Tag: legalized marijuana

New York Governor Signs Marijuana Tax Cut Bills, Providing Local 280E Relief For NYC Businesses

New York’s governor has signed legislation that to provide tax relief to New York City marijuana businesses that are currently blocked from making federal deductions under an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) code known as 280E.

About five months after the Senate and Assembly approved the proposal, and less than a week after both chambers formally transmitted their identical bills to Gov. Kathy Hochul (D), she signed them into law on Friday.

While Hochul signed a separate budget bill last year that included provisions allow state-level cannabis business tax deductions—a partial remedy to the ongoing federal issue—New York City has its own tax laws that weren’t affected by that change. The new measure is meant to fill that policy gap.

“This bill would allow a deduction for business expenses, incurred by taxpayers authorized by the Cannabis Law to engage in the sale, distribution, or production of adult-use cannabis products or medical cannabis, for purposes of the unincorporated business tax (UBT), the general corporation tax (GCT), and the corporate tax of 2015, commonly referred to as the business corporation tax (BCT),” a summary says.

A section of the city’s tax code would be amended to add sections allowing the deductions “in an amount equal to any federal deduction disallowed by section 280E of the internal revenue code.”

Keep reading

Maryland Republicans Want To Let Police Search Cars And People Based On Smell Of Marijuana, Which Is A Legal Product

Republican lawmakers in Maryland are aiming to undo a law that prevents police from stopping or searching people and vehicles based merely on the smell of marijuana, claiming the measure has put motorists at risk and took away an important tool used by law enforcement to seize people’s firearms.

The effort is one of five legislative proposals that the Maryland General Assembly’s Joint Republican Caucus unveiled this week as part of its public safety agenda for the coming legislative session, which runs from January to April of next year.

“There is no doubt about it, people using cannabis while riding in or operating a vehicle makes our roads less safe,” House Minority Whip Jesse Pippy (R) said at a press conference Tuesday. “The Drug Free Roadways Act of 2024 will remove the prohibition from stopping and searching vehicles due to the odor of cannabis.”

Keep reading

Biden’s Justice Department Says Marijuana Consumers Are ‘Unlikely’ To Store Guns Properly In Latest Defense Of Federal Ban

The Biden administration has once again found itself in federal court defending a ban preventing people who use marijuana from buying or possessing firearms, arguing that historical precedent “comfortably” supports the restriction and that cannabis consumers with guns pose a unique danger to society, in part because they’re “unlikely” to store their weapon properly before using marijuana.

In a brief submitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit on Wednesday, attorneys for the Justice Department responded to a series of prompts from the judges, asserting that the firearm ban for marijuana consumers is justified based on historical analogues to restrictions on the mentally ill and habitually drunk that were imposed during the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification in 1791.

The federal government has repeatedly affirmed that those analogues, which must be demonstrated to maintain firearm restrictions under a recent Supreme Court ruling, provide clear support for limiting gun rights for cannabis users. But several federal courts have separately deemed the marijuana-related ban unconstitutional, leading DOJ to appeal in several ongoing cases.

For the case before the Third Circuit, the government is defending the ban against Erik Matthew Harris, who was convicted of violating the federal statute prohibiting the possession of a firearm by a person “who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance.” As the Daily Caller first reported, Harris’s legal representation also submitted a supplemental brief to the court on Wednesday that broadly disputes both the substance of the conviction under the statute, as well as the idea that there are relevant historical analogues to uphold the existing ban.

Keep reading

Top GOP Ohio Lawmaker Says There’s No Need To Rush Changes To Voter-Approved Marijuana Legalization Law, Despite Governor’s Call For Quick Action

A top GOP Ohio lawmaker says there’s no need to rush changes to the state’s voter-approved marijuana legalization law, despite the governor’s insistence on getting revisions enacted before possession and cultivation become legal next month. Meanwhile, another Republican legislator has already come out with a bill to change the law by redirecting millions of dollars in cannabis tax revenue toward supporting law enforcement training.

