A book I won’t read

A book I won’t read

In a Time magazine interview, an author of a new book, Can Legal Weed Win?: The Blunt Realities of Cannabis Economics, says this:

“Legal weed producers and sellers in Washington and Colorado have a better chance at capturing market share than they do in other states. That’s not just because of lower taxes and regulations. It’s also because those two states have been open for recreational and adult use the longest.”

The casual reader would think that cannabis taxes in Washington are low, but they are the highest in the world.  

When I look at cannabis writing, I search for the tax part to judge the whole thing.   Since the authors are off-base on what little I’ve seen from them on taxes, I won’t bother reading this book.

#CBD #Hemp
A book I won’t read
July 2, 2022 2:04 pm

Slides for Chief Judge Foley’s class

Slides for Chief Judge Foley’s class

My old friend Maurice Foley from Senate Finance staff days has risen to become Chief Judge of the U.S. Tax Court, and is teaching a class at the University of San Diego Law School. I’m to make a remote guest appearance June 21 on marijuana taxation.; here are the slides for that appearance.

#CBD #Hemp
Slides for Chief Judge Foley’s class
June 20, 2022 9:16 pm

Federal legalization of cannabis in connection with taxes, pricing, and illegal markets

Federal legalization of cannabis in connection with taxes, pricing, and illegal markets

I’m having to miss a conference in Seattle starting tomorrow on federal legalization of cannabis in connection with taxes, pricing, and illegal markets.  Here are notes for what I hoped to say.

States fall into 4 categories:

  1. 7 states with weight-based taxes or producer taxes that will be eviscerated by interstate commerce in products like imported edibles:  Alaska, Colorado, Illinois, Maine, New Jersey, and Nevada – and California, unless its Legislature acts.  [Those states could use a separate small session.]
  2. 2 states, New York and Connecticut, whose potency taxes may be tested locally by imports that haven’t been tested in-state.  
  3. States with other taxes on the books.
  4. States without taxes yet, like my state of North Carolina, where state monopoly retailing seems a better choice for revenue and public health, and legally avoids the federal 280E selling expense tax. (https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/facsch_lawrev/410/)

For any state with taxes, federal legalization brings problems and maybe opportunities:

Federal legalization and elimination of the federal prohibition premium would probably make pre-tax prices lower, leaving more room for state taxes, but new federal taxes might crowd out state taxes. 

Federal taxes might bring standardization of measurement and piggybacking opportunities – like tobacco taxes today, where the federal government’s blessing of the weight of a pack of cigarettes means states don’t have to weigh packs independently.  Federal weight or potency standards could make state weight or potency taxes just peel off.

Interstate commerce could bring a race to the bottom on marijuana taxes, as we have today with tobacco taxes, as the Eric Garner case shows.  Now some states may want to race to the bottom, and become marijuana tax havens, but Congress could solve that problem in advance, by giving a capped rebate, or a credit against federal marijuana tax for state taxes paid.  So if the federal tax rate is $10, they could give states a credit up to say $8.  If the state tax is zero, the federal tax is $10.  If the state tax is $5, the federal tax is $5.  If the state tax is $8, the federal tax is $2.    If the state tax is $9, the federal tax is still $2, because the credit is capped at $2.  States would have no incentive to race to the bottom.  If the states get together, Congress will listen.  We’re still at the starting gate.

#CBD #Hemp
Federal legalization of cannabis in connection with taxes, pricing, and illegal markets
June 5, 2022 9:22 pm

Medical marijuana in the North Carolina Senate 

Medical marijuana in the North Carolina Senate 

Medical marijuana passed the North Carolina Senate, 35-10, after this hearing in the Rules Committee, where I speak at the 36’45” mark — mostly about how state retail sales are safer, more lucrative, and maybe faster than issuing licenses to just 10 vertically integrated corporations.


My two-minute appearance starts this way: “Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I’m Pat Oglesby, a lawyer with the nonprofit Center for New Revenue.Marijuana is coming.  Iit makes people nervous but we’re gonna have it and the patients are gonna be getting their medicine — and I like to think about where the money goes.  And right now [under SB711] you’ve got these 10 corporations set up.  Antitrust? [Maybe] you can’t bring an antitrust action for selling a federal illegal product. But the antitrust policy of not concentrating all this economic power in these 10 companies:  It’s the same policy.”

Full transcript:

DISCLAIMER: This transcript is automatically generated and may contain spelling and grammatical errors, and mistaken words. WRAL can not guarantee the accuracy of the transcript.

