Business
California voters approve a dozen cannabis ballot measures to expand retail
California voters approved 12 local ballot measures in the 2022 midterm elections that will either expand or create retail cannabis markets in a dozen municipalities, with most of the gains centered in Los Angeles and San Diego counties.
All in, the wins should translate to more than 70 new retail licenses and countless other business opportunities for plant-touching and ancillary companies serving those retailers.
By contrast, six municipalities rejected pro-cannabis ballot measures.
L.A. County alone could create 25 retail licenses after voters in the nation’s most-populous county widely approved taxing marijuana businesses in unincorporated areas, including a 6% tax on gross retail receipts.
In San Diego County, the country’s fifth-most-populous county, voters approved a tax measure that ultimately could lead to more than 20 new retail licenses.
Measure A included a 6% sales tax for retailers.
The county, which has nearly 3.3 million residents, has approved only five marijuana businesses, according to San Diego TV station KUSI.
“Access has always been an issue,” said George Sadler, CEO of San Diego-headquartered cannabis brand Gelato. “Any progress is a big plus.”
Voters in traditionally more conservative Orange County approved cannabis business tax measures in Huntington Beach and Laguna Woods, which could create 10 retail licenses in Huntington and one in Laguna Woods.
Despite its massive population and size, Orange County is a marijuana desert.
Santa Ana, Orange County’s second-largest city with about 320,000 residents, is the only municipality in the county with operational marijuana stores, though nearby Costa Mesa and Stanton are in the permitting process.
That’s why the Huntington Beach passage is noteworthy – not only for the 10 retail licenses the city of 200,000 residents plans to issue but also because it’s now one of the few coastal cities along California’s 840-mile shoreline that allow recreational stores.
Santa Monica also bucked that trend when voters approved a city-led ballot tax initiative that included a 3% tax on non-medical cannabis retailers, a 2% tax on medical cannabis retailers and a 1% tax on other licensed cannabis businesses, with a maximum of 10% gross tax pending city council approval.
The affluent coastal city steeped in cannabis culture has only approved two medical marijuana dispensaries.
California voters rejected six cannabis-related ballot measures, including a clean sweep in L.A.’s beach cities.
“Even though people may have been OK with legal sales, they were not OK with these measures,” said Hirsh Jain, founder of Los Angeles-based cannabis consultancy Ananda Strategy, which analyzed the election results.
In Sacramento County, a majority of voters approved special taxes on gross receipts from marijuana and hemp businesses to fund homeless services, but a two-thirds supermajority was required for passage.
Passage of Measure B would have paved the way for the establishment of 20-40 marijuana retail licenses.
South Bay says no way
When Redondo Beach voters overwhelmingly rejected a special-election referendum in October to add one dispensary beyond the two the city approved in July, it surprised industry watchers.
That ripple turned into a wave of opposition that swept across L.A.’s beach cities, with voters in Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach and El Segundo upholding existing bans on commercial cannabis activity by wide margins.
“We had a major failure in the South Bay,” Jain said.
Though voters in those affluent coastal communities opposed expansion, they approved taxing the industry – a prevailing trend in California this midterm – if local laws change to end prohibitions.
The four ballot measures that aimed to expand retail were led and funded by Elliot Ellis, owner of Long Beach-based Catalyst Cannabis Co., who attracted plenty of fans and detractors leading up to Election Day for his brash videos on social media bashing local politicos and policy as well as touting advocacy efforts.
In Redondo Beach, the cannabis measure was tied to another ballot question asking to recall City Council member Zein Obagi Jr., a critic of marijuana business expansion.
That recall was soundly defeated.
“We didn’t help ourselves in the South Bay being who we are,” said Lewis, who learned some lessons the hard way.
“Negotiation and or getting city support is always the way to go,” he said.
“It’s really hard to go into the headwinds.”
Common thread of opposition
The marijuana ballot failures in California reflected some polling trends across the United States, particularly in Arkansas.
Opposition forces in suburban L.A. and Sausalito positioned their arguments similarly to those in Arkansas; a yes vote for recreational sales would provide a monopolistic advantage to a few benefactors.
“They felt like it was an ambush,” Lewis said of the opposition coalition.
“We should have engaged and tried to negotiate some resolution.”
In Arkansas, voters overwhelmingly quashed an industry-led ballot referendum to legalize adult-use sales, a setback to establish the first recreational marijuana market in a deep-red, conservative Southern state.
In Sausalito, voters were asked to reverse a repeal banning all marijuana sales in the small Northern California town linked to San Francisco via the Golden Gate Bridge.
That measure was written by Sausalito-based Otter Brands, the sole benefactor if it passed. The company doesn’t have an operating store in its hometown but wants one.
With 100% of votes counted, the no votes dominated, 72% to 28%.
Ballot authors included a stipulation that only businesses seeking retail approval before April 2021 could qualify, according to the Bay City News Foundation.
And the only company qualified under that criteria was Otter Brands.
