iAnthus Capital Holdings (ITHUF) Risk Analysis

In certain of the U.S. states where we operate, laws, regulations and/or rules have been passed to regulate the cultivation, processing, manufacturing, distribution, sale and use of adult-use cannabis. Each state has unique requirements that each licensed entity must meet in order to participate in the adult-use market, including, without limitation, maintaining any existing licenses in good standing, payment of a fee, and maintaining certain medical product quantities. In addition, municipalities in each state may pass local rules and ordinances, establishing additional rules and requirements that a licensed entity must meet relating to the cultivation, processing, manufacturing, distribution, sale and use of adult-use cannabis. We can provide no assurance that we will be able to satisfy or meet the requirements established by a state's or municipality's relevant governmental agency that would allow us to enter the adult-use cannabis market. Failure to satisfy or meet the requirements established by a state's or municipality's relevant governmental agency would result in us not being able to participate in the adult-use cannabis market or could delay our entrance into the adult-use cannabis market in a particular state, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

While certain states in the U.S. have legalized "medical cannabis," "adult use cannabis" or both, medical and adult-use cannabis remains illegal under federal law. Although President Trump issued an Executive Order directing the Attorney General to reschedule "marijuana" as a Schedule III substance, the CSA currently still classifies "marijuana" as a Schedule I drug. As such, cannabis-related business activities, including, without limitation, the cultivation, manufacture, importation, possession, use, or distribution of cannabis, remains illegal under U.S. federal law. Individual state laws do not always conform to U.S. federal law or the laws of other states, and there are a number of variations in the laws and regulations of the various states in which we operate. Although we believe our business activities and those of our subsidiaries are compliant with the laws and regulations of the states in which we and our subsidiaries operate, strict compliance with state and local laws with respect to cannabis neither absolves us of liability under U.S. federal law, nor provides a defense to any proceeding that may be brought against us under U.S. federal law. Any proceeding that may be brought against us could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Violations of any U.S. federal laws and regulations could result in significant fines, penalties, administrative sanctions, convictions, or settlements, arising from either civil or criminal proceedings brought by either the U.S. federal government or private citizens, including, but not limited to, property or product seizures, disgorgement of profits, cessation of business activities, or divestiture. Such fines, penalties, administrative sanctions, convictions, or settlements could have a material adverse effect on, among other things: - our reputation and our ability to conduct business;- our ability to obtain and/or maintain cannabis licenses, whether directly or indirectly, in the United States;- the listing of our securities on various stock exchanges;- our financial position, operating results, profitability, or liquidity; and - the market price of our securities.