Dwight grain dane Peterson ha Matthew lee and linda Matthews, thank you. Our pages today are john Eagle, Bessemer City sponsored by Senator Cathy Harrington uh telecheck from Saulsberry sponsored by Senator carl ford and David smith from Lexington sponsored by senator steve Jarvis. Thank you all I think you all three were here yesterday. Uh and so you’re you’re having a a good oversight of what’s going on in the Senate this week. So thank you Two bills on the agenda today. We will start with Senate Bill 774 D. O. T. Legislative changes and agency Bill, Senator Mcinnis. Good morning. You have that. Thank you. Mr Chair ladies and gentlemen, the committee. This is the annual D. O. T. Agency bill. It’s pretty self explanatory. It is non controversial. Uh We did amend the bill yesterday for uh some clarity and uh issued the bill to you for your consideration and appreciate your support. Glad to answer any questions. Thank you questions and comments. None are anyone in the audience. Anyone from the agency in the audience who cares? Okay, Senator Waddell don’t go now. Right. Oh I hope the cameras are rolling because that’s the first mr. We clarified, we clarified in regards to the fee for record request where they’re charging a dollar for somebody to uh to get the records request of a of a of a official document. And uh they they’ve been doing it and we just codified that with the amendment yesterday and make sure it was clarified nothing new. Thank you. Find bill. Well thank you any further discussion or debate. I see no one from the audience that cares to speak on a motion from so what they offer a favorable report uh for Senate Bill 774 D. O. T. Legislative changes. Agency bill all in favor. Please say I oppose no motion carried. Thank you. Thank you. Senator. Uh I’ll call this bill and ask senator heist if he will chair please because I will present along with some other Senate bill 7 11, the N. C. Compassionate Care Act and Senator lee and Senator love. And I will just get us all through this help. Mm hmm. Okay. Thank you. Lord. Thank you. Members of the committee bill before us. Senate Bill 7 11. I will recognize Senator raven to speak first on the bill. Thank you. Mr Chairman uh Members and members of the public uh public Member thank you for being here. Uh No bill in my tenure of of the Senate has gone through more committees. Uh I’ve been more open to comment and uh I’ve been adjusted and readjusted more than this bill had. Uh It’s personally very, very important to me. I want you to know that going in. Uh and I hope that I have been fair and giving everyone uh their chance to uh be for it or against it. And having said that I will give you an overview of the bill and what it does the purpose of the bill is to allow carefully regulated use of medical cannabis for the treatment of debilitating diseases. The recreational sale or use of marijuana will remain illegal under north Carolina law to receive medical cannabis patients must have at least one qualifying debilitating condition as certified in writing by bona fide physician with a patient. Uh relationship qualifying conditions Are defined in the bill. There are 15 of them. Uh we don’t need to go through all of them, but I will uh just highlight some uh cancer, hospice care, uh Ataxia, Crohn’s disease, A. L. S. Uh and other end of life diseases uh that are very debilitating, very horrible ways to die. And this is just a compassionate way to address that. Uh and and help these folks that need it. And I certainly don’t want to leave out the veterans and the PTSD that is associated with some of the problems that are veterans and first responders and other members of society have the patients And design caregivers must apply to DHHS for a registration card in order to receive cannabis from the center. Uh qualified patient caregiver may only possess 30 days. Uh 30 day supply of cannabis. We uh we realized that in the past some of the other uh Bad drugs that have been uh available in cannabis is not one of those by the way have been pretty much a free free prescription from uh physicians in 90 days, 120 days refill as you want. This is not the case and this this is very tightly regulated and designed to be used as necessary again uh in most cases uh in in in end of life hospice care uh for various things. Uh The bill establishes the medical cannabis uh production commission within the D. H. S. To develop a supply system that authorizes uh suppliers to produce cannabis and cannabis infused products uh in the production facilities and produce them uh through uh provide them through medical medical cannabis centers. The bill calls for uh 10 licenses to be issued issued stay wide, and a supplier may only sell cannabis through its own medical centers and not for resale and other centers by another supplier. Each supplier may operate uh no more than eight uh centers that will be an amendment right now. The bill as it reads as four, which will put 80 statewide Uh DHHS will charge an initial non refundable license fee of $50,000 plus $5,000 for each medical cannabis facility. Um And the licensed cannabis suppliers shall pay to DHHS a monthly fee of 10% of gross revenues from the sale of the cannabis or cannabis and Hughes products In in inhalation of cannabis. And that has been a sticking point with some folks is prohibited uh in anyone under 18. Uh it is also uh the smokable products are prohibited in uh many places that you would assume ah like all public places ah nowhere near school grounds. Uh huh. It’s it’s pretty tightly done. Uh And I think if you if you have read it and I think everyone in here, probably everyone in the room has uh good, pretty darn good thing. Closing it, what the bill does, 37 other states have already done this. Uh It is my opinion that no state has done it as well as we are attempting to do it. This is the tightest uh the best written following the models of other states and talking to other states and seeing what they did wrong. We have tried to admit those pitfalls and come up with something that will do just what the bill title does and just what the intention of this bill is. And that is give the citizens the citizens of this state who need and deserve compassionate care just that and it is nothing more than trying to help those people ah with the care that they need ah and augment their treatments as decided upon by the patient and buy a a physician uh and some very very very sad and serious situations. So I would thank you for your support. I will give you a couple of statistics Before I turn it over to the other two about this bill. And I will give you the question on this pole because it was not a push poll. This was not done for my benefit or the other sponsors benefit. This was a straight up question and the question to the voters was this quote, would you support or oppose the General Assembly legalizing medical marijuana for patients with a prescription from a doctor. The end quote, 82% of the voters supported the legislation of medical marijuana, including 57% of the voters who strongly supported the measure, 75% Republicans, 87% unaffiliated, 86%,, democrats backed the measure, At least 78% of male and female, white and black. Matted, moderate conservative voters support medical marijuana. 77% of evangelical voters support medical marijuana. It’s hard for me to say that I have ever seen a poll In my 40 years of the political spectrum one way or another, The polls, 82-77% on anything other than maybe is water wet. Those are amazing numbers. And it shows uh it shows that uh north Carolina and north Carolinian voters do have compassion for their fellow man. Ah and I think that we’re going to have overwhelming support for this measure and I appreciate everyone that has helped me work on this uh for the last five years or so, and I certainly hope that it moves forward and mr chairman, I will turn this over to my other two committee members if they would like to sara low was recognized explains. Mhm. My the reason that I have taken part with this bill is because I believe it will help north Carolinians. I think there are individuals with chronic ailments and other kinds of conditions. And cannabis will help someone and that’s why I support it. Um Other states have done it and as far as I’m concerned, there’s no reason in the world why we shouldn’t open things up so that our citizens can take part in medicine that will help them. Now. I know that a lot of times people when we look at things like this, we in our system of medicine, all kinds of things have been used. One of the things that have been used is opiates which are extremely dangerous, but they’re used and they continue to be used. And those of you that are in this room that have had operations, opiates were used in most cases. Um I think cannabis is much safer and I think that it is something that will help our citizens. So I would encourage you to support this bill as we move forward. Under the thank you mr Chairman, um Over the memorial day weekend, I was hanging out with a friend of mine who was diagnosed with cancer, had surgery about, I think it was six weeks ago, had a scar from here to here. And he was talking about, you know, Delta eight and things that you can buy in the store gummies. They’re completely unregulated to help him through um the chemo that he’s getting ready to go through and for us as a state to be able to find a way where patients can consult with their physician as opposed to their friend on something that they’re going through is incredibly important and so a lot has already been said in committee meetings and other places. But hopefully you would support the bill and to open up this access for physicians to be able to speak with their patients on the best course of treatment may not always be this particular the path that they head down, but at least it’ll be an option for a lot of those folks. Thank you. Questions or comments from members of the committee still dives. Um Thanks so much. Mr Chair I just have three questions in particular. I would like to maybe start out with today, ask your first question. Thank you. Um The first question is when I look at the list of no and I’m just trying to pull it up on my screen. Medical conditions on this is on page two on this listed. Um I’m just curious because often sometimes you know and dealing with other bills that list out conditions. Um The feel that this is an exhaustive list of david deep until they the um but debe Attila I’m gonna get it right the basilica di but I’m gonna get it, your work on me afterwards. Um Is this an exhaustive list. Um Is it a comprehensive list or is this something we’re gonna I mean I may not be here but find ourselves just coming back every session to amend. Thank you on that question. Uh I think that list is uh numerically a through oh with elm and then being halfway through the alphabet, which means that’s 15. So there’ll be 17 of both. Oh right. uh and those 17 things are things that are Mhm. Have some scientific evidence of medical cannabis having a positive effect on or Ameliorating. Ah those diseases somewhat it lists things like growing disease, A. L. S. Hospice care end of life. Uh Cancers. It’s at the uh if you go down that list and those are things that uh let’s say we know that medical cannabis can be useful for and can give some relief or completely satisfied. PTSD is a big one among that as well. Uh And and that is not the end of it all. Um Glaucoma is one that is not on that list that it has been proven that cannabis can help with. But in order for cannabis to work on glaucoma, it has to be a constant a constant infusion or profusion. And that simply can’t happen with today’s uh methodologies and and delivery methods that we have for this product. But the uh the commission. Mhm. It does have the ability to add as they see fit uh other conditions and that will be a plus when you look at the makeup of the commission. Uh It it’s not just one that you’re gonna be put on because you just want to an appointment is gonna be one, you’re gonna be put on to work and help people in north Carolina. Okay. Follow up to that question. So based on this list is currently that’s listed in the bill of debilitating. How do we do that time um conditions? Is this consistent would you say? What other states? Um I think what you’ll find is there’s kind of a hodgepodge around the United States. Although there’s a core group of those that I think are within that. And as Senator raven mentioned the advisory board which has medical professionals, pharmacists and others that will be kind of looking at the research moving forward to be able to make those determinations As two additional debilitating conditions that may qualify. Okay. And if if I actually that was some subsequent questions that they have a question specifically, I do have a question specifically about PTSD. And the question regarding the PTSD is what exactly is the purpose of um In line 43 and 40 for it says details of the Trauma shall not be required because if I understand correctly wooden a veteran in this case or military personnel go to a physician. And would this limit then that conversation with the physician. I’m just trying to understand ah what the the purpose or the intent of quote details of the trauma shall not be required. So while while the commission will be adopting rules, I think if you’ll look on the written certification, it talks about um, mm about how the physician has to outline what the debilitating condition is. And I think the intent is that it’s not required to release that information to the commission. Um, excuse me to DHHS for purposes of the written certification. So you go to a physician, you talk to them about what has given rise to the PTSD, they write your certification, the state’s PTSD, but they don’t have to go into the in depth with DHHS as to what that is. That that’s my understanding of what’s there. Okay. And then the last question then. Okay, looking at the advisory board. Um, I’m just curious and especially with the commitment the General assembly has already made in particular. Um, and I think everybody here voted for it and supported eight spot. Um, if we believe there could be some positive benefit, you know, from veterans, I’m still curious. Um, looking at the composition of the board, you know, we do have some patients that are identified to be participants of the board. Um, is there any specific reason why we would not have a veteran um, on the board? Mm hmm. Let me check back through. And I hate, I hate to air on this with without being exact, but I believe in the seven, uh, in the seven positions, uh, I’m mistaken, but appointed by the governor, that one of those, uh, either is or treats, um that specifically I think he’s human with. Yeah I think you’re I think we’re okay on that. I think you’re talking about the advisory, I’m talking about the advisable and page four you can handle that. Uh No there’s not a specific reference um There is a reference to a cardholder, a patient and then also um a parent of a minor qualified patients. Um You know, I don’t know that we we dug that deep into the advisory board. It’s not exclusive. Such that subsection f on page for uh you know that that particular patient maybe a veteran or someone suffering from PTSD, it’s not excluded but it is not specifically included at this time. Just a final comment. Final final final. Now the question that’s a comment. No, you know I put it as well, I understand what you’re attempting to do, you know? But again I would just emphasize, you know, we understand that Um the number I tend to hear 22 or so veterans, you’ll on average commit suicide a day across the nation and we have made a commitment as a general assembly, you know, just trying to do what we can to address, you know the veteran population out there. So when it’s gone um served the country, they they’ve come back and if you know we think there’s some benefit here and we’ve already made a commitment with the hyperbaric oxygen therapy treatment and we now think perhaps you know those with um debilitating conditions, medical conditions could benefit. I I would just wonder if there would be utility and if if you all would consider, you know, opening, you know, some opportunity for a veteran. So that’s just a thought for you other questions or comments from the committee. Senator Children. Mhm. Thank you. Mr Chair. Um I want to just thank the bill sponsors for the work on this and especially you Senator raben. I um no from my personal experience when I first began to serve here in the legislature. Uh some of the early meetings I had were with patients that um had used medical marijuana to deal with the conditions that they had in place and it was really eye opening to to see how