The Cleveland Cannabis College is set to begin offering courses as the state crafts its medical cannabis regulations, NewsNet5 reports. According to the college’s website, its next course, Introduction to Cannabis, is to be conducted this weekend at the campus in Independence.
The college will offer training and educational courses about medical cannabis laws and history, and courses on horticulture.
“We offer a well rounded program that educates individuals in horticulture, history, legal, retail, activism, patient access and more,” the website states. “After completing the general coursework, our staff is dedicated to finding high paying jobs and internships in all areas of the cannabis industry.”
According to the NewsNet5 report, educators anticipate students will get jobs six months after graduation.
The two-day 14-hour introduction course, which is required for all majors, costs $250, and will cover horticulture, history, legal, business, extracts, edibles, and topicals, activism, and patient access.
From there, students are encouraged to pick a major which they will be able to pursue in the Summer/Fall semester of 2017. Students will be able to receive credits for attending cannabis seminars and events, and enrollees will also have access to incubator space and study labs so long as they remain enrolled.
South Africa has legalized cannabis for medicinal use as the Medical Control Council announced it would publish guidelines for medical cannabis production, according to an IOLreport. The framework would allow patients with severe medical conditions to appeal to the council for approval for medical cannabis which would be dispensed under supervision by medical practitioners.
Members of the Inkatha Freedom Party called the decision a “major victory” and tribute to late MP Mario Oriani-Ambrosini who pushed for legalizing medical cannabis prior to his death from lung cancer in 2014.
IFP MP Narend Singh hailed the reforms as a “major breakthrough and fantastic news for freedom of choice.”
“Mario had fought tirelessly for this and although he proposed cannabis beyond medicinal use to also include it for recreational use, we agreed to withdraw every clause relating to non-medicinal use in our efforts to ensure it becomes legal,” Singh said in the report, noting that “thousands of patients” are already using the oil but at “exorbitant costs.”
“Production must be aimed at making it a medicinal, affordable drug for those who need it. It should not be an exclusive drug of choice for those who have the money,” he said. “That is what we are arguing for.”
Quintin van Kerken, a representative for South Africa’s Anti-Drug Alliance, said that medical professionals “need massive education” about the products before they are able to recommend their use to patients.
“They need to unlearn a lot of the negative myths around cannabis if patients’ right to cannabis can be fully supported by health professionals,” he said.
The Medical Control Council did not provide a timeline for the guidelines’ publication.
A bipartisan coalition of lawmakers from states with adult-use cannabis laws have come together to form the Congressional Cannabis Caucus, hoping to embolden support for normalizing the industry on the federal level.
California Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a Republican, said the lawmakers are seeking “to make major changes” in the national attitude toward cannabis. “If we do, many people are going to live better lives,” he said during a press conference announcing the caucus’ launch.
Rohrabacher is joined on the caucus by Democratic Representatives Earl Blumenauer (Oregon) and Jared Polis (Colorado), and Rohrabacher’s fellow Republican Rep. Donald Young (Alaska).
“We will be trying to do everything we can to keep the momentum going that we’ve established in these last four to five years as we’ve seen great progress on this issue,” Roharbacher said. “Now with a new administration it’s vitally important that we pay attention and don’t do this haphazardly and we get together and have a professional presentation to the people of the United States and to our fellow members of why it’s important to us to take the policies that have not worked…and change those policies so it works for the people of this country.”
Blumenauer said he has become “deeply concerned” about the gap between the public and the policy makers, between “what is rational policy, and where the federal government is,” he said.
“We saw this wave crest in November with eight states moving successful ballot measure to expand adult-use or medical marijuana,” he said. “We’re at the point now where 95 percent of the American public are in states or territories where some aspect of marijuana or medical marijuana is available.”
During the press conference, the members indicated they would be seeking like-minded legislators to join their cause.
Safer Arizona has filed an initiative with the Secretary of State’s office seeking to legalize adult-use cannabis in the state after the measure was narrowly defeated by voters during November’s General Election, according to a report from Cronkite News. Arizonans would have another chance at legalization if the advocates can collect 152,000 valid signatures from registered voters by July 1, 2018,
The Safer Arizona Cannabis Legalization Act would legalize possession, use, consumption, and transportation of cannabis for adults 21 and older, create a regulated and taxed cannabis market, and allow the home growing of up to 48 plants. Additionally, the measure would provide relief for individuals with some previous cannabis convictions, and seeks to provide protection for parental custody rights and for firearm owners. It also includes language that would prevent the state from “re-implementing cannabis prohibition and conspiring with other governments to enforce cannabis prohibition laws.”
“This is what people are getting at when they go for cannabis legalization,” Dave Wisniewski, chairman of Safer Arizona, said in the report. “Everything that has passed so far has been investor driven and doesn’t take on the whole problem.”
Chuck Coughlin, president of HighGround, a public affairs firm, said Proposition 205, which was the only state cannabis measure to be rejected by voters last November, was poorly crafted and put to voters too soon – Arizona passed their medical cannabis laws in 2010.
