Connect with us

Government

California Cannabis Tax Relief: CDFTA and Assembly Bill 195

Published

on

California cannabis tax relief is a big deal. And a real thing. What’s important now is how the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (“CDTFA”) interprets Assembly Bill 195.

As I previously blogged, California is finally on board with a modicum of cannabis tax relief for cannabis licensees (mainly for the benefit of cultivators). As of July 1, 2022, there is no more cultivation tax. The excise tax will stay at 15%, while the mark-up rate for arm’s-length transactions will drop from 80% to 75% (before recalculation on January 1 of next year).

There is a lot of hoopla and self-congratulating from the state on the passage of AB-195. Arguably, all it really does is move the tax headache and collection burden around between licensees. Still, it shows that the state is somewhat listening to the gripes of the industry. In any event, what matters now is how CDTFA interprets AB-195.

On July 7, 2022, CDTFA published the following PSA for all California cannabis licensees:

Cultivation Tax No Longer Applies

Beginning July 1, 2022, the cultivation tax no longer applies to cannabis or cannabis products that enter the commercial market. Additionally, distributors and manufacturers are no longer required to collect the cultivation tax from cultivators when a cultivator sells or transfers cannabis to a manufacturer or distributor on or after July 1, 2022.

What happens when a cultivator sells cannabis to a distributor or manufacturer on or after July 1, 2022?

The distributor or manufacturer must not collect the cultivation tax from the cultivator. The invoice between the cultivator and distributor or manufacturer should indicate no cultivation tax was due.

What happens when a cultivator sells cannabis to a distributor or manufacturer before July 1, 2022, and the cannabis or cannabis products enter the commercial market on or after July 1, 2022?

The cultivation tax is not due on cannabis or cannabis products that enter the commercial market on or after July 1, 2022, even if a cultivator sold or transferred cannabis prior to July 1, 2022. Any cultivation tax collected on cannabis that entered the commercial market on or after July 1, 2022, must be returned to the cultivator that originally paid the cultivation tax. Cannabis enters the commercial market when the cannabis or cannabis products pass the required testing and quality assurance review.

How does a manufacturer pay excess cultivation tax collected?

A manufacturer who collected cultivation tax and cannot return it to the cultivator who paid it must transfer the excess cultivation tax collected to a distributor for the distributor to pay the excess cultivation tax collected to CDTFA.

How does a distributor pay excess cultivation tax?

A distributor must pay excess cultivation tax collected to CDTFA by reporting and paying the excess cultivation tax collected on their next cannabis tax return.

We encourage you to read our online Tax Guide for Cannabis Businesses at www.cdtfa.ca.gov/industry/cannabis.htm, for more information about the upcoming changes.

For More Information?

For more information, visit our website at www.cdtfa.ca.gov. You may also call our Customer Service Center at 1‑800‑400‑7115 (CRS:711), then select the option for Special Taxes and Fees. Customer service representatives are available Monday through Friday from 7:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. (Pacific time), except on state holidays.

The big takeaway from the above is that the cannabis cultivation tax is dead and cultivators will receive a windfall of tax refunds on their cannabis that “entered the commercial” market on or after July 1, 2022. Refunds apply even to cannabis that was sold before July 1 (but then entered the commercial market on or after July 1). The refund process is entirely up to CDTFA to decide and regulate. Cultivators should get their ducks in a row now to ensure they’re getting the refunds to which they’re entitled, because it’s likely that those funds will otherwise go back to the state if it otherwise cannot be refunded.

As the other parts of AB-195 are implemented, we’ll be sure to keep you in the loop on their legal impacts and California cannabis tax in general.

Source: https://harrisbricken.com/cannalawblog/california-cannabis-tax-relief-cdfta-and-assembly-bill-195/

Business

New Mexico cannabis operator fined, loses license for alleged BioTrack fraud

Published

on

New Mexico regulators fined a cannabis operator nearly $300,000 and revoked its license after the company allegedly created fake reports in the state’s traceability software.

The New Mexico Cannabis Control Division (CCD) accused marijuana manufacturer and retailer Golden Roots of 11 violations, according to Albuquerque Business First.

Golden Roots operates the The Cannabis Revolution Dispensary.

The majority of the violations are related to the Albuquerque company’s improper use of BioTrack, which has been New Mexico’s track-and-trace vendor since 2015.

The CCD alleges Golden Roots reported marijuana production only two months after it had received its vertically integrated license, according to Albuquerque Business First.

Because cannabis takes longer than two months to be cultivated, the CCD was suspicious of the report.

After inspecting the company’s premises, the CCD alleged Golden Roots reported cultivation, transportation and sales in BioTrack but wasn’t able to provide officers who inspected the site evidence that the operator was cultivating cannabis.

In April, the CCD revoked Golden Roots’ license and issued a $10,000 fine, according to the news outlet.

The company requested a hearing, which the regulator scheduled for Sept. 1.

