Business
How Biden’s rescheduling of marijuana could affect the US industry
After a half-century in which marijuana endured the strictest prohibition allowed under the law, President Joe Biden has set in motion a process that could lead to revolutionary changes for federal MJ policy.
It could mean struggling American marijuana companies can finally enjoy long-desired tax relief, or those same firms could lose cannabis entirely to big pharmaceutical companies.
Both outcomes – and many other scenarios – are all possible under the “administrative rescheduling” process the president activated last Thursday, according to legal and scientific experts.
At the same time, an act of Congress could cancel out whatever recommendations emerge from the Justice Department, the Department of Health and Human Services and the alphabet soup of other federal agencies responsible for drug policy now tasked with reviewing how Washington DC handles marijuana.
“Anyone who says they know what will happen doesn’t know what they’re talking about,” said Andrew Kline, senior counsel in the Denver office of the Perkins Coie law firm and former public policy director at the National Cannabis Industry Association.
“There are just too many unknowns at the moment.”
Under federal law, drugs fall into one of six categories, ranging from Schedule 1 to unscheduled.
And there are the five steps of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), ranging from most to least dangerous – and restricted.
There are also many substances understood to science as “drugs” that are unscheduled.
These include popular (and potentially deadly) tonics such as alcohol and tobacco as well as the intoxicating hemp-derived delta-8 and delta-9 THC products sold online and in barely regulated smoke shops and bodegas unleashed by the 2018 Farm Bill.
The situation is more complex than some observers realize, but here’s a brief review of the rescheduling process, where marijuana could finally end up and what it would mean for the current and future U.S. cannabis industry.
Schedule 1: status quo
Background: Since 1970, cannabis has been classified under Controlled Substances Act of the Richard Nixon era as a Schedule 1 controlled substance, the category for drugs with no recognized medical application, “a high potential for abuse and the potential to create severe psychological and/or physical dependence,” according to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration.
Other Schedule 1 drugs include heroin, LSD and peyote.
Even in 1970, the move was controversial. In 2022, this situation “makes no sense,” the president noted last week.
Very famously, marijuana has a “lethal dose” so high it’s never been definitively established in humans, while drugs classified as Schedule 2 have a large and growing body count.
Of the 107,622 Americans killed by a drug overdose in 2021, none died from cannabis while 71,238 died from synthetic opioids such as fentanyl that a doctor could theoretically prescribe, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
There is also growing recognition that cannabis has medicinal applications, as former U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy suggested in 2015 and as a 2017 National Academies review echoed.
Though the Schedule 1 status creates an infamous Catch-22 – studies are needed to justify a rescheduling, but Schedule 1 makes cannabis harder to study, a confounding logical pretzel Congress has thus far been unable to untangle – it seems certain that marijuana will be removed from this category, experts agreed.
“Schedule 1 is a fiction,” Kline said. “There’s clear evidence of its medical utility and little evidence of the high potential for abuse.
“There’s no question it should be removed,” he added. “The question is where does it go.”
Business impact: Under Schedule 1, marijuana companies are barred from taking traditional business deductions – thanks to Section 280E of the federal tax code. That has put a major crimp on their earnings. Scientific research involving marijuana also faces heavy restrictions.
Schedule 2: pharmaceutical model
Background: Schedule 2 drugs are like Schedule 1 drugs, with one exception – clinical application with legal availability through a prescription or under supervision from a physician.
These include Adderall and Ritalin as well as cocaine, methamphetamine, fentanyl and other synthetic opioids.
Schedule 2 – the category sought by a rescheduling petition filed in 1972 by the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) and finally rejected in 1994 – is in a way the cannabis industry’s worst nightmare: legal relief and a relaxation of prohibition but availability only via the arduous and expensive U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval process.