cannabis can heal the pain that so many people experience. And I want to thank you for this. Um Just one a couple of questions I think related to the economics of the bill that you and I have uh chatted about. Uh I know that this is what’s called a vertically mandated um Bill, vertically integrated mandated bill in the sense that uh there will be 10 licenses that are gonna be issued for those that will go that will provide seed to sale. And um and I and I understand, I believe the argument really is that it allows for efficiency and also consumer safety um if the state were to go forward because I guess there is some concern that with the vertically integrated model that growers will be excluded manufacturers will be, were excluded. Um My question to you is, I guess the medical cannabis production commission cannot make that decision and we would have to make those changes would have to be made through state through legislative changes. Is that is that correct? So senator, Yes, it is, but we would certainly, I think those changes would cut them about upon the recommendation of that commission. Uh and and that’s what I see going forward. You know, this is uh I think it is necessary to do the uh beginning to the end the the seed to sale product to absolutely ensure quality control and to know that uh that the product that we are producing uh is safe and that the amount uh of THC in that product is going to be the same every time. And just standardization is part of it. I’m sure that if the industry grows as, I think it will grow, um changes will come. Uh but I don’t know what those are, the commission will, will have to in order to change that, Make recommendations to the legislature and this body will then decide, okay, just 1, 1 other follow up. I know that this vertically integrated model I believe exists and um the mandated model exists in florida and new Mexico. Are we aware of any and maybe literally you can answer this if if there had been any any trust challenges for the fact that a limited licenses have been issued. That that may or may not be concerned just a question. Yeah, I’m not aware of that. I mean the process and the bill provides for 20 recommendations to come out of the HHS and the commission has, you know, the ability to choose up to 10 of those from a vertical integration perspective. I don’t know that, that I’m not sure that that any other state is, has had any kind of inquiry um, with the Department of justice or whatever federal agency handles that. Thank you center. Whatever my questions were similar to what um my colleague senator charge we just mentioned, but I have something to other questions concerning that. I did visit a marijuana plant in las Vegas when I went to training and we saw how they were doing what they did from start to finish. But I’m concerned about the business aspect of it in that um, it said here that for business to get licensed, all medical marijuana companies must manage every aspect from farming to the final sale, including owning and operating storefronts and expensive barrier for entry and sometimes the majority of north Carolina farmers are not ready to do so. So is there any sense that this would be like so that the small farmer or the person who’s entering it for the first time would have an opportunity. So I think what the bill allows for is for to be able to work with those who have the expertise that’s required in the application process. Um, So I do think there are opportunities and options in that regard. However, I will say that this is an expensive operation. Um, so you want to make sure that, that the licenses have the ability to produce a product that is of of the quality that you would expect for a physician to write a recommendation for. So the requirements in the application process does not exclude anyone allows them the ability to bring in those with the expertise um, that are required in the application process. But again, it is a, an expensive venture to begin in order to hit the quality measurements that will be needed for a physician to write a recommendation. All right. Thank you. Yes, follow up. And then there’s further stated here that um, The commission will be allowed to issue 10 medical cannabis supplier license. Each supplier would be allowed to operate no more than four medical centers, one of which must be located in a tear one county. So if you’re limited 1 to 81 county. What about the others? Is there any specifications for them? So, um, I think Senator raven mentioned we’re going to increase that to eight. So double the amount of, of access points for patients. Um, the idea behind having at least one in a tier one county was so that um, the suppliers, we’re not just focused around the larger areas and so that folks in rural areas would still have access. So that was kind of the gist behind that having at least one follow up, but it does not say specifically If you have one in one tier one county that some of the others could not Be operating and then in addition to go to till one county. So there’s no limitations. I’m not sure I understand the question. You think there’s not a limitation on how many you can have it here with? There is not, there’s not. So you could put them all in a tier one county if if a licensee wanted to. The idea was that most licenses you’re gonna want to be in in where the major medical centers are because most of the debilitating conditions are those of which folks would be going to some of the major cities not just have a comment. I’m concerned because I had several constituents who approached me, they’re in business already, but not this kind of business. They know how to operate a business because they’ve been doing it that they will be not included and not have the opportunity to be included in this. And we are explicit that we are open. Even if you are running another kind of business, it does not allow you to do this. I think we should open it up and that’s my comment. Any other questions, comments center, Fitch. Look to the legal side I believe similarly responded there was they were not aware of any that’s for coming in. Any other questions or comments. I’ll hold. I’ll come back to you for the motion any other questions or comments from the committee. I don’t have a list up but any members of the public who have signed up for others to speak on this bill. Uh huh. Three. Okay, excuse me. Thank you. Mr. Chairman members of the committee. My name is jerry Royal. I’m counsel for the north Carolina Family Policy Council. Yeah, Based on current medical research and the cost of the harmful effects have been found. We strongly encourage you to oppose Senate Bill 7 11. We all want to be compassionate and to help people in need. As we look at potential health benefits of medical marijuana. We must also weigh the harms and costs to individuals, their families, their community in our state. To find the facts, we need to look to medical professionals and see what they have found so far in their research. We have provided information for you from the Food and Drug Administration, american Academy of neurology, american psychiatric association and american Medical Association. All of these groups encourage continuing research but currently do not support medicinal use of marijuana. A good overview is provided at 2021 article on the A. M. A. Website about a friend of the court brief. They have filed quote. While it is possible, there may be beneficial medicinal uses of marijuana, numerous evidence based studies demonstrate that significant deleterious effects abound. The brief tells the court going on to say without question. The public health risks are immense. Drug abuse and addiction change in brain function, lung disease, intoxication and impaired driving developmental interference, impaired cognition, psychological illness, cardiovascular abnormalities, negative social functioning effects and cancer. The A. M. A. Brief went on to say a massive amount of future systemic research and controlled trials are needed to study the safety and efficacy of cannabis for medicinal purposes. At this point in time, the research clearly shows that the harms and costs to individuals, families and the state greatly outweigh any potential benefits. We therefore encourage you to oppose Senate Bill 7 11. Thank you. Next up, I have reverend Mark Creech, thank you. Mr Chairman and members of the committee reverend Mark Creech, executive director of the christian Action League. Over recent months we’ve heard some emotional testimonies in favor of this bill but I just want to remind you that all of these testimonies are anecdotal evidence, not scientific. I believe that everything that the christian Action League has meant to say on this proposal is summed up in a statement by Dr Samuel Wilkinson and Deepak Cyril D’Souza of the Yale School of Medicine in the Journal of the American Medical Association. If marijuana is to be used for medical purposes, it should be subjected to the same evidence based review and regulatory oversight as other medications prescribed by physicians. Potentially therapeutic compounds of marijuana should be purified and tested and randomized double blind placebo and active controlled clinical trials. Towards this end, the federal government should actively support research examining marijuana’s potentially therapeutic compounds. These compounds should be approved by the F. D. A. Not by popular vote or state legislature, produced according to good manufacturing practice standards distributed by regulated pharmacies and dispensed via a conventional and safe route of administration. Otherwise, states are essentially legalizing recreational marijuana but forcing physicians to act as gatekeepers for those who wish to obtain it. And I would just refer to you. There was a poll mentioned earlier which seemed to indicate complete or vast support on this. But uh that pole that was mentioned suggest if you will that a physician can prescribe uh medical marijuana. But I’m reading for the from the american Association Journal of of Ethics. Currently it is illegal for physicians, even in states where medicinal marijuana is legal to prescribe the drug because it is a scheduled one and prescribing it would constitute aiding and abetting the acquisition of marijuana which could result in revocation of D. E. A licensor and even prison time time has expired. Next. I have Pat Oglesby. Okay, thanks, thank you. Mr chairman, I’m Pat ogles beyond the lawyer with the non profit center for new revenue and marijuana is coming. I mean it makes people nervous but we’re gonna have it and we’re gonna have um the patients are gonna be getting their medicine and I like to think about where the money goes And right now you’ve got these 10 corporations set up now, antitrust, you can’t bring an antitrust action for something of federal illegal product. But the pope, the antitrust policy of not concentrating all this economic power in these 10 companies. It’s the same policy. And I wonder what would happen if if if I mean this state setting it up? Well, I’m an old timer, I’m older than that. I’m not probably not the oldest person here, but I but I keep thinking about a safe model of the state store, fixing up the abc model and doing that where you have patients can get the medicine where you provide the medicine to the patients, but you don’t have these for profit entities promoting it and pushing it because you get a I mean, I love the free enterprise system, I’m gonna go buy things from it today, but when you when you have it, when you unleash the full power of it to deal with a with a drug that we don’t know a lot about and that people are nervous about. It makes me nervous When these, when these folks get there when these 10 companies get their feet in the door, they’re gonna be standing right in line to get first to sell recreational and pushing for that licensing has been, you know, so you’re gonna get this board, give out these licenses, what happens over and over in state after state as lawyers? Well, that’s our hearts come after him and say, well that’s you, you did this wrong, you hold off, there’s abuse of discretion, don’t issue this license and it’s been, they put them on hold and so you said the government can be clunky and slow, but it may be that that state sales could get started even faster and licenses in a in a situation where you’re trying to figure out who gets them and it’s not quite sure who could, who should. So we don’t know, I’d say let’s let’s keep the profit moving down here, keep the noise down marijuana sells itself and thank you all for all your work and and the support of this effort, thank you. Thank you back to the committee. Any other questions or comments from the committee? Senator Harrington, thank you. Thank you Mr Chair. And I’d like to thank the bill sponsors for bringing us through. Um it’s been quite an interesting um, journey to see this bill move through and we’ve seen and heard some of the most compelling and moving testimony in the 12 years that I’ve been here um in favor of this bill and I just wanted to thank you any other questions or comments? Um I hadn’t signed up beforehand, but um I’ll give you one minute, um my name is Sean Perich um I’ve been an entrepreneur in the hemp industry for the last five years and I wasn’t planning on saying something but because of senator chaudhary bringing up the issue or not an issue, but bringing up vertical integration, I just wanted to speak on behalf of how, I don’t necessarily think that might be the best long term thing for the patients. Just seeing what’s happened in other states, seeing what’s happened in the hemp industry, even in this state, the processing of growing is so intricate, there’s like 100 different strains, there’s turbines, the process of processing is so intricate, there’s ethanol extraction, there’s C. 02 extraction in the process of retail is so different in itself or like yes, a physician can give you a prescription, but do we expect all physicians to be up to date with the latest um you know, different types of strains that might work for a certain illness or different types of turbines or different ratios between CBD and THC, I don’t think that’s long term feasible to have that level of quality. Um when you vertically integrate, I believe things would slip up in the cycle and it’s just my fear that that’s something that if it’s still something that can be looked at which earlier didn’t think so, but if it can I would strongly strongly or just all to look at that and I’m happy to give anyone like evidence based on this and other states. Thank you. Thank you very much. I’ll hold I’m holding center Fitch for the motion but any other questions or comments, Senator Newt. So just just one comment, it really goes to whether you’re for this bill is gonna vote for it or against it. I just wanted to commend the bill sponsors. Um I have seen this, you know, sort of not from the beginning because they worked on it before it ever became visible to the rest of us all the way through to today. And I have never seen such a respectful, thorough process of listening to members, uh making changes to the bill every step of the way to try to alleviate concerns that were raised about the bill. So I just want to commend you for that best in class in terms of how to bring a bill through listening to members and the public. And so again, when you’re gonna vote for it or against it. The process has been a plus and I just commend you for the way you handled it. Thank you other questions or comments from the committee scene. Unrecognized center Fitch for emotion. No bill is perfect. That’s why we are in fact the legislative body. I do believe that this is the right thing to do if there are problems that crop up from the latest standpoint, be a legislative body ready, willing and able to make the adjustment. Mr Chairman. If I may at this time, I would move for a favorable report as the bill. I believe it was this a committee substitute. It is not here to it is uh Bill as the bill is before us. Alright, I would move for a favorable report for the bill as before. Um Any final comments from bill sponsors. Seeing none all those in favor of the passage of Senate Bill 7 11. Please signify by saying Aye opposed. No. The eyes have it. The bill will be referred to the floor. I believe senator Ravens running it on the floor. Is that coming in? So I believe it’s scheduled for tomorrow. I would turn the gavel back over to center raven for bringing this thing. Uh Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your attendance today and for the comments from the public. We appreciate everyone being here and pages And our sergeant at arms staff concludes. The agenda of the meeting is adjourned. Thank you