“It is a dramatic amount of change in a short amount of time,” he said. “Other places had medicinal legalized for some time before full legalization.”
Wisniewski indicated that the new proposal sets caps on the general sales tax, allows more plants per home grow, and places the regulation under the state Department of Agriculture rather than creating a whole new agency.
“Prop. 205 was legitimately a very flawed law. There was a large population of cannabis consumers who voted ‘no’ on it,” Wisniewski said. “I don’t believe Arizona voted down Prop. 205 because they didn’t want marijuana.”
The South Dakota Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee has approved a measure that would legalize full-scale hemp production in the state, designating hemp as an oilseed, according to a South Dakota Public Radioreport. The committee passed the bill 9-2.
Proponents pointed to the success of North Dakota’s pilot hemp program, but opponents were concerned that the federal government could crack down on hemp farmers.
“We have an opportunity to maybe start something a little new, it’ll take years to get to a point where it’ll make an impact on our state ag economy but it has to start somewhere, you know, years ago soybeans were in the same spot, people didn’t raise a lot of soybeans and the ethanol industry, like you said was probably started in somebody’s garage in a very small way, so not trying and not even wanting to try is kind of the biggest shame, I think,” Committee Chairman Rep. Herman Otten said in the report.
Jenna Howell, director of the state Department of Safety’s Legal and Regulatory Services, said the state’s law enforcement doesn’t have the resources to test crops to ensure they contain less than the .3 percent of THC allowable to be considered hemp under the 2014 federal Farm Bill.
“Having those things legally grow in our state, we are concerned send mixed messages to our youth who we are trying to warn about the dangers of illegal drugs, and we would ask we not further confuse that issue,” she said.
The proposal includes testing requirements, permitting for the destruction of crops that contain more than the allowable THC content. The measure will head to the House for a full vote.
Georgia’s Senate has passed legislation that would add autism to the medical cannabis qualifying conditions list in the state, but also drops the allowable maximum THC levels in cannabis oil from 5 percent to 3 percent, according to an Atlanta Journal-Constitutionreport. Advocates have warned that the measure, sponsored by Republican state Sen. Ben Watson, would alienate dozens of families who are using cannabis products allowed under the state’s current laws.
The proposal aims to put the state’s regulations more in line with those in other states that permit low-THC cannabis oil for medical purposes; however, according to the report, there have been no issues with the program in its current form. Advocates and doctors, though, have said that the low-dose oil currently permitted doesn’t work for everybody and some patients respond better to products with higher THC percentages.
Watson, who is a medical doctor, also called on the federal government to reconsider cannabis’ Schedule I classification under the Controlled Substances Act, saying that rescheduling would allow for more studies and flexibility for sanctioning its use medically.
“To say cannabidiol has no medicinal value is just not true,” Watson said in the report.
The bill moves next to the House, who are also considering legislation to expand the qualifying conditions approved for medical cannabis use, and another that would allow in-state medical cannabis production. Both of those measures are sponsored by Republican state Rep. Allen Peake.
The official in charge of Nevada’s medical cannabis program told the state Senate Finance Committee that the same products should be sold in both the medical and recreational cannabis markets in the state, with only different taxes applied at the point-of-sale, the Las Vegas Review-Journalreports.
Joe Pollock, the deputy administrator of the Division of Public and Behavioral Health, said treating the products differently would create regulatory burdens on the industry.
“I think there’s a lot of advantages of having recreational and medical marijuana treated the same, right up until the point of sale,” Pollock said in the report.
The setup would be different than the current system in place in Colorado, where there are different checkout counters for medical and recreational sales.
Pollock’s comments are the latest sign that Nevada’s adult-use market could differ from the infrastructure in other states. Lawmakers are expected to take up a public-use bill this session that would allow social clubs to operate in the state. And while the state legislatures in Maine and Massachusetts have both passed legislation delaying the implementation of the voter-approved cannabis measures, Nevada officials have indicated that they are six months ahead of schedule, anticipating adult-use sales to begin as early as July 1.
According to a Des Moines Register/Mediacom poll, 80 percent of Iowans support legalizing cannabis for medical purposes; yet, just 39 percent indicated support for a recreational market. In a 2013 poll, just 58 percent supported a medical program, with 29 percent in support of a recreational cannabis market.
The poll found strong majorities among age groups and political affiliation with 88 percent of young adults, and 87 percent of Democrats supporting medical cannabis access; along with 66 percent of Republicans, 67 percent of senior citizens, and 87 percent of registered independents. Additionally, 76 percent of Protestants, 79 percent of Catholics, and 91 percent of those claiming no religious affiliation backed medical cannabis legalization. Rural residents were less likely to favor the issue than their city-dwelling counterparts, 73 percent to 82 percent respectively.
