DEA Declines State Coordination on Rescheduling, California Official Says

Federal-State Coordination Gap

The DEA hasn't initiated any coordination with state cannabis regulators ahead of the pending Schedule III reclassification, according to California DCC Director Nicole Elliott. Elliott made the statement during a California Cannabis Control Appeals Panel meeting on September 21, 2026, when asked about federal-state coordination efforts.

The DEA "hasn't shown any sort of interest" in helping states prepare operational or regulatory changes tied to rescheduling, Elliott said. It's the first public acknowledgment by a state official that the federal agency responsible for implementing the schedule change has not engaged state regulators.

Timeline and Operational Stakes

The rescheduling process remains pending at the DEA, with no final rule published despite the HHS recommendation submitted in August 2023. The agency issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in May 2024. No final rule date has been set.

State-licensed operators face uncertainty on key operational questions:

• Whether Schedule III status triggers new DEA registration requirements for cultivators and retailers
• How 280E tax deductions phase in and what documentation the IRS will require
• Whether interstate commerce becomes permissible under the Controlled Substances Act
• What federal inspections or compliance audits states must accommodate

California's Regulatory Posture

California hasn't issued guidance to its 13,000+ licensed operators on how to prepare for rescheduling. The DCC has stated it's monitoring federal developments but can't issue state-level directives until the DEA publishes a final rule.

Elliott's comments suggest California—the nation's largest legal market by revenue—has attempted outreach but received no substantive federal engagement. The state collected $1.1 billion in cannabis tax revenue in fiscal year 2025.

Multi-State Operator Exposure

Multi-state operators with operations in 5+ jurisdictions face the highest compliance risk from the coordination vacuum. MSOs must work through conflicting state frameworks without a federal template for Schedule III compliance.

Operators don't know whether they'll need to register facilities, submit product samples, or comply with new record-keeping standards. Legal counsel have advised clients to assume DEA registration will be required. But there's no formal confirmation.

Historical Precedent

The DEA has historically declined to coordinate with states on cannabis policy, citing the Controlled Substances Act's federal supremacy. The agency didn't engage state regulators during the 2013-2016 Obama-era Cole Memo period or the 2018 Farm Act hemp implementation.

The current silence follows that pattern. Since the NPRM comment period closed in July 2024, the DEA hasn't held public stakeholder meetings or published implementation FAQs.

What Operators Should Watch

The next milestone is publication of the final rule in the Federal Register, which triggers a 30- to 60-day effective date. Until then, cannabis remains Schedule I and state operators continue under existing frameworks.

For full background on the rescheduling process and its implications, see the CannIntel topic hub on DEA rescheduling.

Operators should monitor the Federal Register for the final rule and prepare contingency plans for DEA registration, 280E documentation, and potential federal inspections. Because of the coordination gap, states will likely issue emergency guidance only after the rule is final.