Adam Bryant (Courtesy photo)
(This is a contributed guest column. To be considered as an MJBizDaily guest columnist, please submit your request here.)
If you’re a cannabis finance team, you’re probably dealing with some version of this familiar mess: Invoices go out to buyers at retailers. Payment terms stretch. Someone asks whether a large ACH will get flagged. Someone else is reconciling checks, cash drops and partial wire receipts from last week.
Meanwhile, operators need inventory, tax obligations don’t wait and the bank relationship never feels fully secure. That’s the core reality of cannabis payment processing at the wholesale level.
The public conversation centers on the cash handling at checkout counter, but the harder problem sits behind it. Cultivators, manufacturers, distributors, and multi-site retailers must move larger payments, have to document them cleanly and then are forced to survive the delays that come with a federally restricted industry.
And contrary to some hopes, this isn’t a problem that federal banking reform by itself will fix.
Cannabis’ payment and banking problems are on the wholesale level
Let’s say a distributor closes a strong period, but then spends a Friday afternoon deciding which payments can wait until Monday. Inventory moves, invoices go out, and revenue is booked, but cash doesn’t arrive with the predictability needed to run purchasing, payroll and tax schedules with confidence.
For many policymakers, it’s the issues with cash at the retail level that gets the attention, but it’s supply-chain finance that carries more risk. Sales at the retail counter are small and immediate. But a wholesale order has larger ticket sizes and longer terms. And one delayed payment can stall the next inventory purchase.
That pressure shows up in borrowing needs, vendor strain, reserve planning and slower inventory turns. If your payment setup forces accounts receivable to behave more like a collections agency, you don’t have a payment system.
What you have is a cash flow liability.
Can cannabis businesses use normal payment processors?
At the root of the issue is federal law, not product design. Even after partial marijuana rescheduling, adult-use cannabis remains federally illegal even in state-legal markets, and that single fact shapes everything that follows.
For bankers, cannabis merchants automatically fall into the high-risk category. That forces them to use specialized processors, and these charge significantly more than standard merchant setups.
Industry analysis shows standard processors charge 1.5 to 3% for low-risk verticals. Cannabis-specific providers charge substantially more because they carry compliance overhead, fraud exposure, and sponsor bank risk.
The result isn’t just a pricing issue. Cannabis operators’ bank access, underwriting depth and processor durability are all affected. A relationship can look stable until a sponsor bank changes posture. Processor approval is only the start of continuous compliance risk.
Will marijuana banking reform solve the payment issue?
For many, the SAFER Banking Act has become the shorthand answer to almost every cannabis finance problem. That’s understandable, but it’s also where many operators lose the plot.
Federal banking reform is designed to give financial institutions a safer path to serve state-legal cannabis businesses. If passed and enacted, it could improve access to banking, reduce cash dependence and enable more durable financial relationships. That would be helpful and overdue.
But a more sober view is essential. SAFER by itself would not federally legalize cannabis. It would not force every bank to serve the industry. It would not automatically make Visa and Mastercard available for ordinary cannabis purchases. It would not erase state-by-state compliance burdens. And it would not guarantee lower fees or eliminate underwriting friction.
Even if banking access improves, cannabis operators serving other businesses still need payment rails built for larger invoices, auditability and predictable final settlement.
Making matters worse, SAFER Banking has repeatedly attracted support — and repeatedly stalled. Planning operations around eventual passage is risky.
You should treat SAFE as a possible tailwind, not this year’s roadmap. So what’s an operator to do?
What payment rails are available for cannabis operators now?
With cash too risky and checking unreliable, automatic clearing house (ACH) and real-time bank-to-bank payment rails are projected to handle nearly 42% of cannabis transaction volume this year, up from roughly 28%.
That shift matters, but volume share isn’t the same as operational fit. And these solutions still have flaws.
Cash gives immediate finality but creates custody risk, transport cost and weak remittance detail. Checks still show up but bring mail float, deposit delays, and manual matching. Wires work for high-value transfers where both sides accept bank cutoffs, but they’re unattractive for routine volume.
ACH avoids prohibited card network use but typically settles in 1–3 business days and can expose merchants to reversals if activity is flagged.
A compliant rail only earns its keep if it reduces reconciliation effort, failed payment follow-up, and shipment-timing uncertainty.
Can stablecoin payment solutions solve cannabis’ banking woes?
The core problem is settlement certainty. Bank-based rails still carry structural constraints. Sponsor bank policy can change. A receiving bank can flag activity. Cutoff times and manual reviews affect treasury operations even when the front end looks modern.
Stablecoin-based settlement is getting attention for a practical reason: it gives counterparties a way to move value directly with an auditable record and faster finality than traditional wholesale flows. The benefit is operational, not ideological. Faster final settlement changes how payables, receivables, and shipment release decisions get made day to day. Settlement finality, cost visibility, audit trail and counterparty adoption all improve at once.
The best rollout starts with one payment lane. High-value wholesale invoices are a common starting point because the pain is obvious and the savings are easier to measure.
For cannabis CFOs, the lesson of the last three years of banking reform false starts is simple. Waiting for federal reform to fix operational problems is a strategy with no timeline. The teams pulling ahead are the ones treating payment infrastructure as a resilience question.
Adam Bryant is the founder of Offbank.
