california cannabis Archives - The Real Dirt with Chip Baker

California Cannabis Tax to be Lifted to Aid Cultivators

by Travis C | Jul 7, 2022 | Blog, Business, Cannabis Business, Cannabis Law, Cannabis Law and Compliance, Cannabis News, Growing, Industry News, Legalization, Marijuana

California cannabis cultivation tax to be lifted

In an effort to aid cannabis cultivators that have been hanging on by a thread the past several years, California is completely overhauling its cannabis tax codes to try and help.

The changes, which were adopted last week as part of a broader state budget agreement, will also create tax credits for some cannabis businesses, expand labor rights within the industry and switch collection of a state excise tax from distributors to retailers. That tax will pause at 15% for three years, after which regulators could raise the rate to recoup lost revenue from discontinuing the cultivation tax.

Advocates believe the new tax plan will aid the struggling small businesses operating in the legal cannabis industry in California. With exorbitant application fees, license costs and strict regulatory oversight set by local jurisdictions, it has become untenable to run a small-scale cannabis operation in the state.

While this may just be a band aid over the larger issues plaguing California’s legal cannabis industry, it should at least help cultivators stand a better chance of staying afloat in the competitive industry.

Prior to the removal of the tax, cannabis cultivators had to pay a tax of over $10 per ounce of flower. With 16 ounces in a pound, and the price of a pound of cannabis flower tanking as low as $500 in the last year, growers were potentially paying nearly half of their profit just into taxes for cultivation.

Additionally wholesale prices have dropped by as much as 50% over the past year, particularly squeezing farmers whose outdoor crops sell for less and forcing many smaller operations to close down.

Even the trimmings of cannabis plants were taxed at $3 per ounce, making a byproduct of the cultivation process that can be used to create ointments, creams or extracts just as untenable.

And of course, all of the increased costs levied on growers is then transferred to distributors, then retailers, and finally passed on to the consumer. Officials and advocates are hoping the move will lower cannabis prices overall for consumers while making it more profitable for cultivators.

However the state has yet to take any action on retail sales taxes. Business owners and advocates claim that California will never be able to compete with illicit market cannabis which is just as large in the state due to current taxes.

For comparison, alcohol in the state is only taxed at the state sales tax of 6%, with an additional charge of $3.30 per gallon. Cannabis on the other hand, in addition to state and local sales tax, is levied a 15% additional sales tax.

In other words, a customer who thinks they may be getting a deal on a $100 ounce, could actually be paying over $120 for the same product after taxes. Exorbitant sales tax on cannabis is extremely common in legal cannabis industries across the country. Medical cannabis sales in most states have no additional tax at all.

Lastly, the latest removal of the taxes is set to last only 3 years. While this gives advocates time to fight for more ground and lower additional taxes, reform licensing and equity access to the industry, the fight is not nearly over for cultivators and business owners in California’s cannabis industry.

California cannabis farmers markets? New bill would make it possible

by Travis C | Apr 29, 2022 | Blog, Business, Cannabis Business, Cannabis Law and Compliance, Cannabis News, Culture, Industry News, Legalization

California cannabis farmers markets could become a thing

It is not secret that small cannabis farms in California have had a rough few years. A new bill aims to help them out.

A new bill introduced into the Assembly Business and Professions Committee on Tuesday (4/26/22) would allow small scale cannabis farmers to sell their products at farmers markets in California. Introduced by Assembly member Jim Wood, he has seen the issues that small cannabis operations have dealt with and wants to give them a hand.

“It is no secret that cannabis businesses throughout the state are struggling, whether it’s taxes, compliance costs, competing with the illicit market or other challenges, but the focus of AB 2691 is to help legal cannabis farmers who grow less than 1 acre of cannabis get consumer recognition for their unique products, much as has been done for craft beer, artisanal wine and other family farm agricultural products. Giving these smaller farmers opportunities at locally approved events to expose the public to their products increases consumer choice and offers farmers a better chance to reach retail shelves which is their ultimate goal. This is not about circumventing retailers, but growing the industry overall. My office has always been open to those who may have concerns about this bill and I’m here to listen to their concerns and their proposed solutions.”

The Origins Council, a cannabis advocacy organization that represents historic, rural, cannabis-producing regions across California has expressed their support for the bill. Genine Coleman and the group’s 900 or so members have fought consistently for the rights and protections of small, local farms that have been in operation in the state for decades.