Iowa currently has a medical cannabis pilot program, which is set to expire this summer. The limited program allows patients with epilepsy to possess cannabis oils high in CBD with minimal THC content, however, it doesn’t provide for distribution of the oils, which leaves patients without access to their medicine or forces them to break federal law by obtaining it out-of-state.
According to the report, there are at least three bills in the state legislature aimed at the state’s medical cannabis program.
A proposal to seal criminal records of individuals arrested for possession of cannabis in public view in New York has passed the State Assembly 95-38 – if it’s approved by the Senate it could impact more than 800,000 convictions in the state. Citizens charged with possession in public view are often accused of the crime only after being subjected to controversial stop-and-frisk searches.
Assemblymember Crystal Peoples-Stokes, the bill sponsor, said the measure is necessary “because drug laws have created a permanent underclass of people unable to find jobs after a conviction” adding that communities of color have been the most affected by 40 years of “bad drug policies and hyper-criminalization” and are often targeted during stop-and-frisk stops.
“If today’s moment of increased attention to heroin encourages us to center public health in our drug policy, then we need to ensure that we are making amends to communities of color by alleviating the burden bad policies have had on their lives,” she said in a press release. “Sealing low-level marijuana possession convictions is the first step to reintegrating thousands of New Yorkers who are inhibited daily from accessing employment, housing and an education all due to a conviction on their record for simple possession of marijuana.”
Kassandra Frederique, Director of the Drug Policy Alliance, applauded the Assembly vote and said that the measure is “most urgent” under the Administration of President Donald Trump, whose policies have, thus far, been anti-immigrant.
“Comprehensive drug law reform must include legislative and programmatic measures that account for our wrongheaded policies and invest in building healthier and safer communities, from the Bronx to Buffalo, Muslim and Christian, US-born and green card-holding,” she said.
The measure now moves to the state Senate where it is sponsored by Sen. Jamaal Bailey.
Members of Denver, Colorado’s Social Consumption Advisory Committee are set to hold their third meeting next week, continuing to devise rules under which the voter-approved Initiative 300 will operate in the city. During their second meeting, the committee offered rules restricting social-use clubs from operating 1,000 feet “from where children congregate,” proposing application and operation requirements and determining some “unlawful acts” related to storage, processing, quantity limits, advertising, and visible intoxication.
According to an Associated Pressreport, state lawmakers are considering legislation that would allow cannabis “tasting rooms” run by dispensaries, or smoke-friendly clubs akin to hookah lounges or cigar bars. The state-level considerations come as lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are reportedly fed up with seeing cannabis smoked in public spaces and on the street.
Republican state Sen. Chris Holbert said that he has been asked for cannabis by panhandlers by the state capitol.
“It’s a problem we’ve got to address. I mean, look at me. If I’m getting hassled, everyone’s getting hassled,” Holbert said to reporters while pointing to his suit and gray hair.
A bill to treat cannabis clubs like cigar bars is currently being re-written over language that allowed medical cannabis patients to socially consume – which drew the ire of some lawmakers and opponents of the social use measure. Other legislators indicated that they should move slowly on any new regulations because of uncertainty at the federal level.
The Advisory Committee has three more meetings on its agenda for Mar. 10 and 24, and April 6.
Following the 2016 elections, cannabis is now legal in some capacity in 28 states. However, even though it’s legal in certain states, the federal government considers the plant an illegal Class I narcotic, and as a result business owners in the marijuana industry have hit a wall with IRC §280E, which states:
“No deduction or credit shall be allowed for any amount paid or incurred during the taxable year in carrying on any trade or business if such trade or business (or the activities which comprise such trade or business) consists of trafficking in controlled substances (within the meaning of Schedule I and II of the Controlled Substances Act) which is prohibited by Federal law or the law of any State in which such trade or business is conducted.”
IRC §280E will only cease to apply to cannabis businesses if and when cannabis is no longer classified as a Schedule I or Schedule II controlled substance.
When IRC §280E was enacted in 1982 to overturn the result in the Tax Court case Jeffrey Edmondson v. Commissioner, it held that the taxpayer, who was engaged in an illegal drug dealing business, was entitled to deductions for “telephone, auto, and rental expenses” that he incurred in his business. The Senate report makes clear that IRC §280E was intended to overturn the decision in Edmondson and deny deductions to illegal drug dealing businesses. However, for Constitutional reasons, Congress did not attempt to prevent taxpayers from using cost of goods sold (COGS) to compute gross income. Thus, IRC §280E denies all deductions from gross income in computing taxable income, but illegal drug dealing businesses are permitted to take COGS into account in computing gross income.
IRC §61 defines “gross income” as “all income from whatever source derived.” One category of income listed in IRC §61 is “gross income derived from business.” Reg. §1.61-3 states that “gross income” for manufacturing and merchandising businesses, “means total sales, less the cost of goods sold.” As the Tax Court has observed, “cost of goods sold is an item taken into account in computing gross income and is not an item of deduction.”
