Federal Cannabis Update: 2018 Spending Bill Keeps Rohrabacher-Blumenauer Amendment

Posted by Margolin & Lawrence on March 27, 2018

Last week, despite controversy, criticism from both sides of the aisle, and talk of a veto, President Trump agreed to sign the federal government’s omnibus spending bill for 2018. To the relief of many in the legal cannabis industry, the spending bill retains a provision known as the Rohrabacher-Blumenauer (or Rohrabacher-Farr) amendment, which provides limited protection from federal prosecution for state-level legal cannabis activity.

Given both Trump’s and Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ tough talk on drugs and threats to crack down on the cannabis industry, the continued presence of this amendment is a silver lining for those anxious about the future of legal cannabis. While this won’t mean a change in the federal treatment of marijuana – the amendment has been included in every spending bill since 2014 – it does indicate that the government intends to keep on its current course with regard to cannabis, as the provision has to be renewed every year to remain in effect.

Likewise, though the actual protections afforded by the Rohrabacher-Blumenauer amendment are limited, its being signed into law was, and remains, an important indication of the federal government’s shift in attitude regarding cannabis: as the LA Times reported following the provision’s first inclusion in the spending bill, “Congress for years had resisted calls to allow states to chart their own path on pot. The marijuana measure, which forbids the federal government from using any of its resources to impede state medical marijuana laws, was previously rejected half a dozen times.” In this light, the amendment was a notable pivot from a top-down to a state-level approach to cannabis regulation.

California cannabis consumers and business owners shouldn’t get too comfortable, though: not only does the amendment not change anything about the federal government’s cannabis policy in and of itself, its terms only apply to medical marijuana, not recreational cannabis. So far, the government has rejected proposed amendments that would grant recreational cannabis operations the same protection from federal intervention. For the time being, California cannabis business owners’ best bet is to stay in full compliance with state and local law as the federal situation develops.

Will California Lower the Cannabis Tax Rates?

Posted by Margolin & Lawrence on March 23, 2018

Legalization has been a bumpy road for California cannabis operators, and since January 1, owners are learning that it also comes at a price. The state’s steep taxes on cannabis businesses – with effective tax rates as high as 57% for some cannabis activities – have many operators bracing, and calling for a reduction in these so-called sin taxes. Consumers are also encountering price increases -- prices are up about 15% compared to last year.

I Have My Temporary Distribution License. Now What?

Posted by Margolin & Lawrence on March 13, 2018

The state of California has officially begun to grant temporary licenses for cannabis distribution, pending applications and processing of full state licenses. Temporary licenses are “a conditional license that allows a business to engage in commercial cannabis activity for a period of 120 days.” They can only be granted to businesses which have already received their local licenses, and are intended to allow locally-licensed businesses to operate while waiting for their full state license to be reviewed.

When it comes to record-keeping, in particular, the requirements of temporarily-licensed cannabis distributors are different from those of annually-licensed ones. The reason for this difference is that the track-and-trace system which California will use to record the movements of cannabis products has yet to be fully implemented. While annual license holders will be required to use this system, based on the Franwell METRC software, to keep track of their inventory, CalCannabis states that temporary license holders must manually document their sales using “paper sales invoices or shipping manifests”.

For the temporary distribution licensee, then, keeping in compliance with state regulations is not only about following the operating requirements, but also about keeping track of a relatively complicated set of information for the sake of record-keeping. Distributors need:

  • Local cannabis recordkeeping requirements (usually keeping business, inventory, & patient records for a several-year period)
  • State cannabis record retention requirements (listed in California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 42, §5037) – financial, personnel, training, security, etc.
  • The California Board of Equalization’s general record-keeping requirements for businesses (keeping track of the sales & use taxes, receipts, deductions, and purchase prices for 4 years).
  • Paper sales invoices or shipping manifests for all sales
  • A resale certificate for all sales intended for resale

If a distributor plans on reselling cannabis rather than just distributing it, they’ll need to make sure their seller’s permit is in order as well. For more information on resale certificates, check our recent post on the subject.