#CBD #Hemp
Medical marijuana in the North Carolina Senate 
June 5, 2022 12:52 pm

2022 Meeting Announcement, Science Board to the FDA – 06/14/2022

2022 Meeting Announcement, Science Board to the FDA – 06/14/2022 2022 Meeting Announcement, Science Board to the FDA – 06/14/2022 Anonymous (not verified) Wed, 06/01/2022 – 14:56

Event Title
2022 Meeting Announcement, Science Board to the FDA

Event Attendance

June 14, 2022
June 14, 2022
Publish Date
Thu, 06/02/2022 – 00:23

Review Date
Thu, 06/01/2023 – 00:00

Last Reviewed Date
Wed, 06/01/2022 – 00:00

Short Title
2022 Meeting Announcement, Science Board to the FDA

Detailed Description
2022 meeting announcement for the Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration

Event Format

Next Review Date
1 Year

Navigational Page

CE Credit

Source Organization

Bulk Approved



The meeting presentations will be heard, viewed, captioned, and recorded through an online teleconferencing platform. The Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration will consider challenges in evaluating the safety of dietary supplement and food ingredients with predicted pharmacological activity, utilizing cannabinoids as a case study. The Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration will also hear about the Agency’s enhanced efforts to spur the development, qualification, and adoption of new alternative methods for regulatory use that can replace, reduce, and refine animal testing and have the potential to provide both more timely and more predictive information to accelerate product development and enhance emergency preparedness. The Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration will also hear about the Agency’s enhanced efforts to ensure optimal organization, infrastructure, and expertise for data science efforts in alignment with its regulatory scope and evidence-based decision making, in support of FDA’s public health priorities.

Meeting Materials

FDA intends to make background material available to the public no later than two (2) business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post the background material on its Web site prior to the meeting, the background material will be made publicly available on FDA’s website at the time of the advisory committee meeting. Background material and the link to the online teleconference meeting room will be available at:

Public Participation Information

Interested persons may present data, information, or views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee.

  • Written submissions may be made to the contact person on or before June 7, 2022.
  • Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled between approximately 11:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m. Those individuals interested in making formal oral presentations should notify the contact person and submit a brief statement of the general nature of the evidence or arguments they wish to present, the names and addresses of proposed participants, and an indication of the approximate time requested to make their presentation on or before June 1, 2022.

Time allotted for each presentation may be limited. If the number of registrants requesting to speak is greater than can be reasonably accommodated during the scheduled open public hearing session, FDA may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers for the scheduled open public hearing session. The contact person will notify interested persons regarding their request to speak by June 7, 2012.

Contact Information

Rakesh Raghuwanshi
Office of the Chief Scientist
Office of the Commissioner
Food and Drug Administration
White Oak Bldg 1, Room 3309
10903 New Hampshire Ave
Silver Spring, Maryland 20993
Phone: 301–796-4769
E-mail: [email protected]

A notice in the Federal Register about last minute modifications that impact a previously announced advisory committee meeting cannot always be published quickly enough to provide timely notice. Therefore, you should always check the Agency’s Web site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm and scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting link, or call the advisory committee information line to learn about possible modifications before coming to the meeting.

  • FDA Advisory Committee Information Line 1-800-741-8138
    (301-443-0572 in the Washington DC area).

Persons attending FDA’s advisory committee meetings are advised that the agency is not responsible for providing access to electrical outlets. FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with disabilities. If you require accommodations due to a disability, please contact Rakesh Raghuwanshi at (301) 796-4769 at least 7 days in advance of the meeting. FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee meetings. Please visit our Web site for procedures on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.

Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app.2).

Display Short Description

UCM Sorting


Event Duration
1 day

Add Subscription Box

#CBD #Hemp http://www.fda.gov/advisory-committees/committees-and-meeting-materials/2022-meeting-announcement-science-board-fda-06142022 June 1, 2022 6:56 pm

Help HempToday support refugees fleeing the war in Ukraine

HempToday operates under the auspices of the Nakło Foundation in Poland. Our foundation is serving as a safe haven for families forced out of their home country due to the war in Ukraine.

We appeal to the hemp community to support us in this effort. Your donation goes to help cover the costs associated with our hosting of mothers and children, as men between the ages of 18-60 must stay in the country to support the war effort.

The funds will also be used to transport refugees from the border, to contribute to local food banks and to purchase additional items for other refugees who are being relocated in our local community.

We thank you in advance for your support. – Kehrt & Marzenna Reyher

Click here to read more.

Source of “Hemp = 4x More Fiber Than Trees”

Most of the hemp memes circulating are uncited so I investigate to see from whence they come, and thus their accuracy. That “hemp produces 300 gallons of oil and 8,000 pounds of seed per acre” one is the worst, it’s more like 35 gallons and 1,500 pounds if you’re lucky. I don’t ask for a citation because I know they don’t have it and I prefer research only unavoidably biased by me and not also someone else.

So then, this is the source of the “Hemp produces 4.1 more fiber per acre than trees” meme:

1916 Bulletin 404, U.S. Department of Agriculture

Hemp Hurds as Paper-Making Material

By Lyster H. Dewey, Botanist in Charge of Fiber-Plant Investigations, and Jason L. Merrill, Paper-Plant Chemist and Paper-Plant Investigations

This bulletin is printed on paper manufactured from hemp hurds”

While today the hurd (small, short inner fiber found at 5 times higher levels than the bast fiber in the hemp stalk) is prized for use in building materials and elsewhere, in 1916 USDA considered hemp hurd to be a low-value waste material. Note that this might be where HempFlax got the idea for using their hurd for animal bedding in the 1990s:

[…] [On page 4 is:]

Hemp hurds are used to a limited extent for barnyard litter and
stable bedding, as a substitute for sawdust in packing ice, and, in
rare instances, for fuel. They are not regarded as having a commercial value for any of these uses, though they are doubtless worth at least $1 per ton on the farm when used for stable bedding. They are a waste product, without value for other purposes which might compete with their use for paper stock.”

The decorticators of the time discarded hurd as waste, a nuisance byproduct. That’s why realizing that hurd could be used to make paper was important at the time, just before supplies of wood for paper were dwindling. Note that they are using a sustainable forest for this comparison, not a clear-cut:

[…] [On page 24 is:]

“TABLE II.-Comparison between wood and hemp hurds.

The most important point derived from this calculation is in regard to areas required for a sustained supply, which are in the ratio of 4 to 1. Every tract of 10,000 acres which is devoted to hemp raising year by year is equivalent to a sustained pulp-producing capacity of 40,500 acres of average pulp-wood lands. In other words, in order to secure additional raw material for the production of 25 tons of fiber per day there exists the possibility of utilizing the agricultural waste already produced on 10,000 acres of hemp lands instead of securing, holding, reforesting, and protecting 40,500 acres of pulp-wood land.

The annual growth per acre, although decidedly in favor of hurds,
has little bearing on the project, because the utilization of the hurds is subordinate to the raising of hemp, and the paper manufacturer probably could afford to use only hurds resulting from the hemp industry.”

Click here to download a free PDF of this document.

Will New Hemp-Infused Drink be a Trendsetter Among Big Brands?

From the Food Institute article “Will New Hemp-Infused Drink be a Trendsetter Among Big Brands?:”

“Richard Rose, founder of hemp-foods-related therichardrosereport.com, said: “Hemp energy drinks typically have 50 milligrams of hemp seed oil per can, or a less-than-.01 percent hemp content. Thus, with virtually no functionality, it is purely a marketing ploy, but at least it gets the ‘H’ word in front of new consumers.””

Read more at: https://foodinstitute.com/focus/will-new-hemp-infused-drink-be-a-trendsetter-among-big-brands/

Help Provide a Safe Haven for Ukrainian Refugees

From our friends at HempToday:

“Help us provide a safe haven for Ukrainian refugees

Nakło Foundation is serving as a safe haven for families forced out of their home country due to the war in Ukraine. Your donation goes to help cover the costs associated with our hosting of mothers and children, as men between the ages of 18-60 must stay in the country to support the war effort. The funds will also be used to contribute to local food banks and to purchase additional items for other refugees who are being relocated in our local community. We thank you in advance for your support.

– Kehrt & Marzenna”

Read more and donate at: https://naklofoundation.org/donate/

Food: Hemp’s Low-hanging Fruit for Success

With 25,000 possible products from hemp, which should you do first?

CBD products require expensive extraction and packaging equipment and have regulatory issues, technically illegal to FDA. Fiber products need huge investment in infrastructure for an expensive product not yet approved for commercial building, or a $20 million investment if you want to make textiles. Producing fuel requires more energy than it provides and is expensive if made from hempseed. Farming is hard and more farmers have failed at hemp than have succeeded the last few years.

So then, what’s a safe and easy way to enter the hemp industry?


Since 1994 thus relatively new in the space, food was hemp’s first billion-dollar segment and has long been 90% of Canadian hemp. Incorporating hempseed into existing foods is also the easiest way for any company to “get into hemp.”