“Most cities want to dictate their cannabis laws rather than allow one group to monopolize a particular area,” said Arun Kurichety, founder and chief operating officer of Petalfast, a cannabis sales and marketing agency based in Irvine, California.
The perception of monopolies or unfair business advantages can rally voters, particularly in smaller, insular communities, according to Jain.
“I would say the lesson here, both at the state level and at the local level, is most people support legal cannabis,” he said.
“But they need to believe in even-handed measures moving forward, otherwise it’s going to cause cleavages in the community.
“It’s really a wake-up call that we have to sit down and pass public policy that designs regulation, or we’re going to keep having these battles.”
Source: https://mjbizdaily.com/california-voters-approve-dozen-cannabis-ballot-measures-to-expand-retail/
Business
Alleged Crores Pharma Scam Mastermind Arrested from Surat
After evading law enforcement for nearly 13 years, an accused linked to a large-scale pharmaceutical fraud case has been arrested by Delhi Police from Surat, Gujarat. The suspect is alleged to have orchestrated a series of financial scams involving fake identities, forged documents, and dishonoured cheques used to procure high-value pharmaceutical raw materials.
Authorities say the accused, identified as Himmat Singh Lodha, is believed to have defrauded multiple pharmaceutical companies in Delhi of goods worth approximately ₹98 lakh before disappearing and remaining underground for years.
Fake Business Deals and Dishonoured Cheques Used in Fraud
Investigators claim the accused posed as a legitimate pharmaceutical trader and placed bulk orders for expensive drug ingredients, offering post-dated cheques as payment security.
In one documented case from 2013, he allegedly obtained around 550 kilograms of Gliclazide, a diabetes-related pharmaceutical ingredient, valued at over ₹26 lakh. When suppliers attempted to encash the cheques, they were reportedly returned with the remark “account closed.”
Following the transaction, the accused allegedly vacated his office and rented residence and disappeared without settling payments. He was later declared a proclaimed offender in 2016 after repeatedly failing to appear before court proceedings. Authorities had also issued a reward for information leading to his arrest.
Multiple Identities and Repeated Fraud Pattern
Police investigations further link the accused to another cheating case dating back to 2012, where he allegedly used a fake identity, “Kailash Jain,” to obtain a large consignment of Ambroxol HCL, a pharmaceutical compound used in cough medications. The value of that consignment was estimated at around ₹72 lakh.
Officials believe the accused followed a consistent modus operandi—posing as a credible businessman, securing high-value goods on deferred payment terms, and then disappearing after delivery while shutting down business operations.
Investigators suspect that forged business records, fake company credentials, and fabricated financial histories were used to build trust with suppliers and gain access to expensive raw materials.
Multi-State Surveillance Leads to Arrest in Surat
A special Crime Branch team tracked the accused through coordinated surveillance efforts across multiple cities, including Mumbai, Ahmedabad, and Surat. After nearly a month of technical monitoring and intelligence gathering, officials located and arrested him from a residential area in Surat.
Authorities also revealed that the accused had been involved in property-related activities while staying under the radar to avoid detection.
Growing Threat of Corporate Identity Fraud
The case highlights a rising trend of organised financial fraud targeting industries that rely heavily on trust-based transactions and deferred payments. Experts note that criminals increasingly exploit gaps in corporate verification systems by using fake GST registrations, temporary offices, and forged documentation to appear legitimate.
Cybercrime and financial fraud specialists warn that such schemes are becoming more complex with the widespread availability of digital business tools, making it easier to create convincing but fraudulent corporate identities.
Experts Urge Stronger Due Diligence in High-Value Transactions
Experts, including former IPS officer and cybercrime specialist Prof. Triveni Singh, emphasize the need for stricter verification procedures in commercial dealings. He noted that relying solely on paperwork or digital business profiles can expose companies to significant financial risk.
Authorities and industry experts recommend physical verification of business operations, bank account validation, and detailed background checks before engaging in high-value or deferred-payment transactions—particularly in sectors like pharmaceuticals, where single consignments can involve transactions worth crores.
Business
EU Pressure Builds on Google as Regulators Face Calls for Massive Fine Over Search Practices
A growing coalition of European industry groups is intensifying pressure on regulators to take decisive action against Google over allegations of unfair search practices that could reshape competition rules across the region’s digital economy.
Investigation Under Digital Markets Act Gains Momentum
The case is being examined by the European Commission under the European Union’s landmark Digital Markets Act (DMA), introduced to curb the dominance of major technology platforms and ensure fair competition.
Launched in March 2024, the investigation focuses on whether Google has been prioritising its own services in search results, potentially disadvantaging rival businesses that rely on online visibility to reach customers.
Industry Groups Demand Swift Action
Several prominent European organizations have jointly urged regulators to conclude the probe without further delay. They argue that prolonged investigations allow alleged anti-competitive practices to continue, putting European companies—especially startups—at a disadvantage.
Signatories include the European Publishers Council, the European Magazine Media Association, the European Tech Alliance, and EU Travel Tech.