“The vast majority of them are producing half an acre or less of cannabis, so this is definitely a huge potential opportunity for our membership,” Coleman said. “For small-scale producers to have direct marketing and sales opportunities with consumers is really critical.”

However not everybody is on board with the new arrangement. The Executive Director of the Davis Farmers Market Alliance, Randi MacNear, says what she oversees is a “food business”. Even if the new bill passes, she says it is unlikely anything will change at their market.

“We really are interested in selling food, so at this point, cannabis is not a food,” MacNear said. “We’re trying to increase our local farmers. We’re trying to get new, emerging Yolo County farmers in here and give them a space to sell, so I think that probably we would stick with that concentration.”

MacNear did add that the decision ultimately comes down to the Davis City Council.

“I’m sure you’ll see some of this product at other markets but not here in Davis,” MacNear said.

Assembly Bill 2691 is now headed to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, where it must pass before entering the full Assembly followed by the Senate. If approved by all of the above, the bill goes to the governor’s desk for signing.

Supporters argue that the main purpose of this bill is to help small farmers who don’t have the same access channels to consumers as larger competition have the opportunity to grow their customer base and their brand at the local level.

Interstate cannabis commerce bill introduced in California

by Travis C | Mar 23, 2022 | Blog, Business, Cannabis Business, Cannabis Law, Cannabis Law and Compliance, Cannabis News, Culture, Growing, Industry News, Legalization

California interstate cannabis commerce bill introduced

California has always been at the forefront of cannabis legalization. As one of the first states to legalize medical and recreational cannabis, other states looked to California for the outline of legal cannabis.

But despite its progressive policies regarding cannabis, California has not been able to develop and maintain a strong legal cannabis industry. This is for a wide range of reasons, from strict and expansive regulations to exorbitant application and licensing fees. Not to mention the massive illicit market that still operates within the state, in part due to the current barriers to entry into the legal market.

Some would argue that the solution to California’s cannabis industry woes is to simplify the application process, lessen the cost of licensing and give cultivators and retail owners the resources they need to stay within regulation. However the state is taking a different approach to profiting off an industry with an oversupply of cannabis.

SB1326 has been introduced to approve interstate commercial transactions for cannabis products. This means that if passed, California would be able to import and export cannabis products from other legal cannabis states. For example a state that recently legalized cannabis but does not yet have enough supply to meet demand could import products from California to fill the gaps.

If this bill sounds familiar, it may be because Oregon passed something similar in 2019. However since they were the only state with a law allowing export of cannabis, and no states have a law allowing imports, the law is basically moot.

The interstate cannabis commerce bill wouldn’t just be restricted to recreational cannabis either. California also has one of the country’s oldest medical cannabis programs and would be able to provide medical cannabis to neighboring states as well.

Even with the largest illicit market of cannabis production in the country, California’s legal recreational market is still oversupplied. The hope with SB 1326 is that some of that supply can be sent to other states to make the industry more profitable for those participating legally.

Critics of the bill have shown concern however over wording that could remove the opt-out clause currently in place in the state.

Most states with legal cannabis programs will have opt-out clauses that permit municipalities to opt-out of legal cannabis business in their localities. Those criticizing SB 1326 believe that the new bill will overshadow the opt-out clause, but lawmakers believe that it will actually give the municipalities more options than the opt-out clause itself provides.

The interstate cannabis commerce bill also places restrictions on who can enter the new market if it passes.

“The bill would prohibit an entity with a commercial cannabis license issued under the laws of another state from engaging in commercial cannabis activity within the boundaries of this state without a state license, or within a local jurisdiction without a license, permit, or other authorization issued by the local jurisdiction,” the bill’s text reads.

This line should reassure smaller towns and local businesses that multi-state operators won’t be able to just storm in and take over. And at this time, officials in the cannabis industry want to focus on leveling out the supply in California before they begin accepting any imports.

Provisional cannabis licenses in California coming to an end

by Travis C | Jan 28, 2022 | 420 News, Blog, Business, Cannabis Business, Cannabis Law, Cannabis Law and Compliance, Cannabis News, Culture, Industry News, Legalization, Politics

provincial cannabis licenses in California news

Thousands of business have been put on a timeline as provisional cannabis licenses in California will be coming to and end in the future.

The end to a longstanding program in the state is going to make entry into the California legal cannabis industry much more difficult for newcomers. However the end to the temporary permit program will impact thousands of legal cannabis businesses across the state.

In fact, this change will impact the majority of California cannabis businesses.

