2025 ended and 2026 commenced with a flurry of legislative activity in New Jersey touching on cannabis businesses. These changes, as a whole, impact several material changes to the marketplace, including: (a) increasing retail license caps; (b) adopting illicit cannabis enforcement; (c) implementing strict hemp regulation; (d) updates advertising rules; and (e) expands labor oversight and compliance obligations for cannabis businesses. 

We outline each of those legislative changes below, and urge cannabis businesses to closely consider these changes in light of the opportunities and/or obligations these changes implement. 

Increase in Retail License Caps

Most recently, on November 12, 2025, both Houses of the New Jersey Legislature passed S4847/A6267 (“S4847”), which impacts the cannabis operators in several material respects. 

Importantly, S4847 expands license caps for those holding retail licenses in New Jersey, from a prior limit of one (1) wholly owned Class 5 Retail Dispensary to three (3). Specifically, S4847 includes language that “the holder of a Class 5 Cannabis Retailer license shall be authorized to maintain up to two satellite retail locations.” Historically, the only license-holders permitted to own and operate more than one (1) retail dispensary were legacy-medical alternative treatment centers, who, since 2018, were also permitted to open up three (3) retail dispensaries. With the passage of S4847 – subject to the Governor’s approval – newer adult-use market entrants will have the opportunity to expand their retail footprint, subject to the same requirements imposed by the Cannabis Regulatory Commission (“Commission”) for all retail operators, namely, that such licensees present evidence of both site control and local support.

While indirect limitations remain on the ability to expand, i.e., as indirectly calculated by the number of towns that have opted-in to retail uses and number of towns that have opted-in subject to a cap, this nevertheless presents an opportunity for Class 5 Retailers to expand their retail footprint. Operators should think critically about municipal opportunities, both from an ordinance perspective and/or in determining how to assess these opportunities from an M&A standpoint and the corresponding complications associated with other regulatory restrictions.

Importantly, because S4847 permits the addition of these additional retail locations through a “satellite” process, this likely means that the Commission will process these applications outside of the more ordinary retail application process; meaning, there is the potential for adding retail locations quicker than the ordinary application process provides (4-6 month turnaround). 

Increased Enforcement for Illicit Cannabis

S4847 also directs the Division of State Police, in consultation with local law enforcement and the Commission to develop and implement an enforcement program to identify, investigate, and initiate enforcement actions against any person or entity engaged in the unlicensed manufacture, distribution, or sale of purported cannabis or cannabis items. 

Like many states, certain regions of New Jersey has seen the proliferation of illicit cannabis sales, which, prior to this bill, has been hampered by a claimed lack of definitive guidance from the Attorney General’s office on how and when to enforce. 

Now, through coordination between and among the Commission and state and local law enforcement, clearer enforcement priorities and objectives will be developed and implemented. 

Strict Hemp Regulation

S4847 also comes on the heels of other bills similarly directed at cleaning up and/or harmonizing cannabis enforcement in New Jersey. 

For instance, S4509/A6295 (“S4509”) – passed by the Legislature at the end of 2025 and signed by the Governor at the beginning of 2026 – taxes and regulates most, if not all, hemp-derived products, and attempts to bring New Jersey into harmony with recent Federal efforts to close the hemp loophole. 

Beginning on January 13, 2026, New Jersey implemented a $3.75/gallon excise tax on all wholesale sales/deliveries of intoxicating hemp beverages. 

Thereafter, on April 13, 2026, statewide prohibitions on the sale of hemp-derived products commence, with specific carveouts for intoxicating hemp beverages but only permitting sales through licensed alcohol retailers and distributors and licensed cannabis businesses. Moreover, as of April 13, 2026, intoxicating hemp beverages are subject to potency and testing requirements, including: (1) no more than 5mg total THC per serving and no more than 10mg total THC per container; and (b) mandatory testing requirements, including by DEA-registered labs. Penalties for non-compliance also commence as of that date, with civil penalties increasing up to $10,000 for any third and subsequent violation (with each day during which a violation continuing constituting its own separate and distinct penalty). 

By November 13, 2026, all sales, offers for sales, and distribution of intoxicating hemp beverages by anyone are prohibited (though the bill contains a separate carveout that permits the sale of hemp-derived cannabinoid products intended for human consumption by licensed Class 5 cannabis retailers). 

Changes in Advertising for Cannabis Businesses

S4509 also makes favorable amendments to advertising rules applicable to cannabis operators. 

For instance, it permits advertising of any cannabis items on television and radio. While cannabis businesses were previously subject to rules requiring that any advertising be accompanied by reliable evidence that at least 71.6% of the intended audience will be twenty-one years of age or older, this is now reduced to reliable evidence that 50% of said audience is of that age demographic. The law also removes the requirement that certain advertisements be accompanied by designated warnings, where those advertisements are simply designed to alert the public as to the name, contact information, and location of the licensed cannabis business. 

Increased Labor Oversight/Scrutiny

A4182/S3139 (“A4182”) was also passed by the Legislature at the end of 2025, and signed by the Governor in early 2026, concerns conditions of employment of certain cannabis employees and substantially alters state-level labor rights and remedies.  

For those well-versed in the New Jersey cannabis marketplace, labor rights and labor relations remain at the core of the cannabis licensing regime. From a licensing mandate of maintaining labor peace agreements (including hefty fines imposed by the Commission even for otherwise innocent lapses); to statutory requirements to either enter into, or make a good faith effort to enter into, collective bargaining agreements; the State of New Jersey, and the Commission, place labor requirements at the forefront. A4182 seeks to expand those requirements even further. 