While all this paperwork may seem daunting at first, a licensed distribution operation should be more than qualified to handle it – and, once the California METRC system is implemented, keeping records of sales and inventory should be streamlined considerably.

LA City Council Update: New Cannabis Rules in Development

Posted by Margolin & Lawrence on March 6, 2018

As of this year, cannabis business is legal in Los Angeles, but the process of drafting and refining the laws and regulations that will actually govern the legal cannabis industry is still in its early stages.

To that end, over the past month, the LA city council met to adopt the following items:

  • Item #22: Prop D Dispensaries, MMD's, AUMA
  • Item #23: MAUCRSA, Prop D, Land Use, Preparation of Ordinance, AUMA
  • Item #24: New hires at the DCR, Cannabis Business Fees, Interim Position Authority
  • Item #25: Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act / State-Chartered Bank / Cannabis Banking Activities

While none of these items are extremely surprising in their own right, they may have significant consequences for the nature of Los Angeles’ cannabis industry.

For instance, Item #23 lays out a path to adjust the LA municipal code, adding “provisions to allow for the Cannabis Regulation Commission to make exceptions to the 600-foot school restriction for non-retail cannabis activities subject to a California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 analysis of environmental impacts and conditions to address public health, safety and welfare considerations, as well as a public hearing.” This means that buildings that were not in the correct zoning could be, if the City finds after the environmental analysis that there are not negative effects from having a cannabis cultivation or manufacturing operation near a school. A change to this rule would potentially mean that, as long as they were in keeping with public health and safety, cannabis businesses could be located in far more locations across LA. Note that under state law, local jurisdictions can allow for closer than 600 feet. 

Other ideas in these items may also have major impacts on the LA cannabis industry. For instance, Item #23 also provides for mixed-light cultivation and social consumption lounges, two activities that the city’s cannabis ordinances haven’t allowed in the past, while Item #25 expresses the city’s support for a State-chartered bank that would allow cannabis businesses to bank their money in California. Each of these changes would be a major step toward full legal legitimacy for marijuana in the Los Angeles area.

While these items are significant in their own right, they also reflect a trend of increasing acceptance of the cannabis industry in LA. Establishing regulations however,  is an ongoing process. For more information, check our guide to California cannabis business law or contact us at info@margolinlawrence.com to speak with one of our Los Angeles cannabis lawyers.

Contact us

Cannabis Taxes: What is a Cannabis Resale Certificate?

Posted by Margolin & Lawrence on February 14, 2018

As recreational “adult-use” cannabis is officially legalized across California, cannabis taxation is more important than ever for legal cannabis operators. Our Los Angeles Cannabis attorneys are often asked about the new state tax system and what is new since January 1, 2018. As of a few months ago, the BOE became the CDTFA. For California, there are three different state-level taxes on cannabis business: the Cultivation Tax, the Cannabis Excise Tax, and the Sales and Use Tax. The new state tax agency has released an educational series to explain the new tax regime. Cannabis manufacturers and distributors need to become familiar with the resale certificate. As its name implies, a resale certificate relates to the Sales and Use tax.

The Sales and Use Tax applies to sales of cannabis or cannabis products (flowers, plants, hash, bud, vape pens, edibles, oils, etc.) to consumers – in other words, the “final sale” of cannabis before the product is used/consumed. However, there are circumstances in the cannabis supply chain where these products are sold to a cannabis business for resale, rather than to a consumer. For instance, if a licensed distributor sells cannabis to a licensed retailer, they’re making a sale, but the purchaser doesn’t intend to use or consume the product themselves. In order to prevent the distributor from being liable for taxation on this type of sale, the retailer can give the distributor a resale certificate. If timely and valid, this certifies that the purchaser intends to resell the product and therefore exempts the distributor from the tax.

Without a resale certificate, both the seller and the purchaser are liable for Sales and Use Tax. In the example above, the distributor would need to pay it for their sale to the retailer, while the retailer would need to pay it for the sale they make to the final consumer. The same goes for other sales of cannabis between licensed cannabis businesses. For instance, when a cultivator sells cannabis flower to a manufacturer, the cultivator is liable for a Sales and Use Tax unless the manufacturer gives them a resale certificate for the purchase.