Business Impact: Federally legal marijuana would be “subject to tremendous testing and myriad regulatory requirements that are far beyond what states currently implement,” as The Brookings Institution scholars John Hudak and Grace Wallack wrote in 2015, when recreational cannabis sales were underway in several states in much the same fashion they are now across much of the country.
It would also quite likely still be heavily taxed, as Kline and other experts have said. Section 280E prohibits tax deductions for “trade or business” in Schedule 1 or 2 controlled substances that is “prohibited by Federal law or the law of any State in which such trade or business is conducted.”
Schedule 3-4: tax relief, but doctor’s orders
Background: Schedule 3 is where drugs with “a moderate to low potential for physical and psychological dependence,” such as Tylenol with codeine, anabolic steroids and ketamine, live.
This is the threshold “where 280E tax exemption is no longer an issue,” said Shane Pennington, a Denver-based counsel with the Vincente Sederberg law firm.
This is also the classification sought after in the thus-far symbolic bills introduced by the Congressional Cannabis Caucus that have died in committee without a hearing. That is no huge tragedy, as they currently do not stand a chance of passage in the Senate.
Yet, as Pennington observed, this also isn’t what most existing cannabis companies would want, since Schedule 3 drugs are also only generally legally available with a doctor’s authority and, thus, some level of compliance with the FDA approval process.
The same is true with drugs in Schedule 4, which have a “low potential for abuse,” such as Ambien, Ativan and Xanax.
Business impact: It’s here that the fundamental problem with using the Controlled Substances Act to regulate marijuana appears, at least in the cannabis industry’s eyes: You can’t get rid of the FDA, and the FDA process isn’t something that the current industry is built to comply with.
“People need to understand that regardless of the schedule, you’re still subject to the FDCA (Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act),” Pennington said.
“The point is that the model is not built for cannabis.”
The implications of Biden’s announcement and the chances for other federal reform will be unpacked immediately after the midterm elections at MJBizCon, Nov. 15-18. Catch the post-election analysis for the inside scoop on what’s possible and the implications for cannabis business opportunities.
Schedule 5: over the counter, or unscheduled?
Background: Schedule 5 drugs are still FDA-approved and regulated, but they are sold over the counter in pharmacies, supermarkets, gas stations and convenience stores like low-codeine cough syrup.
That’s exactly where most big cannabis companies would love to have their products appear – except, as Pennington pointed out, Schedule 5 products are not considered recreational or adult use.
These include cough syrup formulations.
In that analysis, no place on the Controlled Substances Act is appropriate for marijuana at all, though most observers agree that a complete removal from the CSA is something federal authorities are unlikely to recommend.
Business impact: Better from a C-suite and investors’ point of view would be total removal from the CSA – the legal status enjoyed by delta-8 and delta-9 THC products (though some states currently ban hemp-derived products sold outside their state-regulated cannabis industries).
Rescheduling, then, “would have some benefits but could unintentionally impact the 37 state medical (marijuana) programs which could effectively be dismantled were it placed into Schedule 2 or 3,” said David Holland, a New York City-based cannabis attorney.
“There would need to be a tremendous amount of federal regulation and that would only permit medical usage, not responsible adult usage.”
The upshot
What Biden might have unleashed could turn out to be “an unintended shock wave were rescheduling undertaken, rather than descheduling, which would allow the states to decide the issue of medical legalization and how it may be used in each state – medically and/or recreationally,” Holland said.
In this way, administrative rescheduling could herald tax relief and bigger margins for existing publicly traded marijuana companies.
It could also just as easily lead to an end of federal prohibition packaged with U.S. regulations so onerous that newly burdened big firms disappear and cede marijuana to something like the state-recognized small cooperatives that thrived in the early days of medical cannabis.
About the only thing known is that Biden – in making the most consequential step on federal marijuana policy of any president since Nixon – has unleashed a very long, very complex and very unpredictable force on the world that might yet wreak unintended havoc.
Source: https://mjbizdaily.com/how-biden-rescheduling-of-marijuana-could-affect-us-industry/
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