An existing food company could be up-and-running with a new hemp food in a matter of weeks. Mere line extensions or entire new categories are possible. Foodservice too, your college students will love it.

Over 90% of all recipes or CPG foods could easily use primary hempseed products like shelled hempseed, whole hempseed, presscake, or hempseed oil. All those items are 100% legal to FDA, with their GRAS status accepted in 2018. CBD and hemp flowers themselves can also be used in foods, although they are not yet GRAS each state can make them so, and many have.

From using the shelled seed and hempseed oil to sophisticated industrial ingredients for other processers, hempseed as an ingredient for foods can take on many forms.

Powdered hemp flowers, powdered shelled seed, fractionated proteins, texturized proteins… new ingredients are emerging monthly. There’s been more progress the last 7 years than the first 12,000 in this area.

Potential food applications for shelled hempseed include baby food, bagels, beverage, bird seed, biscotti, bread, breading, breakfast cereal, brownies, cakes, camping food, candy, caramel, cheesecake, chocolate, coffee, cookies, crackers, cream cheese, cream soup, dessert topping, dip, dressing, dry mixes, energy bar, extruded or puffed snacks, falafel, fish food, flour, frozen dessert, fudge, granola, hard cheese, hummous, ice cream topping, marinade, mayonnaise, meat alternative, medical foods, miso, muesli, muffins, nut butter, oil, pancakes, parmesan alternative, pasta, pastries, pesto sauce, pie crust, pilaf, pita bread, pralines, pretzels, protein powder, pudding, sauces, scones, seasoning, shakes, smoothies, snack chips, sour cream, spread, stir-fry, tabouli, tahini, tapenade, tempeh, toffee, tofu, tortillas, trail mix, truffles, veggie burger, waffles, yogurt, and much more.

Show me your product list or menu and I’ll tell you which of your products you can incorporate hemp into, which hemp products, and how. Click the Contact Form here and send it to me, or ask to questions.

I’ll give you a few names of suppliers if appropriate, but have absolutely no products to sell you. None, zip, nada. This is not a sales funnel disguised as a public service, it’s a public service which looks like a sales funnel.

I’m retired so I don’t charge for this, as it’s long been my mission to progress the hemp food industry as much as possible before I go to “the great tofu factory in the sky.”

If you don’t know who I am, click here to Google “Richard Rose” “hemp food”. After helping create the modern hemp food industry 28 years ago and the modern vegan foods industry 42 years ago, if I can’t help you probably no one can.

I now write The Richard Rose Report with all the latest news, analysis, context, history, products, and policy information on hemp.

Animal Groups Clutch Pearls Over Hemp

Many don’t realize that in the early years the American Soybean Association hated us vegan food producers because we could turn scarcity into abundance, with our 16:1 net protein yield over meat.

Opposing hempseed today, which has been fodder way longer than even rice or soya, would be right up their alley.

Read more at: https://hempindustrydaily.com/animal-feed-organizations-reinforce-hemp-safety-concerns-to-state-policymakers/

Hemp 2022 Predictions

My prediction for U.S. hemp in 2022:

I expect the industry to continue to shoot itself in the foot, then blame FDA, DEA, anyone but itself.

Grifters will continue to flourish while those whose shoulders they stand upon will continue to be ignored.

The associations will continue to hurt us all in order to help just one or two big members.

HIA will continue to sell one bad idea after another, continuing its 23 year tradition.

The media will continue to pimp the worst and ignore the best just to sell ads.

Processors will continue to take advantage of farmers.

The industry’s long celebration of mediocrity and legerdemain will continue to flourish.

Over-promising and under-delivering is now the industry’s mantra. Ironically it didn’t have to be that way, the industry had quiet but effective leaders at its disposal. Keyword= quiet, as a Hustleocracy not a Meritocracy it’s now all about the bold bluster, loud and aggressive. It worked for the Orange Don, inspiring many.

All in all, I fear for the future of hemp in the U.S. The bus is headed towards a cliff, driven by the associations. Once crashed, they’ll just find jobs elsewhere. There is no longer a downside for bad people who do wrong. Expect it to flourish.

Marijuana tax policy webinar, January 26 at noon Eastern

Marijuana tax policy webinar, January 26 at noon Eastern

My friend, Center for New Revenue board member, and law professor Doug Berman of the Ohio State University heads up the Drug Education and Policy Center there. That Center and the Center for New Revenue are sponsoring a webinar Wednesday, January 26 at noon Eastern time – on marijuana tax policy.

My co-panelists are Ulrik Boesen of the D.C. think tank Tax Foundation, Tax Professor Ben Leff of American University Law School, and prominent California cannabis lawyer Hilary Bricken.  Shaleen Title of the Parabola Center will moderate.

More info is here https://moritzlaw.osu.edu/solving-cannabis-tax-puzzle-approaches-emergent-industry?utm_campaign=law_marketing-activity_fy22&utm_content=1638540324&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

Registration is required, and to the right of that page.

#CBD #Hemp
Marijuana tax policy webinar, January 26 at noon Eastern
January 21, 2022 8:34 pm

Candidate questionnaire draft

Candidate questionnaire draft

Having given money to Democratic candidates in the past, I’ve been getting calls from candidates asking for my support.

I’m working up a questionnaire to see whom to support; here’s a draft. There will be more questions; suggestions welcomed.

Do you support taking away the carried interest tax advantage for hedge fund operators?

Do you support increasing the federal estate tax?

Do you support eliminating planning opportunities that allow avoidance of the federal estate tax?

Do you propose to let marijuana companies start deducting their advertising and marketing expenses on either federal and North Carolina tax returns?  That is, would you take away the 280E Selling Expense Tax on the books now? 

Do you support government rather than for-profit private marijuana retailing in North Carolina?

My own answers would be yes to all questions except the fourth one about 280E.  

#CBD #Hemp
Candidate questionnaire draft
December 13, 2021 11:11 pm

Remembering Bob Dole

Remembering Bob Dole

I was a big fan of Bob Dole when I worked for Congressional tax-writing committees in the 1980s.  He chaired the Senate Finance Committee until he became Majority Leader, and he stayed on the committee.  He was a statesman in his own way, and funny.  After Dole died, Al Franken started claiming to be the funniest living ex-Senator.

Here’s some marijuana tax trivia.  Bob Dole inserted the 280E Selling Expense Tax into the tax law in 1982 when he was Senate Finance Committee chair.  I was on the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation then, and must have known about 280E back then, because the staff had proofed the technical explanation of the entire bill during Congressional downtime for staff, but I didn’t work on it.

Dole got the idea from Senator Bill Armstrong (R-CO) who was on the Finance Committee.  Armstrong was a pretty shrewd operator.  He was described by Dole as the “the father of tax indexing” – a change called the most dramatic tax law development in a generation by Ken Kies on the right and Jim Wetzler on the left.  So that makes Armstrong a key figure in tax policy.  280E is hated by the marijuana industry, but by making advertising and marketing non-deductible, 280E keeps the noise down.  

#CBD #Hemp
Remembering Bob Dole
December 11, 2021 7:04 pm

Congress: H.R. 6134: To authorize the regulation of interstate commerce with respect to food containing cannabidiol derived from hemp, and for other purposes.

H.R. 6134: To authorize the regulation of interstate commerce with respect to food containing cannabidiol derived from hemp, and for other purposes.
Introduced: Sponsor: Rep. Kathleen Rice [D-NY4]

This bill was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce which will consider it before sending it to the House floor for consideration.

Rep. Kathleen Rice [D-NY4] is a member of the committee.

#CBD #Hemp
December 2, 2021 5:00 am

October 2021 Office of Women's Health e-Update

October 2021 Office of Women's Health e-Update October 2021 Office of Women’s Health e-Update Anonymous (not verified) Mon, 11/22/2021 – 10:09

Detailed Description
FDA Office of Women’s Health newsletter, with a Message from the Associate Commissioner, Women’s Health Highlights, Call To Action, and upcoming Meetings.


Mammogram Detection

Message from the Associate Commissioner

Dear Women’s Health Colleagues,

Many of us know someone who has been affected by breast cancer—a friend, mother, sister, or maybe even yourself. Each year, approximately 255,000 women get diagnosed with breast cancer in the United States and 42,000 die from the disease.¹

Mammograms continue to be the best primary tool for breast cancer screening. Although screening cannot prevent breast cancer, it can help find cancer early, when it is easier to treat. National Breast Cancer Awareness Month serves as a great reminder to ask your healthcare provider about scheduling your mammogram. We invite you to learn more about mammograms here.

While breast cancer is one of the most common cancers among women and top causes of cancer related deaths; heart disease is a leading cause of death for both women and men. Diet is an integral component to preventing and treating heart disease. By limiting sodium, which is a component of salt in our diets, we can help prevent diseases like high blood pressure and heart disease.

In an effort to improve nutrition and reduce disease burden, FDA’s Center for Food Safety and Nutrition (CFSAN) issued a final guidance which provides voluntary short term sodium reduction targets for food manufacturers, chain restaurants and food service operators in an effort to decrease diet-related diseases. Please take a moment to learn about FDA’s nutrition efforts and steps you can take to reduce sodium in your diet.


Kaveeta Vasisht, M.D., Pharm.D.
Associate Commissioner for Women’s Health
Director, Office of Women’s Health


Below are links to specific COVID-19 topics and the latest vaccine fact sheets, with a full list of the latest COVID-19 information from the FDA here.


Woman Jogging

Bone and Joint Health National Action Week is observed on October 12-20. More than 10 million people in the U.S. have osteoporosis. Anyone can develop osteoporosis, but it is more common in older women. Even though osteoporosis affects mostly older women, prevention starts when you are younger. No matter your age, you can take steps to build bone mass and prevent bone loss.

