Resources

Understanding Michigan's New Cannabis Tax Dispute

Michigan finds itself at the forefront of a significant cannabis taxation debate, centered around a newly implemented 24% wholesale marijuana tax that is already undergoing constitutional scrutiny. With the inaugural court proceedings now launched, this case has captured national interest due to its potential impact on cannabis pricing and broader implications for voter-endorsed legislation and tax protocols nationwide.

Image 1

Whether you're directly involved with cannabis or are situated miles from Michigan, this decision carries significance. The verdict may affect how other states construct, modify, and defend cannabis taxation—offering a glimpse into possible future legal challenges as the cannabis market expands.

What’s the Proposal?

In their 2025–2026 fiscal plan, Michigan legislators introduced a 24% wholesale tax on cannabis aimed at funding road enhancements. This tax would take effect earlier in the sales pipeline, before products reach the dispensaries.

Currently, Michigan imposes the following taxes:

  • A 10% excise tax on retail cannabis purchases enacted in 2018 by popular vote

  • A 6% state sales tax

Should the new wholesale tax be enacted, Michigan would feature one of the nation’s most complex cannabis tax frameworks.

Image 2

Why the Legal Challenge?

The Michigan Cannabis Industry Association (MCIA) contends this tax is unconstitutional, emphasizing: The 2018 voter-backed cannabis law cannot be modified without a supermajority vote.

With the legalization of recreational cannabis via the Michigan Regulation and Taxation of Marihuana Act (MRTMA), the law gained a protective status. Amending it requires a three-fourths supermajority.

However, this wholesale tax was sanctioned with merely a simple majority.

MCIA's spokesperson, Rose Tantraphol, highlighted the stakes in her statements to Michigan Advance: “As the premier cannabis trade group, we stand in court to uphold Michigan voters' will.” (Source: Michigan Advance)

The tax’s opponents also caution that increased costs may strain small enterprises and potentially redirect consumers to unregulated markets—an issue observed in high-tax states like California.

The State's Stance

Michigan's government argues the tax's legality on the following grounds:

  • The wholesale tax is a new levy, not an alteration of the 2018 referendum

  • The legislature holds the power to establish taxes for fiscal purposes

  • The chief objective is road infrastructure funding, not to shift cannabis policy

If upheld, the tax might be activated on January 1, 2026.

Image 3

Consumer Implications

Even for those distant from Michigan, cannabis tax frameworks often set precedents nationwide. If the tax withstands scrutiny:

  • Wholesale rates are set to rise

  • Retail prices may climb in response

  • Some may opt for more affordable unregulated alternatives

  • Pressure or consolidation on smaller businesses could increase

Should the tax be annulled, Michigan’s present tax regime—which is comparatively cost-effective nationally—will continue.

National Repercussions

While the legal battle plays out in Michigan, its effects will extend beyond state boundaries.

1. Testing the boundaries of voter-enacted laws

If new taxes can be added without supermajority approval, it could reshape how ballot initiatives operate in multiple states.

2. Potential influence on other states' cannabis taxation

States facing funding shortages for infrastructure might emulate Michigan’s model if it prevails.

3. Underscoring a persistent national concern: cannabis taxes are highly inconsistent

Some states feature nominal cannabis taxes, like Oregon and Michigan, sustaining competitive legal pricing. Others, such as California, wrestle with high taxes supporting thriving illicit activities.

Michigan’s case could inform how taxation disputes are navigated in other jurisdictions.

Future Developments

A Michigan Court of Claims judge has deliberated the initial arguments and a ruling is anticipated shortly. The matter may escalate to the Michigan Supreme Court.

The decision will be impactful, not solely for Michigan’s cannabis sector, but for national approaches to voter-directed laws, emerging markets, and fiscal jurisdiction.

Share this article...

NEVER MISS A STORY.

Sign up for our newsletters and get our articles delivered right to your inbox.

I confirm this is a service inquiry and not an advertising message or solicitation. By clicking “Submit”, I acknowledge and agree to the creation of an account and to the and .

Social Media

Martinez & Shanken, PLLC

1560 W Warner Rd Suite 200
Gilbert, Arizona 85233
Martinez & Shanken PLLC We love to chat!
Feel free to use Ai Chat or Contact Us
Please fill out the form and our team will get back to you shortly The form was sent successfully