One important thing for distributors to keep in mind is the distinction between “transport” and “sale”. If one licensed cannabis business purchases cannabis products directly from another, e.g. a retailer buying flowers from a cultivator, the distributor who is contracted to transport the products from the cultivator’s operation to the retailer’s isn’t making a sale, and therefore doesn’t need to pay a Sales and Use Tax, regardless of whether they’re given a resale certificate.

Even if all their business’ sales are for resale and exempt from Sales and Use Tax, all cannabis operators are still responsible for filing a tax return and reporting their activities to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration. Remember, a resale certificate only applies to the Sales and Use Tax, not the Cultivation or Excise taxes.

Market Volatility & new Cryptocurrency Regulations on the Horizon? 

Posted by Margolin & Lawrence on February 6, 2018

Market volatility sent many investors reeling yesterday, with the dow plunging over 1,000 points. Cryptocurrency, a digital asset that is popular with cannabis entrepreneurs, was not spared. As of today, Bitcoin is trading at $7,049 per USD, down from over $18,000 a few weeks ago. Those familiar with cryptocurrency know that Bitcoin is only one type of asset, and that in fact there are multiple currencies available. One in particular, may be a potential solution to the cannabis industry’s banking crisis: PotCoin. Our Los Angeles cannabis attorneys are following developments in cryptocurrency closely and monitoring progress as regulations catch up with technology, and the state works towards a banking solution for cannabis operators. In fact, just this week, the U.S. Senate in conjunction with the SEC and the CFTC held a discussion titled “Virtual Currencies: The Oversight Role of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission.” We will cover the results of this discussion in a future post.

One of the first cryptocurrencies to ever enter the market as a cannabis coin, PotCoin, was launched on January 21st, 2014. Back then, cryptocurrencies and their applications were widely regarded by the public as a space that catered to the underground, illicit economy of the world. Potcoin describes itself as “the first digital currency created to facilitate transactions within the legalized cannabis industry.” Established around the same time as cannabis legalization in Colorado, PotCoin positioned itself as an alternative to banking, even going so as far as to installing PotCoin ATM machines at a few locations. Now that the marijuana revolution in our country has garnered more support than ever, these cannabis cryptocurrencies will undoubtedly be brought up for legitimate discussion once again. Currently, PotCoin is valued much lower than Bitcoin at $0.129 USD at the time of publishing this article.

How does PotCoin differ from Bitcoin? PotCoin runs on a “proof of stake” system, as opposed to Bitcoin, which runs on a “proof of work” system. This means that the individual or entity mining for PotCoin does not need an all-powerful computer with intense graphics cards, but a certain stake or ownership of the currency to mine it. This eliminates all the expensive hardware associated with the “proof of work” system, and validates the blockchain more efficiently. Through blockchain technology, PotCoins are verified while still efficiently eliminating the double-spending problem. The largest issue that PotCoin faces is one of network scalability and transaction speeds. These are both issues that the development team for PotCoin are fervently trying to solve. Whether or not PotCoin will make its mark on the economy of cannabis is contingent on how the development team addresses these key issues.

With a multitude of states on the path towards the legalization of cannabis, it will be interesting to see whether or not the cannabis industry will adopt PotCoin as a potential solution to the banking quandary and certainly the development issues above will be determinative of whether PotCoin is up to the challenge. 

Ask A Cannabis Trademark Lawyer: How Do I Apply For A State Trademark?

Posted by Margolin & Lawrence on January 9, 2018

 As of January 1st, 2018, the long wait is over: cannabis business owners can apply for California state trademarks. The application form can be obtained here: http://bpd.cdn.sos.ca.gov/ts/forms/tm-100.pdf. Because cannabis is still federally illegal and cannabis products themselves cannot be trademarked, this is a viable avenue for many California cannabis brands that will protect your business marks within the state. You can read our prior post about USPTO Trademarks here.

