Will we see tax reform in 2023 for cannabis sellers? Specifically, will Congress finally get something done about the pain inflicted on industry by the Internal Revenue Code at 26 USC § 280E? (“IRC 28oE”.) It feels like a long shot, but you never know. After many attempts to get the SAFE Banking Act through
There has been so much talk from the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) around cannabidiol (“CBD”) regulations that it makes one’s head spin. For years everyone has wondered when, or even if, the FDA would propose and adopt CBD regulations. To date, while taking input from the public on the topic, the FDA mostly has
Lawful use in commerce is a requirement for a trademark to be registered in the United States. For cannabis brands, this means that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will not register trademarks used in connection with products that are illegal under federal law, most notably marijuana. However, USPTO’s problematic approach to lawful
Cosmetics are something of a bright spot when it comes to federal cannabis regulation. Unfortunately, however, there is quite a bit of misunderstanding when it comes to the federal legal framework for cannabis cosmetics. Following up on question that was asked during a recent webinar, here are the basics of which cannabis brands should be
As we blogged about last week, the SAFE Banking Act is trying to claw its way back from the dead during this lame duck session of Congress. Interestingly, on December 2, Punchbowl News reported that the Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a memo outlining its “issues” with the SAFE Banking Act. Here’s the memo (“Memo”).
As we’ve written about over the past several years, there have been consistent rallying cries for common-sense banking reform for the cannabis industry. The SAFE Banking Act, which would allow federally regulated financial institutions to work with state-legal cannabis businesses, has been passed by the U.S. House of Representatives a whopping seven times. However, the
President Biden’s recent announcement of a pardon for federal cannabis offenses has caught the attention of observers abroad. In fact, I was quoted in an article by Brazilian journalist Anita Krepp on the subject. Unfortunately, the example being set by Biden for other countries is, in part, a bad one. To be clear, we are
Last week, I wrote a piece entitled “Deschedule Cannabis, Don’t Reschedule It.” The post came on the heels of President Joe Biden’s announcement that the federal government is considering the federal scheduling of cannabis. As I noted, rescheduling cannabis to schedule II or below is a bad idea, because it would subject cannabis to DEA
On September 29, I spoke on an opening panel at the 7th annual Cannabis Law Conference for the Cannabis Law Section of the State Bar of Michigan. My co-panelist was the renowned Brookings political scientist John Hudak. One of John’s specialty areas is state and federal marijuana policy. The title of our panel was “Update
I have a bunch of thoughts actually, none of them so flattering. I’m going to break them down by category. The pardons themselves don’t do much President Biden pardoned 6,500 people previously convicted of “simple possession” of marijuana under federal law. The pardons don’t release anyone from prison, as no one was in federal prison