The majority of our subsidiaries, and all of our operating subsidiaries, are located in the United States. Therefore, we are subject to a variety of laws and regulations in the United States and Canada that involve money laundering, financial recordkeeping and proceeds of crime. Such laws and regulations may include the Bank Secrecy Act, as amended by Title III of the U.S. PATRIOT Act, Sections 1956 and 1957 of U.S.C. Title 18 (Money Laundering Control Act), the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act (Canada), as amended, and the rules and regulations thereunder, the Criminal Code (Canada) and any related or similar rules, regulations or guidelines, issued, administered or enforced by governmental authorities in the United States and Canada. If any of our investments, or any proceeds thereof, any dividends or distributions therefrom, or any profits or revenues accruing from such investments in the United States are found to be in violation of anti-money laundering laws or otherwise, such transactions may be viewed as proceeds of crime, including under one or more of the statutes discussed above or any other applicable legislation. Any property, real or personal and its proceeds, involved in or traceable to such a crime is subject to seizure by and forfeiture to governmental authorities. Any such seizure, forfeiture or other action by law enforcement with respect our assets could restrict or otherwise jeopardize our ability to declare or pay dividends, effect other distributions or subsequently repatriate such funds back to Canada and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. On February 14, 2014, FinCEN issued the FinCEN Memorandum, which outlines the pathways for financial institutions to bank cannabis businesses in compliance with federal enforcement priorities. The FinCEN Memorandum states that in some circumstances, it is permissible for banks to provide services to cannabis-related businesses without risking prosecution for violation of federal money laundering laws. Although the FinCEN Memorandum remains intact, it is unclear whether the current administration will continue to follow its guidelines, or what may happen under future administrations. The DOJ continues to have the right and power to prosecute crimes committed by banks and financial institutions, such as money laundering and violations of the Bank Secrecy Act, that occur in any state including states that have in some form legalized the sale of cannabis. Further, the conduct of the DOJ's enforcement priorities could change for any number of reasons. A change in the DOJ's priorities could result in the prosecution of banks and financial institutions for crimes that were not previously prosecuted. The FinCEN Memorandum does not provide any safe harbors or legal defenses from examination or regulatory or criminal enforcement actions by the DOJ, FinCEN or other federal regulators. Thus, most banks and other financial institutions in the United States do not appear comfortable providing banking services to cannabis-related businesses or relying on this guidance given that it has the potential to be amended or revoked by the current or future administrations. In addition to the foregoing, banks may refuse to process debit card payments and credit card companies generally refuse to process credit card payments for cannabis-related businesses. As a result, we may have limited or no access to banking or other financial services in the United States. In addition, federal money laundering statutes and Bank Secrecy Act regulations discourage financial institutions from working with any organization that sells a controlled substance, regardless of whether the state it operates in permits cannabis sales. Our inability or limitation of our ability to open or maintain bank accounts, obtain other banking services and/or accept credit card and debit card payments may make it difficult for us to operate and conduct our business as planned or to operate efficiently. In the United States, the SAFE Banking Act and SAFER Banking Act are previously proposed pieces of federal legislation that would grant banks and other financial institutions immunity from federal criminal prosecution for servicing marijuana-related businesses if the underlying marijuana business follows state law. The U.S. House of Representatives previously passed the SAFE Banking Act on numerous occasions, and the SAFER Banking Act has passed the Senate Banking Committee, but the U.S. Senate has failed to take up either the SAFE Banking Act or the SAFER Banking Act for a vote. It is unclear whether the SAFE Banking Act or the SAFER Banking Act will be reintroduced during the current congressional session, and even if reintroduced there can be no assurance that any such legislation will be passed and enacted into law. In both Canada and the United States, transactions involving banks and other financial institutions are both difficult and unpredictable under the current legal and regulatory landscape. Legislative changes could help to reduce or eliminate these challenges for companies in the cannabis space and would improve the efficiency of both significant and minor financial transactions.

Our existing investments in the United States and any future investments in the United States may become the subject of heightened scrutiny by regulators, stock exchanges and other authorities in Canada and the United States. As a result, we may be subject to significant direct and indirect interaction with public officials. There can be no assurance that this heightened scrutiny will not in turn lead to the imposition of certain restrictions on our ability to invest in the United States or any other jurisdiction, in addition to those described herein. Government policy changes or public opinion may also result in a significant influence over the regulation of the cannabis industry in Canada, the United States, or elsewhere. A negative shift in the public's perception of the medical or adult use of cannabis could affect future legislation or regulation in Canada, the United States, or elsewhere. Among other things, such a shift could cause such jurisdictions to abandon initiatives or proposals to legalize cannabis or reverse existing legislation that legalized cannabis in some respect. A shift by any such jurisdiction could limit the number of new jurisdictions into which we could expand or reduce the jurisdictions in which we operate, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our expansion strategy, business, financial condition and results of operations.