For more information on osteoporosis, click here. Download our osteoporosis fact sheet or order in bulk for distribution to the women in your community at www.fda.gov/womenshealthpubs.


FDA Permits Marketing of E-Cigarette Products, Marking First Authorization of Its Kind by the Agency

The FDA announced it has authorized the marketing of three new tobacco products, marking the first set of electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) products ever to be authorized by the FDA through the Premarket Tobacco Product Application (PMTA) pathway. 

Do Not Use Needle-Free Devices for Injection of Dermal Fillers

The FDA is warning the public and healthcare professionals not to use needle-free devices such as hyaluron pens for injection of hyaluronic acid (HA) or other lip and facial fillers, collectively and commonly referred to as dermal fillers or fillers. 

The FDA is aware of serious injuries and in some cases, permanent harm to the skin, lips, or eyes with the use of needle-free devices for injection of lip and facial fillers.

Specific Lots of Aerosol Sunscreen Spray Products by Coppertone: Recall – Due to the Presence of Benzene

Coppertone is recalling twelve lots of five Coppertone aerosol sunscreen spray products manufactured between the dates of January 10, 2021 and June 15, 2021. Coppertone has identified the presence of benzene in these lots. Benzene is classified as a human carcinogen. Exposure to benzene can occur through inhalation, oral, and skin and it could, depending on the level and extent of exposure, result in an increased risk of cancers including leukemia, and blood cancer of the bone marrow and other blood disorders which can be life-threatening.

Youth E-cigarette Use Remains Serious Public Health Concern Amid COVID-19 Pandemic

A study released by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that more than 2 million U.S. middle and high school students reported currently using e-cigarettes in 2021, with more than 8 in 10 of those youth using flavored e-cigarettes.

Risk of Exposure to Unsafe Levels of Radiation with Safe-T-Lite UV WAND

The FDA issued a safety communication to warn consumers that use of the Max-Lux Safe-T-Lite UV WAND may expose the user or person nearby to unsafe levels of ultraviolet-C (UV-C) radiation and may cause injury to the skin, eyes, or both after a few seconds of use.

The FDA is aware that consumers may use the Max-Lux Safe-T-Lite UV WAND to try to disinfect surfaces and kill germs in the home or similar spaces. The FDA recommends that consumers consider using safer alternative disinfection methods, such as general-purpose disinfectants.

Essure: Update on Adverse Event Reports

The FDA remains committed to providing updates on the safety profile of Essure, a permanently implanted birth control device for women. Although Essure has not been available for implantation in the U.S. since December 2019, the FDA continues to monitor the product’s safety through an FDA-required postmarket surveillance study and other activities. FDA is providing an update on the adverse event information received by Bayer (the company that manufactured Essure) as required in the April 24, 2020 variance from Medical Device Reporting requirements.

All Ultrasound Gels and Lotions by Eco-Med Pharmaceutical: Class I Recall – Due to Risk of Bacteria Contamination

All ultrasound gels and lotions manufactured by Eco-Med are being recalled due to risk of bacterial contamination with Burkholderia cepacia complex (Bcc). The FDA independently confirmed that distributed product tested positive for bacterial contamination. The use of affected ultrasound gels and lotions contaminated with Bcc may lead to serious infections, including bloodstream infections, which may result in sepsis or death.

Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion (LAAO) Devices Potentially Associated with Procedural Outcome Differences Between Women and Men

The FDA issued a Letter to Health Care Providers about the potential for differences in procedural outcomes between women and men undergoing implant of an LAAO device. A recent publication in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Cardiology indicates that major adverse events and lengthened hospital stay may be more common in women compared to men.  

It’s a Good Time to Get Your Flu Vaccine

Fall is here, and it is time to get your seasonal flu vaccine. It’s best to get vaccinated before flu viruses start circulating. Flu viruses typically spread in fall and winter, with activity peaking between December and February. Getting your FDA-approved flu vaccine now can lower your chances of getting the flu.

FDA Takes Steps Aimed at Improving Quality, Safety and Efficacy of Sunscreens

The FDA took steps aimed at improving the quality, safety, and efficacy of sunscreens as part of its implementation of new authorities for certain over-the-counter (OTC) drugs. In the short term, these new authorities essentially preserve status quo marketing conditions for these sunscreens. However, the agency proposed revisions and updates to those requirements related to maximum sun protection factor (SPF) values, active ingredients, broad spectrum requirements, and product labeling, among other provisions.

FDA Authorizes Software that Can Help Identify Prostate Cancer

The FDA authorized marketing of software to assist medical professionals who examine body tissues (pathologists) in the detection of areas that are suspicious for cancer as an adjunct (supplement) to the review of digitally-scanned slide images from prostate biopsies (tissue removed from the body). The software, called Paige Prostate, is the first artificial intelligence (AI)-based software designed to identify an area of interest on the prostate biopsy image with the highest likelihood of harboring cancer so it can be reviewed further by the pathologist if the area of concern has not been identified on initial review.

FDA Approves First Biosimilar to Treat Macular Degeneration Disease and Other Eye Conditions

The FDA approved Byooviz (ranibizumab-nuna) as the first biosimilar to Lucentis (ranibizumab injection) for the treatment of several eye diseases and conditions, including neovascular (wet) age-related macular degeneration (nAMD), a leading cause of vision loss and blindness for Americans aged 65 years and older. Byooviz is also approved to treat macular edema (fluid build-up) following retinal vein occlusion (blockage of veins in the retina) and myopic choroidal neovascularization, a vision-threatening complication of myopia (nearsightedness).

Microneedling – Getting to the Point on Benefits, Risks and Safety

People are using microneedling in a variety of ways, from reducing the appearance of scars to treating fine lines and wrinkles to improve their appearance.

If you are thinking about having a microneedling procedure, the FDA recommends you choose a health care provider who is specially trained in microneedling. Talk with the provider to determine if you are a good candidate for microneedling—not everyone is. And discuss the benefits and risks, including the risk of infection if the microneedling tools are not cleaned or used properly.

Pfizer Expands Voluntary Nationwide Recall to include All Lots of CHANTIX® (Varenicline) Tablets Due to N-Nitroso Varenicline Content

Pfizer is voluntarily recalling all lots of Chantix 0.5 mg and 1 mg Tablets to the patient (consumer/user) level due to the presence of a nitrosamine, N-nitroso-varenicline, at or above the FDA interim acceptable intake limit. As alternative suppliers have been approved in the United States, Pfizer is undertaking this precautionary measure.

Long-term ingestion of N-nitroso-varenicline may be associated with a theoretical potential increased cancer risk in humans, but there is no immediate risk to patients taking this medication. The health benefits of stopping smoking outweigh the theoretical potential cancer risk from the nitrosamine impurity in varenicline.

FDA Releases Quiz About Prescription Drug Promotion and the Bad Ad Program

The FDA’s Bad Ad Program released the Bad Ad quiz to test your knowledge about prescription drug promotion and the FDA’s Bad Ad Program. The Bad Ad Program helps to ensure that information from prescription drug promotion that health care providers may use to inform their assessment of the risks and benefits of a drug is truthful, balanced, and not misleading. 

5 Things to Know about Delta-8 Tetrahydrocannabinol – Delta-8 THC

Delta-8 tetrahydrocannabinol, also known as delta-8 THC, is a psychoactive substance found in the Cannabis sativa plant, of which marijuana and hemp are two varieties. Delta-8 THC is one of over 100 cannabinoids produced naturally by the cannabis plant but is not found in significant amounts in the cannabis plant. As a result, concentrated amounts of delta-8 THC are typically manufactured from hemp-derived cannabidiol (CBD).

It is important for consumers to be aware that delta-8 THC products have not been evaluated or approved by the FDA for safe use in any context. They may be marketed in ways that put the public health at risk and should especially be kept out of reach of children and pets.

Updates on Philips Respironics CPAP, BiPAP, and Ventilator Recall

The FDA updated the frequently asked questions (FAQs) about this recall on FDA.gov: Philips Respironics CPAP, BiPAP, and Ventilator Recall: Frequently Asked Questions.

Pregnancy Registry

Pregnancy exposure registries are studies that collect health information on exposure to medical products such as drugs and vaccines during pregnancy. 
Learn more about pregnancy registries today!

Participate in Upcoming FDA Meetings

Visit FDA Meetings, Conferences and Workshops to find out about available meetings.

Communication Type

Short Title
October 2021 Office of Women’s Health e-Update

Source Organization

Short Description
FDA Office of Women’s Health newsletter, with a Message from the Associate Commissioner, and Women’s Health Highlights

Contributing Office

Publish Date
Mon, 11/22/2021 – 10:10

Review Date
Tue, 11/22/2022 – 00:00

Last Reviewed Date
Mon, 11/22/2021 – 00:00

Site Structure

Next Review Date
1 Year

Navigational Page

Bulk Approved

Display Short Description

First Publish Date
Mon, 11/22/2021 – 10:10

Generic Boolean


Number of Related Information to Display

Add Subscription Box

#CBD #Hemp http://www.fda.gov/consumers/collaborate-and-connect/october-2021-office-womens-health-e-update November 22, 2021 3:09 pm

New leader in tax-haters’ contest

New leader in tax-haters’ contest

A new marijuana legalization bill by freshman Republican U.S. House Member Nancy Mace of South Carolina imposes a tiny three- percent ad valorem tax on the drug, which is not enough to offset the disappearance of the current 280E Selling Expense Tax (which applies only to federally illegal drugs).