Coping strategies for cannabis companies
There are various strategies that those in the marijuana industry have employed. The first approach derived from Californians Helping to Alleviate Medical Problems, Inc. (CHAMP) v. Commissioner. In this Tax Court Case, the California-based marijuana dispensary provided marijuana to its patients, but also provided non-cannabis services, including counseling and caregiving services for its patients. This allowed the company to fully deduct the expenses associated with those practices.
It is perfectly okay to run two separate businesses under one roof. If the business is a medical marijuana dispensary, it could certainly provide other caregiving services under another company. It can also then share employees with the dispensary, paying the employees minimum wage under the dispensary company, and making up the difference with the caregiving company. The dispensary is only allowed to deduct COGS, whereas the caregiving business isn’t held to the same restrictions.
However, not all cannabis businesses have been successful in separating their businesses between dispensary and non-dispensary activities. In the Tax Court Case Olive v. Commissioner, the Court found that the taxpayer’s activities of providing free yoga classes, chess and other board games, movies with popcorn and drinks, chair massages, use of vaporizers, education on medical marijuana and its responsible use, and snacks, did not constitute a business separate from the taxpayer’s dispensary business.
Cannabis companies face some taxing issues that are entirely unique from other industries. Photo Credit: Rory Savatgy
The second approach to minimizing the impact of IRC §280E is to characterize as many costs as possible as COGS rather than operating expenses.
As the Tax Court has observed, “[the concept of COGS] embraces expenditures necessary to acquire, construct or extract a physical product which is to be sold; the seller can have no gain until he recovers the economic investment that he has made directly in the actual item sold.” In other words, the total costs incurred to create a product or service that has been sold. Generally, a taxpayer first determines gross income by subtracting COGS from gross receipts, and then determines taxable income by subtracting expenses from gross income.
The IRS and cannabis
IRC §471 gives broad authority to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to force taxpayers to account for inventory in a way that most clearly reflects income. IRS regulations under IRC §471 provide that a producer of property generally is required to treat indirect costs as COGS if they are “incident to and necessary for production” or manufacturing operations. In 1986, Congress enacted IRC §263A, which requires purchasing, handling, and storage expenses, as well as a portion of third party service costs such as accounting or legal fees, to be included in COGS, in addition to the costs covered by the IRC §471 regulations.
Absent an inclusion in COGS, indirect costs for cannabis businesses are subject to IRC §280E, which denies deductions from gross income. It does not impact costs for determining gross income. Increasing COGS decreases gross income and decreases the amount of denied deductions from gross income as a result of IRC § 280E. This creates an incentive for cannabis businesses to maximize their costs included in COGS.
Normally, taxpayers with inventories prefer to treat costs as deductible expenses rather than including them in COGS because expenses are currently deductible, while COGS does not reduce income until the taxpayer sells the inventory items to which the COGS relates. However, because IRC §280E prevents the deduction of many cannabis-related costs as current expenses, taxpayers in the cannabis industry have reversed the normal tax planning objective and prefer to maximize the costs treated as COGS.
A recent IRS pronouncement attempts to limit reliance on IRC §263A to maximize COGS and minimize expenses subject to IRC §280E. Chief Counsel Advice memorandum 201504011 (CCA) takes the position that a taxpayer who traffics a Schedule I or Schedule II controlled substance must determine COGS using the applicable inventory-costing regulations under IRC §471 as that IRC § existed when IRC §280E was enacted. Thus, the IRS is taking the position that IRC §263A does not require — indeed, does not allow — taxpayers to include in COGS cannabis-related costs that would be nondeductible under IRC §280E if they were not capitalized.
The CCA interprets two tax provisions in making its conclusion. First, the CCA interprets language in IRC §263A(a) (2) to limit indirect costs included in COGS to those that are deductible from gross income when calculating taxable income. Stated differently, an indirect cost cannot be included in COGS by reason of IRC §263A for determining gross income if that cost could not be deducted from gross income if it were not included in COGS.
Second, the CCA points to legislative history to interpret IRC §280E. The Senate report notes the adjustment to gross receipts for COGS was not affected to preclude Constitutional challenge. Congress feared that denying COGS to determine gross income might be held unconstitutional.
Interestingly, the CCA concludes that a business trafficking in cannabis “is entitled to determine [COGS] using the applicable [COGS] regulations under IRC §471 as they existed when IRC §280E was enacted.” The CCA does not explain its basis for making this assertion. It is unclear why changes to the IRC §471 regulations subsequent to the enactment of IRC §280E should not apply to businesses trafficking in cannabis.
It appears the IRS is asserting that COGS, as defined by the IRC §471 regulations at the time IRC §280E was enacted, represents COGS that are Constitutionally protected when determining costs for gross income. Further, the IRS interpretation permits costs generally included in COGS to be denied as a cost for determining gross income whenever COGS includes incremental costs from when IRC §280E was enacted. Presumably, the IRS does not find these incremental costs to be Constitutionally protected.