Currently, the Company is traded on the CSE and on over-the-counter markets in the United States. The business, operations and investments of the Company in the United States, and any future business, operations or investments, may become the subject of heightened scrutiny by regulators, stock exchanges and other authorities in Canada and the United States. As a result, the Company may be subject to significant direct and indirect interaction with public officials. There can be no assurance that this heightened scrutiny will not in turn lead to the imposition of certain restrictions on the Company's ability to operate or invest in the United States or any other jurisdiction, in addition to those described herein. On February 8, 2018, the Canadian Securities Administrators published CSA Staff Notice 51-352 (Revised) – Issuers with U.S. Marijuana-Related Activities ("Staff Notice 51-352") describing the Canadian Securities Administrators' disclosure expectations for specific risks facing issuers with cannabis-related activities in the U.S. Staff Notice 51-352 confirms that a disclosure-based approach remains appropriate for issuers with U.S. cannabis-related activities. Staff Notice 51-352 includes additional disclosure expectations that apply to all issuers with U.S. cannabis-related activities, including those with direct and indirect involvement in the cultivation and distribution of cannabis, as well as issuers that provide goods and services to third parties involved in the U.S. cannabis industry. In 2017, there were concerns that the Canadian Depository for Securities Limited, through its subsidiary CDS Clearing and Depository Services Inc. ("CDS"), Canada's central securities depository (clearing and settling trades in the Canadian equity, fixed income and money markets), would refuse to settle trades for cannabis issuers that have investments in the United States. However, CDS has not implemented this policy. On February 8, 2018, following discussions with the Canadian Securities Administrators and recognized Canadian securities exchanges, the TMX Group, which is the owner and operator of CDS, announced the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (the "TMX MOU"), with Aequitas NEO Exchange Inc. (now Cboe Canada), the CSE, the Toronto Stock Exchange and the TSX Venture Exchange. The TMX MOU outlines the parties' understanding of Canada's regulatory framework applicable to the rules, procedures and regulatory oversight of the exchanges and CDS as it relates to issuers with cannabis-related activities in the United States. The TMX MOU confirms, with respect to the clearing of listed securities, that CDS relies on the Canadian securities exchanges to review the conduct of listed issuers. The TMX MOU notes that securities regulation requires that the rules of each of the exchanges must not be contrary to public interest and that the rules of each of the exchanges have been approved by the securities regulators. Pursuant to the TMX MOU, CDS will not ban accepting deposits of or transactions for clearing and settlement of securities of issuers with cannabis-related activities in the United States. Even though the TMX MOU indicated that there are no plans to ban the settlement of securities through CDS, there can be no guarantee that this approach to regulation will continue in the future. If such ban were implemented at a time when our common shares are listed on a Canadian stock exchange, it would have a material adverse effect on the ability of holders of our common shares to make and settle trades. In particular, our common shares would become highly illiquid until an alternative (if available) was implemented, and investors would have no ability to affect a trade of our common shares through the facilities of the applicable Canadian stock exchange. We have obtained eligibility with the Depository Trust Company ("DTC") for our common shares quotation on the OTC Markets and such eligibility provides another possible avenue to clear our common shares in the event of a CDS ban. Revocation of DTC eligibility or implementation by DTC of a ban on the clearing of securities of issuers with cannabis-related activities in the United States would similarly have a material adverse effect on the ability of holders of our common shares to make and settle trades.

As cannabis remains illegal under U.S. federal law, those non-U.S. citizens who are employed at or investing in Canadian companies with operations in the U.S. cannabis business could face detention, denial of entry, or lifetime bans from the United States for their business associations with such companies. Entry happens at the sole discretion of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (the "USCBP") officers on duty, and these officers have wide latitude to ask questions to determine the admissibility of a foreign national. As a result, the Canadian government warned travelers that previous use of cannabis or any substance prohibited by U.S. federal laws could mean denial of entry to the United States. In addition, business or financial involvement in the legal cannabis industry in Canada or in the United States could also be a reason for USCBP officers to deny entry in the United States. In reaction to the then-impending legalization of cannabis in Canada, the USCBP released a statement outlining its position with respect to enforcement of U.S. federal laws. The statement specified that Canada's legalization of cannabis would not change the USCBP's enforcement of U.S. federal laws regarding controlled substances, and because cannabis continues to be a controlled substance under the CSA, working in or facilitating the proliferation of the cannabis industry in states or Canada where cannabis is legal may affect admissibility to the United States. Although the USCBP has affirmed that Canadian citizens "working in or facilitating the proliferation of the legal cannabis industry in Canada, coming to the U.S. for reasons unrelated to the cannabis industry will generally be admissible to the U.S.," if Canadian citizens, or any other travelers, are "found to be coming to the U.S. for reason related to the cannabis industry, they may be deemed inadmissible" and risk being barred from entry into the United States. Certain of our directors, officers and employees are or may be Canadian citizens and may be subject to denials or bans from entry into the United States by USCBP officers due to their service to or employment by us. In the event that any such directors, officers, or employees are hindered or otherwise prevented from entering the U.S., either in one instance or permanently, their ability to provide services to us could be materially hindered, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, our ability to attract qualified candidates may be diminished by the prospect of a denial or ban from entry into the United States, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

There is a risk that a greater number of state regulatory agencies will begin requiring entities engaged in certain aspects of the business or industry of legal marijuana to post a bond or significant fees when applying, for example, for a dispensary license or renewal as a guarantee of payment of sales and franchise taxes. We are not able to quantify at this time the potential scope of such bonds or fees in the states in which it currently operates or may in the future operate. Any bonds or fees of material amounts could have a negative impact on the ultimate success of our business.