To prove how anti-tax she is, the bill adds a “Moratorium” – no increase in that tiny tax for 10 years, unless three-quarters of each House agrees to an increase.  Now that moratorium can be rescinded by a simple majority Act of Congress at any time:  One Congress cannot bind another.  Still the filibuster (requiring 60 Senate votes) could be repealed by a simple majority Act of Congress at any time, but that time has not come.  I know of no current rule tying Congress’s hands on taxes.

In any event, if you’re looking for anti-tax sentiment, the Mace bill tops the list.

#CBD #Hemp
New leader in tax-haters’ contest
November 20, 2021 9:13 pm

NASS Uniquely Positioned to Conduct Hemp Survey

NASS Uniquely Positioned to Conduct Hemp Survey

Last week, the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) began collecting data for its first ever Hemp Acreage and Production Survey. Hemp is a commodity that can be used for numerous industrial and horticultural purposes, including fabric, food products, cosmetics, and more. Yet, there is no comprehensive, national production data for it. That’s where NASS comes in.

#CBD #Hemp https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2021/10/26/nass-uniquely-positioned-conduct-hemp-survey October 26, 2021 1:19 pm

Identify Stoned Drivers

Identify Stoned Drivers

Testing drivers for cannabis impairment is something I’ve been thinking about just a little with legalizers in North Carolina and California.  Some of this thinking is theirs.

One argument prohibitionists use against legalization of marijuana is that stoned drivers are a menace to everyone on the streets and roads.  Marijuana is much less impairing than alcohol, but stoned driving worries people.

Figuring out which cannabis-consuming drivers make the roads unsafe is hard.  With alcohol, breath and blood tests produce numerical results that allow “per se” determinations of intoxication:  if the amount of alcohol in a driver’s system reaches .08 percent, or some bright-line numerical threshold, they’re guilty.

Finding a bright-line threshold for marijuana seemed like a way to find stoned drivers.  Colorado, for instance, started out saying that 5 nanoliters per (milliliter?) of some THC chemical in blood were per se evidence of intoxicated driving.  That was a political bone thrown to folks worried about the issue so as to get legalization passed.

Impaired driving is a battle NC NORML is fighting here, so they propose a five-minute roadside test for impairment, not involving bodily fluids.  

To expand on that:  Maybe some jurisdiction will say, “No conviction for cannabis-impaired driving without video evidence.”  No video, no probable cause, no search, no arrest, no nothing.  

The discussion below aims at that result.

If setting a bright line number of minutes (say five) the police can acquire roadside behavioral evidence of intoxication is worth pursuing, how might a five-minute rule interact with blood, oral fluid, or breath tests that detect active THC? (We can test hair and urine to show use, but they don’t show intoxication.  they only detect non-psychoactive metabolites which don’t affect driving.  Only blood, oral fluid, or breath tests detect active THC. o one even supposes a hair test shows intoxication.)

No conviction without failing both tests?  (Presumably failing video-recorded the roadside behavioral test is ultimately a jury question – does the community think this person is impaired?  Jury questions usually get plea-bargained away these days.)  But what if someone shows no THC or alcohol or anything in bodily fluids or breath but does terribly on the behavioral test?

Anyway, if failure on both tests is required for a conviction, what’s the order of testing?

1.  Police administer blood, oral fluid, or breath test and then, if it shows (enough?) THC have a go at the roadside behavioral test?  How quickly do results come back from the tests?


2. Police administer a roadside behavioral test and if police say the suspect failed, then administer a blood, oral fluid, or breath test?  And when the police say the driver failed the behavioral test, who oversees the police’s determination?  A magistrate eventually?  A magistrate on Zoom immediately?  A jury (or prosecutor evaluating the case to present to a jury)?

Not my field . . . 

#CBD #Hemp
Identify Stoned Drivers
October 18, 2021 4:47 pm

Regulatory Capture: Friend or Foe?

Regulatory Capture: Friend or Foe?

I wonder what free market conservatives think of the regulatory capture in North Carolina SB711:  New N.C.G.S. section 90-113.122 would say the Medical Cannabis Production Commission is to have two industry representatives among its 11 members. 

Is that bad, because regulatory capture is bad, or good, because regulation is bad, so weakening it is good?

#CBD #Hemp
Regulatory Capture: Friend or Foe?
October 18, 2021 12:07 pm

Marijuana policy reading

Marijuana policy reading

Drafting a pamphlet: “What North Carolinians Need To Know About Marijuana Money.” Here’s what I’m thinking for background reading references:  

For marijuana issues generally, I don’t know a better place to start than Mark Kleiman’s Marijuana Legalization:  What Everyone Needs to Know (2d ed. 2016, with Caulkins and Kilmer, under $20), which inspired the title here.  A more technical 2015 analysis by Kleiman and others for the State of Vermont is in the public domain at https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR864.html.

Kleiman’s work is a little dated; a recent multi-author issue of the B.U. Law Review provides a good update in the public domain. https://www.bu.edu/bulawreview/2021/07/14/volume-101-number-3-may-2021/.

For an ideological prohibitionist view, the group Smart Approaches to Marijuana, https://learnaboutsam.org, provides online material and offers a book for sale.  

An anti-prohibition view is thought through in a free online book by the U.K. Transform Drugs Foundation: https://transformdrugs.org/publications/how-to-regulate-cannabis-a-practical-guide

#CBD #Hemp
Marijuana policy reading
September 25, 2021 2:25 pm

5 Cosas que Debe Saber Sobre el Delta-8 Tetrahidrocannabinol – Delta-8 THC

5 Cosas que Debe Saber Sobre el Delta-8 Tetrahidrocannabinol – Delta-8 THC 5 Cosas que Debe Saber Sobre el Delta-8 Tetrahidrocannabinol – Delta-8 THC Anonymous (not verified) Thu, 09/16/2021 – 12:02

Detailed Description
Los productos de Delta-8 THC no están aprobados por la FDA y pueden ponerle en riesgo.


Public Awareness


El delta-8 tetrahidrocannabinol, también conocido como Delta-8 THC, es una sustancia psicoactiva que se encuentra en la planta de Cannabis sativa, de la que la marihuana y el cáñamo son dos variedades. El Delta-8 THC es uno de más de 100 cannabinoides producidos naturalmente por la planta de cannabis, pero no se encuentra en cantidades significativas en la planta de cannabis. Por ello, las cantidades concentradas de Delta-8 THC se fabrican normalmente a partir de cannabidiol (CBD) derivado del cáñamo.

Es importante que los consumidores sepan que los productos de Delta-8 THC no han sido evaluados ni aprobados por la FDA para su uso seguro en ningún contexto.  Pueden comercializarse de forma que ponen en peligro la salud pública y, sobre todo, deben mantenerse fuera del alcance de los niños y las mascotas. 

A continuación, se presentan 5 cosas que debe saber sobre el Delta-8 THC para mantenerse a usted y a sus seres queridos protegidos de productos que pueden suponer graves riesgos para la salud:

1. Los productos de Delta-8 THC no han sido evaluados ni aprobados por la FDA para su uso seguro y pueden comercializarse de forma que ponen en riesgo la salud pública.

La FDA está consciente de la creciente preocupación sobre los productos de Delta-8 THC que se venden actualmente en línea y en las tiendas. Estos productos no han sido evaluados ni aprobados por la FDA para su uso seguro en ningún contexto. Algunas de las preocupaciones incluyen la variabilidad en las formulaciones y las etiquetas de los productos, el contenido de otros cannabinoides y terpenos, y las concentraciones variables de Delta-8 TCH. Además, algunos de estos productos pueden estar etiquetados simplemente como “productos de cáñamo”, lo que puede confundir a los consumidores que asocian “cáñamo” con “no psicoactivo”. Además, la FDA está preocupada por la proliferación de productos que contienen Delta-8 THC y se comercializan para usos terapéuticos o médicos, aunque no hayan sido aprobados por la FDA. La venta de productos no aprobados con afirmaciones terapéuticas sin fundamento no sólo constituye una infracción de la ley federal, sino que también puede poner en riesgo a los consumidores, ya que no se ha demostrado que estos productos sean seguros o eficaces. Esta comercialización engañosa de tratamientos no probados plantea importantes problemas de salud pública porque los pacientes y otros consumidores pueden utilizarlos en lugar de las terapias aprobadas para tratar enfermedades graves e incluso mortales.

2. La FDA ha recibido informes de eventos adversos relacionados con productos que contienen Delta-8 THC.

Desde diciembre de 2020 hasta julio de 2021, la FDA recibió informes de eventos adversos tanto de consumidores como de las fuerzas policiales que describían a 22 pacientes que consumieron productos con Delta-8 THC; de ellos, 14 se presentaron en un hospital o sala de emergencias para recibir tratamiento después del consumo. De los 22 pacientes, 19 experimentaron efectos adversos tras consumir productos alimenticios que contenían Delta-8-THC (por ejemplo, brownies, gomitas). Los eventos adversos incluyeron vómitos, alucinaciones, problemas para mantenerse en pie y pérdida de conciencia.  

Los centros nacionales de control de envenenamiento recibieron 661 casos de exposición a productos con Delta-8-THC entre enero de 2018 y el 31 de julio de 2021, 660 de los cuales ocurrieron entre el 1 de enero de 2021 y el 31 de julio de 2021. De los 661 casos de exposición:

  • El 41% implicó una exposición no intencional al Delta-8-THC y el 77% de estas exposiciones no intencionales afectaron a pacientes pediátricos menores de 18 años.
  • El 39% afectó a pacientes pediátricos menores de 18 años.
  • El 18% requirió hospitalizaciones, incluyendo niños que requirieron ingreso en la unidad de cuidados intensivos (ICU, por sus siglas en inglés) tras la exposición a estos productos.