The analysis by the CCA is flawed because:
(1) it provides no support for the position that COGS may be defined differently for certain classes of taxpayers, and;
(2) the fact that IRC § 263A does not apply to indirect costs of a cannabis business does not mean that those costs cannot be capitalized.
Filing taxes in the cannabis industry can be a real headache without a proper plan and lots of preparation. Photo Credit: 401(K) 2012
Cannabis businesses should be entitled to include in COGS all costs that may be included in COGS under all capitalization rules other than IRC §263A. The fact that IRC §263A requires the capitalization of particular costs does not preclude such costs from capitalization under other rules. Capitalization must be decided based on the IRC §471 regulations as currently written, and IRC §280E has no impact on capitalization requirements.
Looking to the future
Under the 16th Amendment, Congress has the ability to tax only gross income, not gross receipts. The determination of what is included in COGS determines gross income. Both IRC §471 and IRC §263A determine whether a cost is included in COGS. The U.S. Supreme Court in New Colonial Ice Co. v. Helvering held that deductions from gross income depend “upon legislative grace,” and a particular deduction can be allowed only if it is clearly provided by the statute.
By enacting IRC § 280E, Congress has denied its legislative grace to deductions from gross income for businesses trafficking in Schedule I or Schedule II controlled substances. However, the IRS provides no evidence that a court has applied the concept of “legislative grace” to the inclusion of costs in COGS. It is therefore unclear whether Congress has the authority to create a separate and narrower definition of COGS for these businesses. If it does not, the Constitution requires that IRC §263A be taken into account in determining COGS for cannabis businesses in the same manner as it is taken into account for other businesses — that is, without regard to IRC §280E.
One case, Alpenglow Botanicals, LLC, Et Al. v. U.S., is challenging the very concept of IRC §280E. On February 3, 2016, plaintiffs Alpenglow Botanicals, LLC, filed a Complaint against defendant The United States of America seeking declaratory, injunctive, and monetary relief so as to overturn the IRS’ decision to deny deductions to income obtained during the course of plaintiffs’ business for the tax years 2010, 2011, and 2012. More specifically, plaintiffs raised the following claims:
The IRS went beyond its jurisdiction in administratively determining that plaintiffs were not entitled to certain deductions pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §280E;
Congress exceeded its power under the Sixteenth Amendment in passing §280E;
The IRS violated the Fifth Amendment in taking evidence from plaintiffs without informing them that they were under investigation for violating the Controlled Substances Act (CSA); and
§280E violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on excessive fines and penalties.
The appellate court ruled in favor of the government, setting up a showdown that could soon take place in the Supreme Court.
One thing is for sure: with marijuana now legal in over half the states in America, §280E may soon be a thing of the past.
Lansing, Michigan’s City Council has set new rules for medical cannabis home-growing which require patients to register with the city if they continuously or intermittently use more than 3,500 kilowatt hours of electricity, the Lansing State Journalreports. It’s unclear whether those who register would need to pay a fee, but failure to register with the city could result in a civil infraction.
Mayor Virg Bernero said the city would be conducting inspections to ensure the new rules are being followed, noting that the ordinance was supported by several neighborhood groups.
“We know that it is legal under state law for medical marijuana patients and caregivers to grow marijuana in their home, but this activity must be done in a safe manner that does not create a nuisance or put their neighbors in harm’s way,” Bernero said in the report. “Protecting the quality of life in our neighborhoods is vitally important. With the new tools this ordinance provides, we can make sure that any hazards or neighborhood nuisances caused by home growing of marijuana can be addressed and resolved.”
T.J. Doyle, a registered patient and caregiver in the capital city, called the move “misguided” and an “overreach.”
“You don’t punish every single person in the program because you have a handful of people doing things poorly,” Doyle said. “The city didn’t have to get draconian with it.”
Officials indicated that the registration records would be maintained by the city and would be protected under both the general privacy exemption of the Freedom of Information Act and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.
The ordinance was approved unanimously by the City Council.
Jamaica’s Cannabis Licensing Authority has issued its first conditional licenses for medical cannabis cultivators and processors in the island nation, according to a Jamaica Observerreport. The licenses were approved for two small cultivators, and one small processing facility. Another cultivation license was considered – however, the owners could not establish that the venture was “substantially owned or managed by individuals ordinarily resident in Jamaica” as required under the nation’s laws.
According to the report, the CLA had been under pressure from stakeholders to issue licenses – having announced the regulatory scheme in May after passing the reforms in February 2015. The agency said the approvals require extensive verification and that the processes in Colorado and Uruguay initially took about two years.
“At the outset, the authority mapped the application process and noted that the processing of conditional approvals could take up to six months provided all relevant information was supplied,” CLA Chairman Cindy Lightbourne said in the report. “In several instances, information has been requested by the Authority to help verify applications and any delay by applicants in providing this requested information adds to the processing timelines.”
