South Carolina Veterans Group Pushes Medical Cannabis Debate Forward

Veterans Coalition Frames Medical Access as Healthcare Equity Issue

The South Carolina Veterans Cannabis Coalition released a public statement arguing that continued prohibition forces veterans to choose between federal benefits and state-legal treatment options available in 38 other states. South Carolina veterans currently face a binary choice, according to the coalition's July 14 press release: relocate to access medical cannabis programs, or forego a treatment modality that peer-reviewed literature associates with symptom reduction in PTSD and neuropathic pain.

The coalition cited VA data showing South Carolina has the ninth-highest veteran suicide rate nationally at 32.8 per 100,000 in 2024, compared to a national average of 27.5. The group doesn't claim causation. Instead, it frames medical cannabis access as one component of a comprehensive mental health strategy.

South Carolina law currently classifies cannabis as a Schedule I controlled substance under S.C. Code Ann. § 44-53-190, with no carve-out for medical use. Possession of any amount remains a misdemeanor carrying up to 30 days incarceration for first offense.

Legislative History Shows Repeated Stalls in Committee

South Carolina's General Assembly has considered medical marijuana bills in seven sessions since 2014, with none advancing past Senate committee review. The most recent iteration, S.150 (the South Carolina Compassionate Care Act), passed the Senate Medical Affairs Committee in February 2024 but died without a floor vote before the session's June adjournment.

S.150 would've established a vertically integrated licensing structure capping cultivators at ten statewide. The qualifying condition list was narrow, limited to:

• Cancer and chemotherapy-related nausea
• Epilepsy and seizure disorders
• Glaucoma
• Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis
• PTSD (for veterans with documented VA diagnosis)
• Multiple sclerosis and ALS

The bill explicitly excluded smokable flower. Permissible forms included oils, tinctures, topicals, and vaporizable concentrates with THC caps at 15% by weight—mirroring Minnesota's 2014 framework more closely than any neighboring state's current program.

House leadership hasn't committed to bringing a companion bill in the 2027 session, which convenes January 12, 2027. Speaker Murrell Smith told the Charleston Post and Courier in May 2026 that medical marijuana "does not have the votes" in the House Republican caucus.

Revenue and Regulatory Framework Remain Unresolved

No fiscal impact analysis has been published for S.150. That leaves unresolved questions about state revenue potential, regulatory agency designation, and tax treatment under South Carolina's 6% sales tax and potential excise structures. The South Carolina Department of Revenue hasn't issued guidance on whether medical cannabis sales would be subject to the state's standard sales tax or a separate excise levy, as seen in neighboring North Carolina's proposed framework (15% excise at retail).

Federal tax treatment under IRC §280E would apply to any South Carolina licensee, prohibiting deduction of ordinary business expenses for entities trafficking in Schedule I substances. That federal burden persists regardless of state legalization unless Congress enacts the SAFER Banking Act or a successor statute.

For full background on this legislative timeline and stakeholder positions, see the CannIntel topic hub on South Carolina Medical Marijuana.

The next legislative window opens January 12, 2027. Veterans advocacy groups have signaled intent to lobby House leadership directly in the interim, with a focus on Republican members representing districts with above-average veteran populations in the Upstate and Pee Dee regions.