Thailand Tightens Cannabis Rules as 7,000 Shops Close

From boom to brakes: why the policy direction is changing

Thailand became internationally known for loosening cannabis controls, a shift that helped drive a highly visible retail scene across tourist and residential areas. But Reuters reported in 2025 that Thailand was moving toward recriminalising cannabis, a step that would rattle an industry it described as worth around US$1 billion. That reporting framed the change as a major reversal from the earlier liberalisation narrative and highlighted the economic stakes for businesses that had formed around the new market.

In a separate Reuters dispatch from May 2025, the news agency said Thailand would require medical certificates for buying cannabis. Taken together, these Reuters reports indicate that authorities were preparing to narrow access and push consumption toward a medical framework, rather than leaving cannabis widely available through general retail channels.

International coverage has also tried to explain the shift to audiences outside Thailand. Time Magazine published a “what to know” style overview in late June 2025 about Thailand’s “un-legalization,” signalling that the country’s regulatory direction was no longer simply about opening a new consumer market. While the details of implementation vary across reports, the common thread is clear: Thailand is moving toward tighter rules and a more controlled model.

Retail shakeout: reports cite 7,000+ shop closures

As policy tightened, the retail landscape appears to be contracting. Multiple outlets—including Nation Thailand, The Straits Times, and VnExpress International—reported that more than 7,000 cannabis shops closed as regulations became stricter and new legal requirements arrived or were introduced. Nation Thailand carried similar headlines at different points (January and February 2026), and the closure figure was echoed by other regional media.

Because these are separate publications pointing to the same scale of closures, the figure has become a key indicator of how quickly the market is changing. However, the sources provided do not supply identical descriptions of the regulatory triggers in each headline, and they do not provide a single shared breakdown of where closures occurred or whether they represent temporary suspensions, permanent closures, or non-renewal of licenses. What is supported across the coverage is the overall direction: stricter rules are being associated with a substantial reduction in the number of operating retailers.

Nation Thailand also reported messaging that “patients” were assured, suggesting that, at least in public communications around enforcement or compliance, there was an emphasis on maintaining access for medical use even as the broader market narrowed. That framing aligns with Reuters’ reporting about medical certificates for purchase, which would structurally privilege medical access over casual consumer buying.

Backlash and social concerns rise alongside enforcement

While businesses track regulatory details, public debate has increasingly focused on social impact. The Japan Times reported that backlash was growing in Thailand amid concerns about children and cannabis use. The report’s framing points to a domestic argument that liberalisation created pathways for underage exposure or easier access, and that policy tightening is partly a response to those worries.

This is important context for Thailand-centric readers because it helps explain why the current shift is not only an economic story. It is also a political and social one, with questions about public health, youth access, and the visibility of cannabis retail in everyday life. The sources provided do not quantify youth usage rates, but they do indicate that concerns about children have become part of the mainstream narrative in international coverage of Thailand’s policy turn.

Politics remains intertwined with cannabis policy

Cannabis policy in Thailand has long been tied to political identity, and that link continues to shape the debate. In September 2025, both WION and The Guardian published stories connecting the political rise of Anutin Charnvirakul with the cannabis decriminalisation push. The Guardian described him as a tycoon who led the effort to decriminalise cannabis and later became prime minister, underlining how closely cannabis reform and political branding have been connected in the public imagination.

Even as the regulatory environment becomes more restrictive, political networks and advocacy groups are still pushing for clearer legislation. Nation Thailand reported in October 2025 that a cannabis reform network proposed an overhaul of three laws and urged a fast-tracked Cannabis Bill. That detail matters because it shows that the policy discussion is not simply “tighten or loosen.” It also includes calls to restructure the legal framework—potentially to clarify what is allowed, who can sell, and under what conditions.

Meanwhile, trade and industry observers continue to speculate on whether leadership changes could affect the direction of regulation. Cannabis Science and Technology published a piece in September 2025 asking whether new leadership might “spark cannabis legalization.” That headline highlights uncertainty in the sector, even as Reuters and other outlets described a tightening trajectory.

These perspectives are not perfectly aligned. Some coverage looks forward to possible re-liberalisation or legislative clarity, while other reporting describes a move toward recriminalisation and medical-only gatekeeping. Based on the sources provided, what can be said confidently is that Thailand’s cannabis rules are in flux, and political developments remain a central driver of that volatility.

What this means on the ground in Thailand

For Thai operators, workers, and consumers, the immediate takeaway from these reports is that compliance expectations are rising and the retail field is narrowing. If medical certificates become a requirement for purchases as Reuters reported, day-to-day buying patterns would likely shift, and the customer base for dispensaries could change significantly. At the same time, if authorities proceed with recriminalisation as Reuters reported later in June 2025, the risks for non-compliant businesses could increase, and informal supply chains could come under more pressure.

The reported scale of shop closures—more than 7,000—suggests many businesses either could not adapt quickly enough, chose to exit, or were unable to meet new rules. That kind of contraction can reshape pricing, product availability, and employment in a sector that, for a period, expanded rapidly across major provinces and tourist corridors.

For communities, the Japan Times’ focus on youth concerns points to a different dimension: regulation is also being justified as a way to limit exposure and access for minors. Whether new rules accomplish that goal will depend on enforcement and the details of the regulatory system, but the political impetus is evident in the coverage.

The outlook: continued uncertainty, continued debate

Thailand’s cannabis sector is now defined by transition. The country that drew global attention for liberalisation is being covered—by Reuters, Time, and regional outlets—for tightening access, changing the legal posture, and overseeing a large shakeout in retail.

At the same time, political narratives around the original reform push remain influential, and advocacy groups are still calling for a comprehensive Cannabis Bill. Until Thailand settles on a clear, durable framework that aligns enforcement with legislation, businesses and consumers should expect ongoing changes—and continued headlines that reflect competing visions for what cannabis should look like in Thailand: a tightly controlled medical product, a regulated commercial market, or something in between.