In a joint statement, these groups warned that delays in enforcement are affecting innovation, profitability, and growth prospects for regional businesses competing in digital markets.
Google Denies Allegations
Google has rejected claims of bias, stating that its search algorithms are designed to deliver the most relevant and useful results to users. The company has also proposed adjustments to address regulatory concerns.
However, critics argue that these changes are insufficient and fail to address the core issue of market dominance.
Potential Billion-Euro Penalties
If found in violation of the DMA, Google could face significant financial penalties. Under EU rules, fines can reach a substantial percentage of a company’s global turnover, potentially amounting to billions of euros.
Regulators may also impose corrective measures requiring changes to business practices, which could have long-term implications for how digital platforms operate in Europe.
Wider Implications for Big Tech
The case highlights ongoing tensions between European regulators and major U.S. technology firms. In recent years, the EU has taken a more aggressive stance in enforcing competition laws, aiming to create a level playing field for local businesses.
A final ruling against Google could set a major precedent, influencing future enforcement actions and shaping the regulatory landscape for global tech companies operating within Europe.
As scrutiny intensifies, the outcome of the investigation is expected to play a critical role in defining the future of digital competition across the European Union.
AI & Technology
Amazon Faces Potential Criminal Trial in Italy Over €1.2 Billion Tax Evasion Allegations
Milan: U.S. tech giant Amazon is facing the prospect of a major legal showdown in Italy, after prosecutors in Milan formally requested a court to move forward with criminal proceedings over alleged tax evasion totaling approximately ₹12,500 crore (€1.2 billion).
The case targets Amazon’s European division along with four senior executives, marking one of the most significant tax-related investigations involving a global e-commerce platform in Europe.
Trial Push Despite Multi-Million Euro Settlement
The move comes even after Amazon reached a financial settlement with Italian tax authorities in December, agreeing to pay around ₹5,500 crore (€527 million), including interest, to resolve part of the dispute.
Typically, such settlements lead to the closure of criminal investigations. However, Milan prosecutors have opted to proceed, signaling a tougher stance on alleged corporate tax violations.
A preliminary hearing is expected in the coming months, where a judge will decide whether to formally indict the company and its executives or dismiss the case.
Allegations of VAT Evasion Through Marketplace Sellers
At the center of the investigation are claims that Amazon’s platform enabled non-European Union sellers to avoid paying value-added tax (VAT) on goods sold to Italian consumers between 2019 and 2021.
Prosecutors allege that the company’s marketplace structure allowed thousands of foreign vendors—many reportedly based in China—to operate without fully disclosing their identities or tax obligations. This, authorities argue, led to substantial VAT losses for the Italian government.
Under Italian law, online platforms facilitating sales can be held partially liable if third-party sellers fail to comply with tax requirements, a key point in the prosecution’s case.
Italian Government Named as Affected Party
In their filing, prosecutors identified Italy’s Economy Ministry as the injured party, citing significant financial damage resulting from the alleged tax evasion.
Legal experts say the outcome of the case could have wide-ranging implications across the European Union, where VAT systems are harmonized and similar compliance rules apply to digital marketplaces.
Multiple Investigations Add to Pressure
The VAT probe is just one of several legal challenges facing Amazon in Italy. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office is reportedly examining additional tax-related issues covering more recent years.
Meanwhile, Milan authorities are pursuing separate investigations into alleged customs fraud linked to imports from China and whether Amazon maintained an undeclared “permanent establishment” in Italy—potentially exposing it to higher tax liabilities.
In a separate regulatory action, Italy’s data protection authority recently ordered an Amazon unit to stop using personal data from over 1,800 employees at a warehouse near Rome.
Amazon Denies Allegations
Amazon has consistently denied wrongdoing and indicated it will strongly contest the allegations in court if the case proceeds. The company has also warned that prolonged legal uncertainty could impact investor confidence and Italy’s appeal as a destination for international business.
Broader Impact on Europe’s Digital Economy
If the case moves to trial, it could become a landmark moment for the regulation of global e-commerce platforms in Europe. Governments across the region are increasingly scrutinizing how digital marketplaces handle tax compliance, especially in cross-border transactions.
With online retail continuing to expand, regulators are under mounting pressure to ensure that multinational platforms and third-party sellers adhere to the same tax rules as traditional businesses.
-
Business3 years agoPot Odor Does Not Justify Probable Cause for Vehicle Searches, Minnesota Court Affirms
-
Business3 years agoNew Mexico cannabis operator fined, loses license for alleged BioTrack fraud
-
Business3 years agoAlabama to make another attempt Dec. 1 to award medical cannabis licenses
-
Business3 years agoWashington State Pays Out $9.4 Million in Refunds Relating to Drug Convictions
-
Business3 years agoMarijuana companies suing US attorney general in federal prohibition challenge
-
Business3 years agoLegal Marijuana Handed A Nothing Burger From NY State
-
Business3 years agoCan Cannabis Help Seasonal Depression
-
Blogs3 years agoCannabis Art Is Flourishing On Etsy