Just one day after meeting with Gov. Mike DeWine (R) to discuss potential amendments to the statutory cannabis law that voters passed at the ballot last week, House Speaker Jason Stephens (R) said on Tuesday that the areas they’re looking to change don’t come into play for nearly another year, meaning there’s no reason lawmakers need to ram them through before the basic legalization provisions become effective on December 7.

Specifically, the governor, Stephens and Senate President Matt Huffman (R) have been talking about potential revisions focused on mitigating youth consumption, reallocating certain tax revenue and increasing resources to prevent impaired driving.

“To do that in the next couple of weeks, it’s going to be a real challenge to put forth such a large program that quickly,” Stephens said, as The Cleveland Plain Dealer reported.

Another state lawmaker, Rep. Cindy Abrams (R), isn’t wasting any time as she proposes her own changes to the legalization law, however. A bill she introduced last week, shortly after voters approved the marijuana measure, would use $40 million in cannabis tax revenue annually to support a law enforcement training fund. Any revenue in excess of $40 million per year would then be distributed according to the statutory initiative.

“The voters did approve Issue 2, and they had their idea of what the tax money was going to be used for,” Abrams said at a press conference on Tuesday. But she questioned if voters “really even know what they actually voted for.”

Keep reading

Ohio Governor Says Voters Shouldn’t Expect ‘Surprises’ As He Works With GOP Leadership To Amend Marijuana Legalization Law

The governor of Ohio met with GOP Senate and House leadership on Monday to discuss changes to a voter-approved marijuana legalization initiative that he wants to see implemented before part of the law take effect next month. Meanwhile, a key Democratic lawmaker who has championed cannabis reform says Republicans should have taken the chance to shape policy on the issue months or years ago.

Gov. Mike DeWine (R) said voters shouldn’t expect any “surprises,” and the proposed revisions that are being discussed would still honor the “spirit” of the reform. Potential changes would focus on mitigating youth consumption, reallocating certain tax revenue and increasing resources to prevent impaired driving.

The governor had already previewed the meeting with Senate President Matt Huffman (R) and House Speaker Jason Stephens (R) shortly after last week’s election, which saw voters approve legalization 57-43 percent.

“We have an obligation I believe, to carry that out,” DeWine told reporters following Monday’s discussion.

With respect to possible changes, he said he doesn’t think “there’s any surprises out there,” nor does he think “any of the things that I have suggested that we do really flies in the face of the spirit of what people were voting for.”

“I truly believe that most people went in [to vote] and the issue was, ‘Are we gonna have legal marijuana or we’re not going to have legal marijuana?’ And the details—I’m not sure people got focused on it,” he said. “I have to focus on it because we have to administer it. We have to make sure it actually does, in fact, work.”

Keep reading

Most Americans Say The U.S. Has ‘Lost Ground’ In War On Drugs, Gallup Poll Shows As Support For Marijuana Legalization Hits Record High

A majority of Americans now say that the U.S. is losing ground in the country’s “illegal drug problem,” according to a new Gallup poll. And at the same time, support for taking a fundamentally different approach to marijuana by enacting legalization has reached a record high.

The survey shows that 52 percent of respondents believe that the U.S. has “lost ground” in the drug war, while 24 percent said that the country has made progress. That’s a major reversal in public opinion compared to the last time Gallup asked Americans about the issue in 2019. At that time, a plurality (41 percent) was optimistic about progress, while 30 percent said the country was losing ground in combating illegal drugs.

That 22-point difference over the course of four years can likely be attributed to growing awareness and concern about the opioid overdose epidemic, which has compounded as fentanyl and other synthetic analogues have proliferated in the drug supply.

Part of the shift could also reflect a growing awareness that the decades-long focus on criminalization at the center of government drug strategies has not worked.

In any case, there are notable partisan divides in attitudes about progress in addressing drug issues, the new poll shows.

“Republicans are extremely negative about U.S. progress on illegal drugs, with 12 percent believing the U.S. is making progress and 75 percent losing ground,” Gallup’s analysis, published on Friday, says. “Independents are also decidedly pessimistic, with 22 percent believing progress is being made and 52 percent thinking the situation is getting worse.”