In September, Minister of Tourism Edmund Bartlett estimated cannabis would help the island nation move away from the all-inclusive, mass tourism model, expecting “a full roll-out” of a cannabis-centric health and wellness tourism subsector by the end of this year.
Canadian medical cannabis producer Tilray has received the necessary approvals to export medical cannabis to New Zealand, and will supply Auckland’s Middlemore Hospital with cannabis oils containing both THC and CBD.
The approval by Canadian and New Zealand regulators expands Tilray’s international reach – last year they became the first company to legally export medicinal cannabis products from North America to the European Union and Australia. They were also the first North American medical cannabis producer to be certified under the European Medicines Agency’s Good Manufacturing Practice standards. This year, the company is eyeing export deals with additional European countries and in Latin America.
“We are proud to be able to offer patients in need access to high-quality, pharmaceutical-grade medical cannabis products,” Tilray President Brendan Kennedy said in a press release.
Last June, the company announced a deal to export medical cannabis products to Croatia. Their products are also being used in a New South Wales, Australia government-led study focused on using medical cannabis therapies to treat and prevent vomiting and nausea from chemotherapy; and another trial using Tilray products – focused on Dravet syndrome – conducted by Toronto’s Children’s Hospital is set to begin this year.
The first shipment of Tilray products to New Zealand is expected to arrive by the end of the month.
A measure to legalize CBD oil use for patients 18-years-old and younger has passed the Indiana Senate, which would allow some physicians, nurses, caregivers, and individuals to use the oil to treat intractable epilepsy, allowing pharmacies to dispense it. Under the proposal, the oil must be derived from industrial hemp, as it is required to meet the federal definition of hemp, which is set at .3 percent THC.
The bill (SB.15) would also establish a pilot study registry for physicians to study CBD as an epilepsy treatment. It does not include provisions allowing the cultivation of cannabis; however, Jeff Staker, head of Hoosier Veterans for Medical Cannabis, said the approval “could open the door” for other medical cannabis and hemp-related legislation in the state.
“Obviously we all see this as a huge step here in our state,” Staker said in an interview with Ganjapreneur. “It’s made from the cannabis plant and you got to get a prescription so it’s medical cannabis.”
According to the bill’s fiscal statement, the state Health Department could charge up to a $50 initial registration fee and up to $25 for a renewal. The authors estimate that the fees would top $158,000 during the first year, equating to a patient count of 3,160.
The measure, which passed the Senate 38-12, has been sent to the House.
Two bills have moved their way through separate houses of the New Mexico Legislature that would expand the state’s medical cannabis program, and exempt industrial hemp from New Mexico’s Controlled Substance Act.
The medical cannabis proposal, sponsored by Democratic Sen. Cisco McSorley, was approved by the Senate 29-11but only after an amendment was filed removing a provision which would have allowed all military veterans access to the program regardless of their medical conditions. Opponents argued that the language would have, in essence, legalized recreational cannabis use for veterans.
If approved by the House of Representatives and signed by Republican Gov. Susana Martinez, the measure would allow patients to possess up to 5 ounces of cannabis during a 30-day period, up from three, and allow licensed producers to possess up to 1,000 cannabis plants during a three-month period. The measure would also add “opiate use disorder” to the qualifying conditions list, allowing people undergoing addiction treatment to access the program.
McSorley, who sponsored the medical cannabis legislation enacted in the state in 2007, explained that while the initial bill “had numerous checks and balances” it has “become somewhat outdated” over the last decade.
“This is the first amendment we’ve done in 10 years to the medical cannabis program,” he said in a Santa Fe New Mexicanreport. “And there’s one thing this bill does. It helps the patients.”
The industrial hemp bill, sponsored by Republican Rep. Ricky Little, would allow farmers to cultivate industrial hemp in the state without a special license. Industrial hemp is defined under the 2014 federal Farm Bill as a plant from the cannabis genus that contains less than .3 percent THC. Under the Farm Bill, states are allowed to enact pilot programs, but it does not allow full-scale cultivation. According to the New Mexicanreport, Gov. Martinez vetoed legislation in 2015 that would have created a hemp pilot program in the state.
The medical cannabis expansion bill has been moved to the House but has not yet been moved to a committee. The industrial hemp bill has been sent to the Senate but not yet to a committee.
Arizona’s Senate Committee on Commerce and Public Safety voted 6-1 to approve industrial hemp production, processing, manufacturing, distribution, and commerce by licensed growers and processors in the state, according to a Capitol Media Servicesreport. The measure must be approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee before moving to the full Senate for a vote.
The proposal defines hemp according to the 2014 Farm Bill – as a plant from the cannabis genus that contains less than .3 percent THC. Under the measure, the state Department of Agriculture would issue licenses valid for two years, setting up an Industrial Hemp Trust Fun to fund the implementation and regulation of the program. According to a proposed amendment to the bill, execution of the program would require three new full-time positions in the Department of Agriculture to the tune of $250,000 in fiscal year 2017-2018. The department would also require another $422,000 to set up testing infrastructure.