According to the website for the Office of the California Secretary of State:

“Beginning January 1, 2018, customers may register their cannabis-related Trademark or Service Mark with the California Secretary of State's office so long as:

1.The mark is lawfully in use in commerce within California; and 

2.Matches the classification of goods and services adopted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office.  

If the application submitted to register a Trademark or Service Mark is found deficient, the application will be returned to the registrant for correction.

Note: Not all cannabis-related products can be registered under current law due to the inability to meet federal classifications.”

This means that in order to obtain your state marks, you must be lawfully using the marks in commerce at the time of the application. Therefore, you will need to be licensed in compliance with SB 94,  both at the local and state level, before you’re eligible for trademark approval. Otherwise, if you claim an unlicensed use, you may run into issues with the Secretary of State. Further, once your license is obtained, you must also show that you’re making actual, bona fide use of the trademarks on your products in the stream of commerce. That means that customers are identifying you by your brand when they purchase your goods or services in the marketplace.

Breaking News: LA County Releases Proposed Cannabis Regulations

Posted by Margolin & Lawrence on December 19, 2017

L.A. County released long-awaited draft cannabis regulations yesterday. The Board of Supervisors, which creates laws that govern all of the unincorporated areas of the county (any area that is not part of an incorporated city) has been listening to the findings of the Cannabis Advisory Group over many months and has released the zoning requirements that will apply to commercial cannabis in the county, as well as the activities that will be licensed.The County will be issuing for Adult-Use (recreational) and Medical cannabis uses. Our LA cannabis attorneys have reviewed the proposed cannabis regulations and our findings are below. 

L.A. City Council Passes New Cannabis Ordinances

Posted by Margolin & Lawrence on December 7, 2017

Yesterday the LA City Council passed three ordinances that will regulate recreational cannabis sales, manufacturing, cultivation, distribution, delivery, and microbusiness in the city of LA. The council also voted on the Social Equity Program and cannabis zoning, including the setbacks from sensitive-use areas that will be required of licensed cannabis businesses. Volatile cannabis manufacturers, for example, will have to be not only 600 feet away from schools, but also at least 200 feet away from any residential parcel.

The city is also imposing caps on the number of licenses granted per neighborhood, so licensing will be a competitive process in some areas; if you haven’t already, now is the time to start preparing your cannabis business for licensure. The city has rigorous requirements for proof of operation in compliance with Prop D if your business is a pre-ICO, as well as strict safety and environmental regulations for marijuana cultivators and manufacturers.

The new regulations passed by the city can be found here:

If you are a cannabis operator with an existing marijuana business in the city of LA, email us at info@margolinlawrence.com to speak with one of our cannabis attorneys. We can advise you on the next steps for your operation as Los Angeles enters a new era for cannabis.

Contact us

L.A. City Council Voting on Cannabis Ordinances TODAY

Posted by Margolin & Lawrence on December 5, 2017

Cannabis attorney Allison Margolin addressing the LA City Council on the new zoning regulations on Monday:

Today  the LA City Council will vote to determine all of the City's.  the city's new restrictions on where a cannabis business may be located. The current California cannabis law requires that cannabis businesses be located more than 600 feet from all schools.

Los Angeles cannabis attorney

On top of that, LA's most recent draft of its location ordinance required businesses intending to conduct on-site retail sales to be located 750 feet away from sensitive-use areas, including schools, public parks, libraries, and drug treatment facilities, as well as any existing marijuana retail business.

While this is a more lenient approach to sensitive-use areas than LA's previous zoning restrictions, which called for an 800-foot buffer zone, some cannabis businesses and marijuana advocates, including our Los Angeles Cannabis lawyers, argue that introducing two different distancing standards will only complicate the already-opaque standards for marijuana zoning.

The City Council's vote will take place at 10 A.M. tomorrow, December 5th, at 200 N. Spring St.

Categories

This blog is not intended as legal advice and should not be taken as such. The possession, use, and/or sale of marijuana is illegal under federal law.