Keep reading

Michigan Marijuana Tax Revenue Grew By 49% Over The Past Year, Surpassing Alcohol Earnings

Sales of legal marijuana in Michigan contributed $266.2 million in tax revenue to the government during the most recent fiscal year, according to a new report from the legislature’s nonpartisan House Fiscal Agency. That’s more than the state made from the sale of beer, wine and liquor combined.

Tax from sales of adult-use cannabis were up 49.1 percent in fiscal year 2022–23, which ended in October, compared to $178.6 million collected the year before. That amounted to an additional $87.6 million in state revenue from cannabis sales compared to the prior 12 months.

Of all the major tax revenues itemized in the House Fiscal Agency report published last week, none grew at a faster rate than cannabis revenue.

Adult-use marijuana products are subject to a 10 percent state excise tax, which accounts for the $266.2 million. Products also incur the state’s standard 6 percent sales tax, which works out to an additional $159.7 million in revenue from legal marijuana transactions.

Looking at the cannabis excise tax alone, marijuana was responsible for nearly 0.8 percent of total state revenue recorded in the annual report. Including sales tax, the share works out to about 1.3 percent of total revenue.

The marijuana excise tax brought in more money for the state last fiscal year than alcohol taxes, which contributed about $192.6 million total—$46.6 million from beer and wine and $146 million from liquor That’s a shift from fiscal 2021–22, when combined alcohol taxes brought in roughly $12.9 million more revenue than cannabis.

By contrast, marijuana revenue amounted to less than half of the $722.2 million Michigan made from tobacco taxes in the most recent fiscal year.

In October 2023 alone, the marijuana excise tax produced $52.4 million in tax revenue—more than any other single source aside from sales and use taxes, income taxes, insurance taxes and tobacco taxes.

Michigan voters approved adult-use marijuana legalization in 2018, with legal sales beginning the next year.

The state has set sales records even as the average cost of marijuana has remained at record lows, with the price of an ounce for adult-use cannabis now hovering around $98 just a few months ago. In December 2021, by contrast, the cost of an ounce was about $180.

Last month, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) signed a pair of bills into law to allow state-licensed marijuana businesses to conduct trade with tribal cannabis entities. Both took effect immediately.

“The bills are intended to allow for the sale of product between the two types of businesses while maintaining a level playing field by requiring tribal businesses to pay the same tax rate as other businesses,” according to an analysis prepared by House staff.

Michigan is one of several states where cannabis tax has earned more revenue than taxes on alcohol.

During the most recent fiscal year in Illinois, for example, legal cannabis brought in $451.9 million—about $135.6 million more than alcohol.

Colorado last year state generated more income from marijuana than alcohol or cigarettes—and nearly as much as alcohol and tobacco combined.

Similar milestones have been seen in Arizona and Washington State.

Keep reading

Former FDA Official Says He’d Be ‘Shocked’ If DEA Doesn’t Reschedule Marijuana By 2024 Election

Speaking at a cannabis industry event on Thursday, a former Food and Drug Administration (FDA) official said he’d be “shocked” if the Drug Enforcement Administration doesn’t reschedule marijuana by next year’s presidential election.

“I would be really shocked if it took the DEA longer than the second quarter of next year to come up with its final rule,” said Howard Sklamberg, former FDA deputy commissioner for global regulatory operations and compliance. “Even when I was at FDA, we knew that important regulations that you wanted to get done in an election year, you want to get done by the summer before.”

Sklamberg also said he expects DEA will ultimately accept the FDA’s recommendation to put cannabis in Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) instead of reaching a contradictory scheduling decision.

“I personally would be surprised if DEA did not agree ultimately with FDA and [the Department of Health and Human Services]’s decision,” Sklamberg, who served as chair of FDA’s Marijuana Working Group from 2014 to 2017, said. “It certainly would be strange, in an issue that is such an important priority for the administration, for one part of the administration to reverse what another one has said.”

Sklamberg, now a lawyer at the firm Arnold and Porter, was one of a handful of panelists who spoke during a Thursday webinar hosted by the American Trade Association for Cannabis and Hemp’s (ATACH) Capital Markets Council. Others included Andrew Kline, a former policy advisor to then-Vice President Joe Biden (D) who’s now at the law firm Perkins Coie, and Adam Goers, a senior vice president at the multi-state marijuana operator The Cannabist Company (formerly Columbia Care).