During his testimony to the committee, Sen. Sonny Borrelli, a Republican and the bill sponsor, said that the state has been “missing out on a multi-billion-dollar industry” due to the prohibition of industrial hemp production.
According to the report, the only opposition came from Arizona attorney Bob Lynch, who represents irrigation districts that would supply the water to farmers.
In an interview with Capital Public Radio, Sacramento, California County Sheriff Scott Jones indicated that he has had conversations with Attorney General Jeff Sessions about cannabis policy which lead him to believe that Sessions will maintain the status quo in states with legal cannabis programs.
“Regarding the prioritization of federal resources to combat marijuana, he didn’t see the federal government getting involved in marijuana use or low-level state, what are traditionally state and local crimes, but, I don’t think he ruled out the possibility of the federal government getting involved in larger-scale operations,” he said.
Those “large-scale operations” would include trafficking by drug cartels, Jones said.
Jones’ take is the latest pointing toward the federal government continuing to take a hands-off approach to the legal cannabis industry despite the confirmation of Sessions – an admitted prohibitionist whose nomination culled unease for industry operators and stakeholders.
During his confirmation hearings, Sessions said he “won’t commit to never enforcing federal law,” explaining that he thought if prohibition was “not desired any longer…Congress should pass a law and change the rule.”
President Donald Trump has said he supports states’ rights and medical cannabis access.
The Drug Enforcement Agency has removed factually inaccurate information about cannabis from its website following public pressure and a legal request filed last year by Americans for Safe Access.
The legal request, filed with the Department of Justice, argued that the DEA website contained more than 25 false statements about cannabis – a violation of the Information Quality Act – 23 of which appeared in a publication titled “Dangers and Consequences of Marijuana.”
Steph Sherer, executive director of Americans for Safe Access, suggested that the removal of the “myths,” which included claims that cannabis was a gateway drug, contributed to lung cancer and psychosis, and caused an irreversible cognitive decline in adults, “could mean the end of the Washington gridlock” over cannabis policy.
“This is a victory for medical cannabis patients across the nation, who rely on cannabis to treat serious illnesses. The federal government now admits that cannabis is not a gateway drug, and doesn’t cause long-term brain damage, or psychosis,” Sherer said in a statement. “While the fight to end stigma around cannabis is far from over, this is a big first step.”
According to a press release, the federal government is already a week past the required deadline to respond to the legal petition over claims that the DEA is still actively spreading false information about cannabis.
Americans for Safe Access has also sent a letter to the DEA urging them to “correct its inaccurate statements” regarding cannabis in light of the confirmation of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who they claim “has made several statements demonstrating his beliefs that cannabis is a gateway drug and that its psychological effects are permanent.”
“As the top law enforcement official in the nation, Mr. Sessions must have access to accurate information based on current scientific data in order to make informed decisions regarding the enforcement (or non-enforcement) of federal drug laws,” the letter states. “Allowing Mr. Sessions to make law enforcement decisions based on biased, out-of-date information does a tremendous disservice to ASA’s members and the American people at large.”
Legal cannabis customers in Oregon can now order deliveries from recreational dispensaries under a plan adopted by the state Liquor Control Commission, WwKYCreports. The agency has approved 117 retailer delivery permits across the state, including 13 in Portland.
The regulations allow licensed dispensaries to deliver only within the city they are licensed in, requiring the products to be transported in a locked box secured to the delivery vehicle, which can carry no more than $3,000 worth of product at one time. Cannabis can only be delivered between 8 a.m. and 9 p.m. to residential homes, and not to places like dorms, hotels, or campgrounds. Customers must provide proof of age and sign for the delivery.
According to OLCC Spokesman Mark Pettinger the plan had to be postponed until this month so the agency could set up the appropriate infrastructure.
“We needed to make an adaptation to the cannabis tracking system to provide a document that would actually allow for the delivery of recreational marijuana to homes,” he said in the report.
Spencer Krutzler, manager of Portland’s La Cannaisseur, said that since launching the service the company has only had a few online orders so far.
“It’s super exciting,” he said. “I definitely expect to a smile on everyone’s face when we show up to that front door.”
Two patients suffering from chronic pain have been approved for medical cannabis use in Sweden, marking the first time the condition has been deemed eligible to access the nation’s program, according to a report from The Local. The individuals both suffer from severe back injuries and their doctors appealed to the Medical Products Agency on their behalf.
Dr. Fredrik von Kieseritzky, who advised the physicians involved with the patients on the case, called the MPA approval “pragmatic,” indicating that the patients were advised to use an edible delivery method rather than smoking.
“For me personally it is important to keep a watertight distinction between medicinal and recreational cannabis,” he said in the report.
The patients’ cannabis will be supplied by the government, who uses a Dutch company for its supply.
Karl Mikael Kälkner, a representative for the Swedish MPA, said that the decision was “not an approval of the use of cannabis in general” as registration in Sweden’s medical cannabis program is still determined on a case-by-case basis.
