Point-of-sale audit reveals significant compliance gaps in marketing practices for cannabis retailers in five U.S. cities, indicating a need for stronger regulations.
• Cannabis retail surveillance is crucial to inform regulations and enforcement. • We examined marketing and regulatory compliance among US cannabis retailers in 2025. • We found youth-appeal marketing, health claim, and discount restriction noncompliance. • There were also compliance gaps with state required warning signage. • Results reinforce the need to strengthen cannabis retail regulations and enforcement. Cannabis retail surveillance is crucial to inform regulations and enforcement efforts. This point-of-sale audit study examined marketing practices and compliance with age verification rules, required signage, and marketing restrictions among 161 cannabis retailers in 5 US cities in states authorizing nonmedical cannabis retail (Los Angeles [LA], California; Las Vegas [LV], Nevada; Denver, Colorado; Portland, Oregon; Seattle, Washington) in summer 2025. Descriptive and bivariate analyses characterized retailers overall and across cities. Overall, 84.5% of retailers requested age verification upon entry (range: Seattle = 43.3% to LV = 100%); 8.1% never verified (range: LV/Denver = 0% to Seattle = 26.7%). All 5 states required pregnancy-related warning postings/brochures, observed in 64.6% (less often in LA = 30.8% and LV = 46.9%). Nevada and Oregon required signage prohibiting on-site consumption, observed in 51.6% overall (LV = 81.3%, Portland = 86.7%). California and Washington required signage indicating negative impacts on children/youth, posted in 42.2% (LA = 20.5%; Seattle = 80.0%). All 5 states restricted youth-oriented packaging, found in 24.2% (more often in Denver = 53.3% and LV = 40.6%). Other targeted populations (based on advertisements/promotions) included veterans/military (12.4%), senior citizens (9.3%), LGBTQ+ (8.7%), and racial/ethnic minorities (7.5%). Colorado, Oregon, and Washington prohibited health claims in advertising, found in 65.8% (Denver = 40.0%, Portland = 40.0%, Seattle = 70.0%). California, Colorado, and Washington restricted outdoor business signage, identified at 36.6% overall (LA = 18.2%, Denver = 7.7%, Seattle = 40.0%). California, Oregon, and Washington restricted discounting, identified in 93.8% (LA = 92.3%, Portland = 96.7%, Seattle = 86.7%). Further, 39.8% promoted online ordering, 33.5% curbside delivery, pick-up, or drive-through options, and 13.7% home delivery. Given compliance-related issues with many regulations (e.g., required signage, prohibitions on youth-oriented marketing, health claims), states’ cannabis retail regulations and enforcement must be strengthened.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Berg et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: