to research, ease banking restrictions imposed by federal criminal status, and — crucially — open the door for ordinary business tax deductions currently prohibited for Schedule I/II trafficking firms under Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code. For analysts building models, the tax channel is the largest direct P&L lever; investors should model scenarios with statutory corporate tax at 21% versus current effective tax burdens that companies describe as materially higher due to disallowed deductions (company 10-Ks, 2024).

The timing and certainty of benefits will vary. Even if the DEA moves quickly, secondary rulemaking, litigation risk, and IRS guidance could delay full economic effects by months or quarters. Institutional allocators should therefore build layered scenarios: rapid implementation (0–3 months), phased implementation (3–12 months), and protracted contestation (12+ months). Each scenario implies different discount rates for future cash flows and distinct capital structure implications for MSOs and ancillary service providers.

Data Deep Dive

Market sizing anchors valuation: retail legal cannabis sales in the United States were estimated at roughly $30 billion in 2024, according to industry research providers such as BDSA; the category has shown mid-to-high single-digit to low double-digit annual growth in recent years driven by state-level adult-use expansion (BDSA, 2024). That baseline matters because federal tax and banking relief will operate on an existing revenue base; a conservative sensitivity analysis that assumes a 10% uplift to net margins from lower tax and compliance costs implies several hundred million dollars of incremental EBITDA across MSOs collectively — a material amount for small-cap operators and public ETFs. Analysts should therefore quantify margin expansion under tax normalization scenarios; a move from an effective tax burden above 50% (reported by some operators in 2024 filings when factoring in disallowed deductions and state taxes) down to the statutory 21% corporate rate could translate into 20–30 percentage points of operating margin improvement for certain business models.

Capital markets responded quickly to the Axios reporting: equities and ETFs focused on cannabis registered intraday gains in U.S. trading, reflecting investors pricing in a lower-risk regulatory framework and a path to normalized profitability (market data, Apr 22, 2026). Institutional flows will matter more than retail momentum for sustained re-rating. Large-cap MSOs with diversified state footprints and strong balance sheets — names such as Tilray Brands (TLRY), Canopy Growth (CGC), and Cronos Group (CRON) — will be compared against smaller operators that trade at higher multiples due to growth optionality. Index and ETF performance (e.g., MJ) will depend on constituent weightings and whether passive products rebalance on improved fundamentals versus technical buying.

From a credit perspective, rescheduling could reduce default risk for heavily leveraged operators by improving free cash flow profiles but will not retroactively change covenant terms; lenders will re-evaluate credit facilities, and new financing could emerge for creditworthy operators. Bank de-risking has constrained working capital solutions; a meaningful policy shift should relieve some compliance costs and reduce counterparty risk premiums, but banks will still require robust AML/KYC frameworks and state-level licensing assurances before re-entering business lines at scale.

Sector Implications

Tax. The immediate fiscal channel is Section 280E, which currently prevents Schedule I/II actors from deducting ordinary business expenses. Analysts estimate that normalizatio