“There is clearly some potential for abuse. This is a drug that is illegal to possess and consume. But we have other medicines that are also classed as narcotics,” he said. “If the rules are correctly followed then there is no reason that [cannabis] should not be used as a preparation in a clinical setting.”
West Palm Beach, FL –The first business conference designed for east coast states that have recently adopted medical and recreational marijuana will be held on March 18th and 19th at Harrah’s Resort in Atlantic City. National and regional experts will advise on licensing, regulations, growing, medical recommendations, extracts, edibles, labs, delivery systems, taxes and banking.
Watch highlights from a Meet the Experts conference:
Event producers Rhory Gould and Robert Platshorn brought together a roster of outstanding cannabis professionals to speak, advise, meet and network for two full days. Key Note speakers include award-winning Denver Relief Consulting and Discovery Channel’s Master Grower, Mike Boutin. Attendance is limited to a maximum of 450. All ticket sales benefit The Silver Tour, a non-profit that teaches seniors the benefits of cannabis.
These conferences are common in Colorado and California, but east coast states are relatively new to the industry. According to producer Robert Platshorn, “States from Florida to Maine passed new cannabis laws in 2016. Most are just now writing their regulations or have just announced licensing opportunities. Confusion about who can do what or who can be licensed, is rife. Doctors need guidelines. Growers want information on legal growing. Labs, labeling and packaging are new to many aspiring entrepreneurs. Meet the Experts will focus on this information void.”
This is the fifth Meet the Experts conference. Prior conferences sold out and drew praise from attendees and industry leaders.
Crowd’s view during a presentation from the 2014 Meet the Experts.
“I have to say I’ve been to hundreds of conferences as a psychologist and that was the best, most rich in content, meaningful conference I’ve ever been to. Right up to all the details of the meals, the networking, and discounted accommodations,” said Kelly Sachs of ASA. “Really well done!”
Fun times at the Meet the Experts’ 2014 conference.
According to producer Rhory Gould, “Harrah’s Resort in Atlantic City is the perfect venue for a Business to Business Spring Break. Easy to reach from most cities. Harrah’s has made a hundred rooms available to ticket holders at a deep discount.” Information and tickets are available at http://www.meetexperts.org/.
For photos and interviews contact Robert Platshorn at Meettheexperts@gmx.com, cell # 954-773-6967.
Nevada Department of Taxation officials have proposed a timeline for the implementation of the voter-backed adult-use cannabis industry, expecting it to launch as early as July 1, the Associated Pressreports. The target is well in advance of the Jan. 1, 2018 deadline required under the law.
Tax department Executive Director Deonne Contine said that medical cannabis operators in good standing would be eligible to apply for temporary licenses and should be able to start selling cannabis to adults 21 and older by this summer. The department started crafting the rules and regulations for the program in November and Contine said she expects to have a draft of those regulations by March and begin the licensing process by May.
Contine indicated that Nevada’s rules and regulations borrow heavily from Colorado’s adult-use scheme and from Nevada’s own medical cannabis regime. Retail sales will be taxed 15 percent in the state.
Joe Pollock, deputy administrator of the Nevada Division of Public and Behavioral Health and an overseer of the medical cannabis program, said that the new system must ensure that medical cannabis prices are lower than recreational prices otherwise patients won’t have much incentive to use remain enrolled in the program; just 482 of the 25,000 registered patients in Nevada are under 21. Pollock was also concerned with how the commercial market would impact the informal market because, currently, “the rurals don’t have dispensaries.”
“If anything, I would be worried that the black market would move toward those rural counties because the recreational marijuana will not be available conveniently in those counties,” he said in the report.
Potential canna-business owners who are not currently operators in the state will likely have to wait until at least October 2018 to apply for a license.
A bill that would remove hemp from New Mexico’s controlled substance list has passed through the state’s House Labor and Economic Development Committee, moving it to the House for a full vote, according to a report from the Tenth Amendment Center. If approved, the measure, HB.166 sponsored by Republican Rep. Ricky Little, would allow full-scale commercial hemp farming.
Under than plan, hemp cultivation would not require any special license, treating the crop like any other agricultural product so long as it’s THC content is not more than .3 percent, as defined under the 2014 federal Farm Bill. The bill passed the committee 10 to 1 after passing through the Agriculture and Water Resources Committee 7 to 1 last month.
According to the fiscal impact report accompanying the bill, no government agency reported a positive or negative financial impact in the state, although Little wrote that “there could be some reduction in prosecutions for cultivation, possession or trafficking in this substance.”
If the measure is approved, New Mexico would join California, Massachusetts, Maine, Oregon, Colorado, and Vermont in allowing industrial hemp production within the state.
Little has also introduced HB.154 this session, which would establish an industrial hemp research and development program in the state, which would require licensing. That bill unanimously passed the House Agriculture and Water Resources Committee on Jan. 31.
