Oversight and onward

Oversight and onward

After spending weeks writing an article warning of the dangers of interstate commerce or federal legalization for states that tax marijuana by weight (Alaska, California, Colorado, Maine, and Nevada) or collect pre-processing (Canada; Alaska, California, Colorado, Illinois, Maine, and Nevada) and publishing it in Tax Notes, I remembered that New Jersey did both.

I’ve made lots of mistakes before; and list some here:  https://newrevenue.org/2015/01/28/3-errors-in-laws-to-tax/.  And for this recent article, I skipped the step, so useful in earlier writing, of soliciting comments before publication, like in 2011:

Still, overlooking New Jersey at age 75 is kind of embarrassing. But it may mean I can slow down, maybe to the point of being a critic or second set of eyes, and take comfort from some tax policy scholars who have been looking at and writing about cannabis revenue:

Carl Davis of the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, https://itep.org/?s=cannabis#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=cannabis&gsc.page=1(Richard Phillips and Misha Hill contributed to some of this work.

Ulrik Boesen, when he was at the Tax Foundation, https://taxfoundation.org/individual-and-consumption-taxes/excise-taxes/marijuana-taxes/

Richard Auxier of the Tax Policy Center, https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/pros-and-cons-cannabis-taxes (with Nikhita Airi)

Ben Leff of American University Law School, https://www.bu.edu/bulawreview/files/2021/07/LEFF.pdf

Jane Gravelle and Sean Lowry from the Congressional Research Service way back in 2014, https://newtax.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/fed-mj-tax-r43785.pdf

Lots of drug policy scholars look at cannabis revenue policy too, but my own background in tax leads me to appreciate these tax policy people who have taken up this work especially.


#CBD #Hemp
Oversight and onward
October 25, 2022 2:56 pm

বাংলা简体中文繁體中文EnglishFrançaisDeutschहिन्दीItaliano日本語한국어मराठीPortuguêsਪੰਜਾਬੀРусскийEspañolSvenskaతెలుగుไทยTürkçeУкраїнськаTiếng Việt