At the hearing, the CCD testified that the company’s dried-cannabis weights in BioTrack were suspicious because they didn’t seem to accurately reflect how much weight marijuana loses as it dries.

Company employees also poorly accounted for why they were making adjustments in the system of up to 24 pounds of cannabis, making comments such as “bad” or “mistake” in the software, Albuquerque Business First reported.

Golden Roots was fined $298,972.05 – the amount regulators allege the company made selling products that weren’t properly accounted for in BioTrack.

The CCD has been cracking down on cannabis operators accused of selling products procured from out-of-state or not grown legally:

Golden Roots was the first alleged rulebreaker in New Mexico to be asked to pay a large fine.

Source: https://mjbizdaily.com/new-mexico-cannabis-operator-fined-loses-license-for-alleged-biotrack-fraud/

Continue Reading

Business

Marijuana companies suing US attorney general in federal prohibition challenge

Published

on

Four marijuana companies, including a multistate operator, have filed a lawsuit against U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland in which they allege the federal MJ prohibition under the Controlled Substances Act is no longer constitutional.

According to the complaint, filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Massachusetts, retailer Canna Provisions, Treevit delivery service CEO Gyasi Sellers, cultivator Wiseacre Farm and MSO Verano Holdings Corp. are all harmed by “the federal government’s unconstitutional ban on cultivating, manufacturing, distributing, or possessing intrastate marijuana.”

Verano is headquartered in Chicago but has operations in Massachusetts; the other three operators are based in Massachusetts.

The lawsuit seeks a ruling that the “Controlled Substances Act is unconstitutional as applied to the intrastate cultivation, manufacture, possession, and distribution of marijuana pursuant to state law.”

The companies want the case to go before the U.S. Supreme Court.

They hired prominent law firm Boies Schiller Flexner to represent them.

The New York-based firm’s principal is David Boies, whose former clients include Microsoft, former presidential candidate Al Gore and Elizabeth Holmes’ disgraced startup Theranos.

Similar challenges to the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA) have failed.

One such challenge led to a landmark Supreme Court decision in 2005.

In Gonzalez vs. Raich, the highest court in the United States ruled in a 6-3 decision that the commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution gave Congress the power to outlaw marijuana federally, even though state laws allow the cultivation and sale of cannabis.

In the 18 years since that ruling, 23 states and the District of Columbia have legalized adult-use marijuana and the federal government has allowed a multibillion-dollar cannabis industry to thrive.

Since both Congress and the U.S. Department of Justice, currently headed by Garland, have declined to intervene in state-licensed marijuana markets, the key facts that led to the Supreme Court’s 2005 ruling “no longer apply,” Boies said in a statement Thursday.

“The Supreme Court has since made clear that the federal government lacks the authority to regulate purely intrastate commerce,” Boies said.

“Moreover, the facts on which those precedents are based are no longer true.”

Verano President Darren Weiss said in a statement the company is “prepared to bring this case all the way to the Supreme Court in order to align federal law with how Congress has acted for years.”

While the Biden administration’s push to reschedule marijuana would help solve marijuana operators’ federal tax woes, neither rescheduling nor modest Congressional reforms such as the SAFER Banking Act “solve the fundamental issue,” Weiss added.

“The application of the CSA to lawful state-run cannabis business is an unconstitutional overreach on state sovereignty that has led to decades of harm, failed businesses, lost jobs, and unsafe working conditions.”

Source: https://mjbizdaily.com/marijuana-companies-suing-us-attorney-general-to-overturn-federal-prohibition/

Continue Reading

Business

Alabama to make another attempt Dec. 1 to award medical cannabis licenses

Published

on

Alabama regulators are targeting Dec. 1 to award the first batch of medical cannabis business licenses after the agency’s first two attempts were scrapped because of scoring errors and litigation.

The first licenses will be awarded to individual cultivators, delivery providers, processors, dispensaries and state testing labs, according to the Alabama Medical Cannabis Commission (AMCC).

Then, on Dec. 12, the AMCC will award licenses for vertically integrated operations, a designation set primarily for multistate operators.

Licenses are expected to be handed out 28 days after they have been awarded, so MMJ production could begin in early January, according to the Alabama Daily News.

That means MMJ products could be available for patients around early March, an AMCC spokesperson told the media outlet.

Regulators initially awarded 21 business licenses in June, only to void them after applicants alleged inconsistencies with how the applications were scored.

Then, in August, the state awarded 24 different licenses – 19 went to June recipients – only to reverse themselves again and scratch those licenses after spurned applicants filed lawsuits.

A state judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by Chicago-based MSO Verano Holdings Corp., but another lawsuit is pending.

Source: https://mjbizdaily.com/alabama-plans-to-award-medical-cannabis-licenses-dec-1/

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 420 Reports Marijuana News & Information Website | Reefer News | Cannabis News