Beginning June 30th, the options for entering the cannabis industry in California will become more limited. Potential newcomers will have two options:

Obtain an annual state license
Buy an existing licensed company

But obtaining an annual state license in California right now can take months or even years before a new business could begin operations, not to mention the costs of obtaining said license. Buying an existing cannabis company that is already licensed will be a much speedier process, though likely even more costly.

This could mean an increase in merger and acquisition activity in the state. While the end to the provisional cannabis licenses in California is meant to help existing cannabis businesses in the state, it may be too soon to say.

Of the 12,221 marijuana businesses that are currently licensed in California, only 3,378 currently hold annual state licenses. In other words, over 70% of legal cannabis businesses in California are operating with a provisional license.

Compared to annual licenses, provisional cannabis licenses in California have been much easier to obtain. Provisional licenses have acted as an extension of temporary permits that were issued following the passing of Proposition 64. These temporary licenses were originally intended to allow already licensed medical cannabis businesses in the state to sell cannabis recreationally while the state set up the regulated industry.

That was in 2018.

In 2022, the majority of the industry is still operating under provisional licenses for a variety of reasons. However most would likely argue that the costs of obtaining an annual license alone is reason enough.

As it stands, current provisional license holders don’t need to worry. However those looking to apply for a new provisional cannabis license in California will have their first deadline March 31, 2022. These will specifically be license applications for mixed light and indoor cultivation at or less than 22,000 square feet of contiguous premises and outdoor cultivation at or less than 20,000 square feet of contiguous premises.

June 30, 2022 is when the California Department of Cannabis Control is when these licenses must be issued. Starting July 1st, renewing a provisional cannabis license in California will become more difficult, requiring specific conditions. However local equity applicants and smaller cultivations will still be able to apply for provisional cannabis licenses in California through 2023.

January 1, 2026 is the last day that any provisional cannabis licenses can be in effect. In other words, all current provisional cannabis license holders — 70% of current businesses in California — have until this date to obtain an annual state license.

Four years may seem like ample time for the 8,843 provisional license holders in California to make the switch to an annual license. However since Proposition 64 passed, California has been plagued with suffocating bureaucracy, exorbitant fees and costs, strict regulations and other issues that already make it extremely difficult to operate for smaller operations.

The state has allocated $100 million to help the 17 cities and counties with the most marijuana companies to finish transitioning provisionally licensed companies into annual permits. However the annual licensing process is so involved, said attorney Ariana Van Alstine, that some companies have taken years to get theirs. Others are still waiting for their licenses, going back-and-forth with local or state regulators on getting theirs completed or both.

With a priority on transitioning existing provisional cannabis licenses in California, one must hope that the process will run smoothly. Ideally, every provisional license holder will be able to make the switch to an annual license before January 1, 2026.

However if California’s past is to act as any reference, one must also be extremely skeptical.

Despite legalization, California black market still thriving

by The Real Dirt | Jan 5, 2022 | Blog, Business, Cannabis Business, Cannabis Law, Cannabis Law and Compliance, Cannabis News, Culture, Industry News, Legalization, Politics

Lake County has some of the largest acreages in permitted cannabis grows in California. Yet, despite a legal market, illegal grows are unfairly undermining the profitability of lawful cultivators.

This illegal market that voters sought to eradicate with cannabis legalization is quickly eroding the permitted industry and threatening public safety. Amounting to an estimated 80% of all cannabis sales in California, the market is saturated with low-cost illicit product. Cannabis cultivators are unable to compete.

As the underground economy thrives, so does criminal activity and environmental harm.

Rural counties with land and industry prime for cannabis cultivation are at the front lines of this battle, including those in the Sacramento region. During a time of limited staffing and competing priorities, local governments require increased state funding for enforcement.

The path for the legal industry is already challenging. Growers face a long permit process, including extensive state-mandated environmental review and higher taxes intended to help monitor and ensure public health and safety.

Distribution is also affected by the struggles of the state’s licensed retail outlets, which must compete with illegal retailers that similarly flourish due to limited enforcement resources.

Unencumbered by these obstacles, illicit growers and suppliers can sell product at half the cost and distribute them nationally. The negative impact to residents and the environment from this activity is significant.

A 2020 raid on illegal cannabis grows in Lake County resulted in the seizure of over 51,000 plants and the discovery of 40 state Fish and Wildlife violations. This included storage of chemical pollutants near waterways and usage of underage labor. Stories like these are echoed across the state, with illegal grows linked to violent crime, environmental damage and wildfire.