The law targets “cannabis employers” that are licensed or otherwise authorized to operate in New Jersey as cultivators, manufacturers, wholesalers, distributors, retailers, delivery services, medical cannabis operators, and clinical registrants, to the extent they employ workers who are not subject to the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”). “Cannabis workers” covered by the bill are employees in this sector who likewise fall outside the NLRA (while not necessarily neatly delineating who is or is not covered). The law also states that, in mixed workplaces employing both NLRA covered and non covered workers, its procedures apply to the latter group. 

The law would extend a comprehensive set of labor rights and protections to covered cannabis workers and, correspondingly, define unfair labor practices for both employers and labor organizations. 

For cannabis employers, prohibited conduct would include interfering with employees’ protected activity; dominating or interfering with an employee organization; discriminating against employees for exercising rights under the bill; refusing to bargain in good faith or to reduce agreements to writing; and violating regulations promulgated by the State Board of Mediation. For labor organizations, unfair practices would include coercing employees; interfering with an employer’s choice of representative; refusing to bargain in good faith or to sign an agreement; and violating Board regulations. 

The State Board of Mediation (the “Board”) is granted exclusive authority to investigate and remedy unfair practices, including ordering cease and desist relief and affirmative remedies. In cases involving discharge or discrimination, the Board could order reinstatement, back pay for lost wages, reasonable costs, and liquidated damages equal to the wages due. 

The law builds on existing state procedures to recognize majority representatives for private sector workers not covered by the NLRA. Where there is no current majority representative, an employee organization could be recognized based on either a majority showing of signed authorization cards or an election that comports with NLRA style procedures. The employee organization would be permitted to petition the Board to require the employer to produce an accurate, timely employee list with contact information. The bill increases penalties for noncompliance with such information requests to up to $5,000 per day, recoverable by the Board. 

In the cannabis sector specifically, if an organization petitions for the employee list, the employer must also provide access to employees, including permitting meetings during the workday on employer premises and at any employer controlled employee living quarters. Once recognized as the majority representative, the organization must be granted ongoing access to investigate and discuss grievances and workplace issues; hold worksite meetings during non work breaks and before/after shifts; and meet with newly hired employees within five days of hire without charge to the employee’s pay or leave. 

Employee organizations representing cannabis workers would have an express right to engage in truthful publicity—including picketing—advising the public about disputes with cannabis employers and requesting that consumers cease patronizing businesses that distribute or sell the employers’ products. The law underscores that nothing in its provisions diminishes employees’ rights to strike or engage in concerted actions.

The Board would be responsible for adopting regulations governing recognition procedures, bargaining, grievance resolution, dues and fee collection, and other terms and conditions of employment for covered cannabis workers. The Board would also have the power to seek enforcement of its orders in the Appellate Division of the Superior Court, with factual findings upheld if supported by substantial evidence. 

This law materially expands the labor law overlay for New Jersey cannabis operators beyond existing licensure based obligations, particularly for cultivators and other employers whose workforces are partially or entirely outside the NLRA. The most immediate operational impacts would likely include formalized union access on site; expedited initial engagement with newly hired employees (including the right to meet with a newly hired employee within five days after hire); enhanced recordkeeping and data sharing obligations tied to employee lists; and a more prescriptive payroll system for dues and fees. Employers should expect closer scrutiny of neutrality and non interference, heightened exposure for unfair practice allegations, and remedies that include reinstatement, back pay, liquidated damages, and organization “make whole” relief. 

For employees and labor organizations, the bill would standardize representation pathways, increase rights in access to workplaces and employee information, and provide a clearer remedial forum and process for addressing coercion and bargaining impasses. The explicit protection for publicity campaigns and picketing aimed at downstream retailers and distributors could reshape organizing and dispute resolution leverage within vertically integrated or tightly networked supply chains. 

From a governance standpoint, operators may need to reassess policies and training around union access, solicitation, and use of facilities; adjust HR onboarding to accommodate early union meetings; review housing arrangements if they provide employer controlled living quarters; update privacy, data security, and data sharing protocols for employee lists; and ensure payroll systems can handle union dues and any Board set representation fees. Mixed coverage employers should map which roles fall outside the NLRA to understand where the State Board of Mediation’s jurisdiction would apply. 

Finally, while the law does not itself alter licensure conditions, it would sit alongside the state’s existing labor related requirements for cannabis licensees. In practice, noncompliance could compound regulatory risk, given the sector’s broader compliance expectations and history of the Commission issuing fines and suspensions for labor-related violations. Cannabis businesses may therefore benefit from early alignment of their labor practices, documentation, and bargaining strategies with the structures contemplated by the bill.

Conclusion

As the preceding identifies, the New Jersey cannabis marketplace is not idle. While the preceding identifies the most recent Legislative change; as most are aware, New Jersey is also in the midst of a change in administration in the Executive Branch, with more changes to the Commission likely to follow. The Commission has already seen three (3) of the original five (5) Commissioners turning over, with the terms of two (2) of the remaining original five (5) set to expire in the coming months. While much is changing in the Garden State, the New Jersey marketplace remains one of the stronger cannabis marketplaces nationally; and, as many of the Legislative developments discussed previously identify, New Jersey remains committed to growth and reinvention.