The group’s mood toward August’s rescheduling recommendation was decidedly upbeat. “I’m really looking forward to this conversation,” Kline said at the start of the event, “and getting people to the place where they understand that this is a really good thing.”

Sklamberg called the possible move “a giant step in the right direction and one that, probably, you know, four years ago, most people would not have foreseen.”

Keep reading

State-Licensed Pot Suppliers Say Federal Prohibition Is Unconstitutional As Applied to Them

A lawsuit filed late last month in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts argues that the federal marijuana ban is unconstitutional as applied to the intrastate operations of state-licensed cannabis suppliers. That claim is similar to one that the U.S. Supreme Court decisively rejected in the 2005 case Gonzales v. Raich, which involved state-authorized medical use of marijuana. But the plaintiffs in Canna Provisions v. Garland—a pot shop chain and three other Massachusetts marijuana businesses—argue that several developments since then undermine the logic of that ruling.

In the 2005 case, Angel Raich and Diane Monson, two patients who used marijuana for symptom relief in compliance with California law, argued that Congress exceeded its authority “to regulate commerce…among the several states” when it purported to ban noncommercial production and possession of cannabis that never crossed state lines. Monson grew her own marijuana, while Raich relied on two caregivers who grew it for her.

It may seem obvious that the power to regulate interstate commerce does not cover conduct that is neither commercial nor interstate. But the Supreme Court had held otherwise in the 1942 case Wickard v. Filburn, which involved an Ohio farmer who exceeded his wheat quota under the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938. Although Roscoe Filburn planned to use the extra wheat “wholly for consumption on the farm,” the Court unanimously ruled that the collective impact of such decisions on interstate commerce was enough to justify the rule he violated.

When farmers grow wheat for their own consumption, the justices reasoned, that has “a substantial influence” on the interstate “price and market conditions” that Congress sought to regulate. “Even if appellee’s activity be local and though it may not be regarded as commerce,” Justice Robert H. Jackson wrote for the Court, “it may still, whatever its nature, be reached by Congress if it exerts a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce.”

Writing for the majority in Gonzales v. Raich, Justice John Paul Stevens applied similar reasoning to the federal ban on marijuana. “Our case law firmly establishes Congress’ power to regulate purely local activities that are part of an economic ‘class of activities’ that have a substantial effect on interstate commerce,” Stevens wrote. Wickard, he said, “establishes that Congress can regulate purely intrastate activity that is not itself ‘commercial,’ in that it is not produced for sale, if it concludes that failure to regulate that class of activity would undercut the regulation of the interstate market in that commodity.”

Keep reading

Congressional Researchers Warn That High Federal Marijuana Taxes Could Inhibit Industry’s Economic Potential

As the Biden administration’s marijuana scheduling review continues, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) has released a report cautioning that if cannabis is eventually legalized, lawmakers should consider the potential unintended consequences of imposing high federal taxes on marijuana products.

The non-partisan research body isn’t necessarily suggesting that federal legalization is imminent, but it pointed out that there are a number of comprehensive reform proposals that Congress may consider as the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) completes its scheduling review and decides whether to follow the recommendation of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) by moving marijuana to Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).

As it argued in another recent report, CRS said it’s “likely that DEA will reschedule marijuana according to HHS’s recommendation,” based on past precedent. Meanwhile, lawmakers have put forward several federal legalization proposals that could expand on that incremental change, including legislation that would tax and regulate cannabis.

“Recreational marijuana’s potential economic effects may be a factor in any congressional actions on the substance,” the report says, caveating that federal data on the topic is limited given the ongoing prohibition of cannabis. Congress could collect additional data if it moved to require agencies like the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) and Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) to start gathering such material, it said.

While federal data is generally limited, the U.S. Census Bureau did recently release its first report on state-level marijuana tax revenue following what the agency calls “a complete canvass of all state agencies” going back to July 2021.

Keep reading