There is no assurance that state laws legalizing and regulating the sale and use of cannabis will not be repealed or overturned, or that local governmental authorities will not limit the applicability of state laws within their respective jurisdictions. If the U.S. federal government begins to enforce U.S. federal laws relating to cannabis in states where the sale and use of cannabis is currently legal, or if existing state laws are repealed or curtailed, our business or operations in those states or under those laws would be materially and adversely affected. Federal actions against any individual or entity engaged in the cannabis industry or a substantial repeal of cannabis related legislation could adversely affect our business. The rulemaking process at the state level that applies to cannabis operators in any state will be ongoing and result in frequent changes. Regulatory compliance and the process of obtaining regulatory approvals can be costly and time-consuming. No assurance can be given that we will receive the requisite licenses, permits or cards to continue operating our businesses. In addition, local laws and ordinances could restrict our business activity. Land use, zoning, local ordinances and similar laws could be adopted or changed and have a material adverse effect on our business.

We are engaged in both the medical and adult-use marijuana industry in the United States where local state and territory law permits such activities. Investors are cautioned that in the United States, cannabis is largely regulated at the state and territory level. Pursuant to the Congressional Research Service, as of March 10, 2026, (i) approximately forty states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands allow the medical use of cannabis products, (ii) approximately eight states allow for the "limited access medical cannabis," and (iii) approximately twenty-four states, the District of Columbia, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands and the U.S. Virgin Islands have enacted laws allowing the recreational use of marijuana. Notwithstanding the permissive regulatory environment of cannabis at the state and territory level, cannabis continues to be categorized as a Schedule I controlled substance under the CSA and as such, cultivation, distribution, sale and possession of cannabis violates federal law in the United States. The inconsistency between federal, state and territory laws and regulations is a major risk factor. Under the current administration, federal prosecutors are free to utilize their prosecutorial discretion to decide whether to prosecute cannabis activities despite the existence of state-level laws which may be inconsistent with federal prohibitions, though there have been no such prosecutions that we are aware of. Nevertheless, there can be no assurance that in the future the federal government will not seek to prosecute cases involving cannabis businesses that are otherwise compliant with state laws. Federal law preempts state law in these circumstances, such that the federal government can assert criminal violations of federal law despite a state's law. The level of prosecutions of state-legal cannabis operations is entirely unknown, and the current administration and DOJ have not articulated a policy regarding state legal cannabis. It is unclear what position Attorney General Pam Bondi will take. If the DOJ sought to aggressively pursue financiers or equity owners of cannabis-related business, and United States Attorneys followed such DOJ policies through pursuing prosecutions of such financiers and equity owners, then we could face (i) seizure of our cash and other assets used to support or derived from our cannabis subsidiaries; and (ii) the arrest of our employees, directors, officers, managers and investors, who could face charges of ancillary criminal violations of the CSA for aiding and abetting the violation of, as well as and conspiring to violate, the CSA. If the current administration and Attorney General do not adopt a policy incorporating some or all of the policies articulated in the Cole Memorandum, then the DOJ or an aggressive federal prosecutor could allege that we "aided and abetted" violations of federal law by providing financing and services to our operating subsidiaries. Under these circumstances, it is possible that a federal prosecutor could seek to seize our assets and to recover what could be deemed "illicit profit". In these circumstances, our operations may cease, and our shareholders could lose their entire investment and our directors, officers and/or shareholders could be left to defend any criminal charges against them at their own expense and, if convicted, be sent to federal prison. Violations of any federal laws and regulations could result in significant fines, penalties, administrative sanctions, convictions or settlements arising from civil proceedings conducted by either the federal government or private citizens, or criminal charges, including, but not limited to, disgorgement of profits, cessation of business activities or divestiture. This could have a material adverse effect on us (including directors' and officers' reputations and ability to conduct business), our holding (directly or indirectly) of medical and adult-use cannabis licenses in the United States, the listing of our securities on the CSE or OTC Markets, our capital, financial position, operating results, profitability or liquidity or the market price of our listed securities. Overall, an investor's contribution to and involvement in our activities may result in federal civil and/or criminal prosecution, including forfeiture of his, her or its entire investment.

In certain states, the cannabis laws and regulations limit not only the number of cannabis licenses issued, but also the number of cannabis licenses that one person or entity may own. Such limitations on the ownership of additional licenses within certain states may limit our ability to expand in such states.

Certain states require cannabis dispensaries to submit cannabis pricing for licensing approval in order to ensure that the cost of cannabis in the regulated market is neither too high, which among other things may encourage the purchase of cannabis from illicit cannabis business, or too low, which among other things may increase the risk of legally purchased cannabis being resold illicitly. Additionally, certain states regulate the operations of cultivators to address oversupply of local markets. Our ability to adjust sale prices at our dispensaries or production volumes at our cultivation facilities may be affected by such pricing and supply regulations, which could have a material adverse impact on our ability to adapt to local market conditions.