3. El Delta-8 THC tiene efectos psicoactivos y embriagantes.

El Delta-8 THC tiene efectos psicoactivos y embriagantes, similares a los del Delta-9 THC (es decir, el componente responsable del “subidón” que pueden experimentar las personas al consumir cannabis). La FDA está al tanto de los informes de los medios de comunicación sobre productos con Delta-8 THC que hacen que los consumidores estén “drogados”.  La FDA también está preocupada por el hecho de que los productos con Delta-8 THC probablemente expongan a los consumidores a niveles de la sustancia mucho más elevados que los que se dan de forma natural en los extractos crudos de cáñamo. Por lo tanto, no se puede confiar en el uso histórico del cannabis para establecer un nivel de seguridad para estos productos en los seres humanos.   

4. Los productos de Delta-8 THC a menudo implican el uso de productos químicos potencialmente dañinos para crear las concentraciones de Delta-8 THC que se afirman en el mercado.

La cantidad natural de Delta-8 THC en el cáñamo es muy baja, y se necesitan productos químicos adicionales para convertir otros cannabinoides del cáñamo, como el CBD, en Delta-8 THC (es decir, conversión sintética). Las preocupaciones con este proceso incluyen:

  • Algunos fabricantes pueden utilizar productos químicos domésticos potencialmente nocivos para fabricar Delta-8 THC mediante este proceso de síntesis química. Se pueden utilizar productos químicos adicionales para cambiar el color del producto final. El producto final de Delta-8 THC puede tener subproductos potencialmente dañinos (contaminantes) debido a los productos químicos utilizados en el proceso, y hay incertidumbre con respecto a otros contaminantes potenciales que pueden estar presentes o producirse dependiendo de la composición de la materia prima inicial. Si se consumen o inhalan, estas sustancias químicas, incluidas algunas utilizadas para fabricar (sintetizar) el Delta-8 THC y los subproductos creados durante la síntesis, pueden ser perjudiciales.
  • La fabricación de productos de Delta-8 THC puede llevarse a cabo en entornos no controlados o antihigiénicos, lo que puede dar lugar a la presencia de contaminantes nocivos u otras sustancias potencialmente dañinas.   

5. Los productos de Delta-8 THC deben mantenerse fuera del alcance de los niños y las mascotas.

Los fabricantes están envasando y etiquetando estos productos de forma que puedan resultar atractivos para los niños (gomitas, chocolates, galletas, dulces, etc.).  Estos productos pueden comprarse en línea, así como en una variedad de establecimientos, incluyendo tiendas de conveniencia y gasolineras, donde puede que no haya límites de edad sobre quién puede comprar estos productos. Como se ha comentado anteriormente, se han producido numerosas alertas de centros de control de envenenamiento que implican a pacientes pediátricos que estuvieron expuestos a productos que contienen Delta-8-THC. Además, los centros de control de envenenamiento de animales han indicado un fuerte aumento general de la exposición accidental de las mascotas a estos productos. Mantenga estos productos fuera del alcance de los niños y las mascotas.

¿Por qué está notificando la FDA al público sobre el Delta-8 THC?

Una combinación de factores ha llevado a la FDA a proporcionar a los consumidores esta información. Estos factores incluyen:

  • Un aumento de los informes de eventos adversos a la FDA y a los centros de control de envenenamientos del país.
  • La comercialización, incluida la comercialización en línea de productos que resulta atractiva para los niños.
  • Preocupación por la contaminación debida a los métodos de fabricación que en algunos casos pueden utilizarse para elaborar productos comercializados de Delta-8 THC. 

La FDA está trabajando activamente con socios federales y estatales para seguir abordando las preocupaciones relacionadas con estos productos y vigilando el mercado en busca de quejas sobre los productos, eventos adversos y otros productos emergentes derivados del cannabis de potencial preocupación. La FDA advertirá a los consumidores sobre problemas de salud pública y seguridad, y tomará medidas, cuando sea necesario, cuando los productos regulados por la FDA infrinjan la ley.

Cómo reportar quejas y casos de exposición accidental o eventos adversos:

Si cree que tiene un efecto secundario grave que supone un peligro inmediato para su salud, llame al 9-1-1 o la sala de emergencias de su localidad. Se alienta a los profesionales de la salud y a los pacientes a que comuniquen las quejas, los casos de exposición accidental y los acontecimientos adversos al programa MedWatch de Información de Seguridad y Reporte de Eventos Adversos de la FDA:

Para más información sobre el Delta-8 THC:  RED DE ALERTA DE SALUD DE LOS CDC (HAN, POR SUS SIGLAS EN INGLÉS) – añada el enlace cuando esté disponible

La Asociación Americana de Centros de Control de Envenenamientos (AAPCC, por sus siglas en inglés) mantiene el Sistema Nacional de Datos sobre Envenenamientos (NPDS, por sus siglas en inglés), que alberga registros de casos no identificados de información recopilada de las personas que llamaron durante la gestión de la exposición, y llamadas de información sobre envenenamientos gestionadas por los centros de control de envenenamientos del país (PCC, por sus siglas en inglés).  Los datos del NPDS no reflejan todo el universo de exposiciones a una sustancia concreta, ya que puede haber exposiciones adicionales que no se reporten a los PCC; por lo tanto, no debe interpretarse que los datos del NPDS representen la incidencia completa de las exposiciones a cualquier sustancia en los EE. UU.  Las exposiciones no representan necesariamente un envenenamiento o sobredosis, y la AAPCC no puede verificar completamente la exactitud de cada informe.  Las conclusiones basadas en los datos del NPDS no reflejan necesariamente las opiniones de la AAPCC.

el Delta-8 THC Tiene Graves Riesgos Para la Salud

Communication Type

Short Title
5 Cosas que Debe Saber Sobre el Delta-8 Tetrahidrocannabinol – Delta-8

Source Organization

Short Description
Los productos de Delta-8 THC no están aprobados por la FDA y pueden ponerle en riesgo.

Publish Date
Thu, 09/16/2021 – 18:05

Review Date
Fri, 09/16/2022 – 12:00

Last Reviewed Date
Thu, 09/16/2021 – 12:00

Site Structure

Next Review Date
1 Year

Navigational Page

Bulk Approved

Display Short Description

First Publish Date
Thu, 09/16/2021 – 12:26

Generic Boolean


Number of Related Information to Display

Add Subscription Box

Haga clic en “Consumer Health Info” y luego marque “Artículos en español”

Email Subscription List

Subscríbase a los Artículos para el Consumidor en español

#CBD #Hemp http://www.fda.gov/consumers/articulos-en-espanol/5-cosas-que-debe-saber-sobre-el-delta-8-tetrahidrocannabinol-delta-8-thc September 16, 2021 4:02 pm

Ad valorem excise taxes are not the way to go for marijuana. 

Ad valorem excise taxes are not the way to go for marijuana. 

Ad valorem excise taxes are not the way to go for marijuana.  Ideological adversaries agree on that, if on little else!  The left-leaning Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy warned, in a detailed report, that ad valorem price-based “ad valorem” taxes on marijuana are a recipe for trouble when prices go down – as they do in every jurisdiction where legalization takes hold. https://itep.org/taxing-cannabis/  

More recently, the right-leaning Tax Foundation has joined the warning:  “states risk losing out on forecasted revenue if prices continue to go down.” https://taxfoundation.org/safe-banking-act-state-marijuana-revenues/

We needn’t use ad valorem taxes at all for marijuana.  The bill phases ad valorem taxes out, but keeps them too long, then compounds the error by de facto freezing them.  

The draft sticks precisely to the early 2017 design of the old Blumenauer-Wyden bill, with ad valorem taxes for five years before switching to “specific” (non-ad valorem) taxes, only at that late date taxing flower by weight and concentrates by THC.  See http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/economy-budget/327694-marijuana-legalization-grows-closer-with-senate-tax

2017 is a long time ago for a drug that was first legalized in 2012; we’ve come a long way in what we know since then.

That five-year delay may have had some possible justification in 2017, but not now.  But even then, ad valorem taxes were outdated.  Sure, no one was taxing anything by THC content then – but several states had already worked out taxing raw plant matter by weight, the state of the art tax system in 2017.  In the intervening four years since the 2017 bill, Canada, legalizing in 2018, moved straight into taxing flower by weight immediately, and concentrates by THC content about a year later.  No five-year delay!  The system up north seems to be humming.  Lots of states tax by weight already, and Canada has the gold standard using both bases, weight and THC.  I don’t know why we don’t just go ahead and copy it — now.

Taxing by price means that when the pre-tax price goes down, taxes do, too. So do after-tax prices.  Low taxes and cheap weed are not on some people’s wish list, but not everyone’s. After legalization, pre-tax prices are bound to wither.  Fully legal marijuana won’t sell for hundreds or even dozens of dollars per ounce, pre-tax.

But price taxes create another problem. In case of “vertical integration” like a farm-to-market operation, the bill shies away from taxing the actual price the consumer pays, so it imagines an artificial — and probably arbitrary — “constructive sale price” in section 5903.   This is the amount one person, who is both retail clerk and farmer, supposedly pays his farmer self as a wholesale price.  Shenanigans galore!  Colorado has this kind of unworkable producer price tax on the books but, finding it doesn’t work, has quietly given up. Colorado taxes producers by weight instead of by the de jure price-based ad valorem method in related party transactions.  Nevada taxes producers by weight instead of the de jure price-based ad valorem tax on its statute books, last I heard – in all transactions.

— Sent to sponsors of U.S. Senate marijuana bill.

#CBD #Hemp
Ad valorem excise taxes are not the way to go for marijuana. 
September 1, 2021 7:03 pm

Hold Hearings before legalizaing marijuana federally

Hold Hearings before legalizaing marijuana federally

Here’s one of my messages to sponsors of federal marijuana legalization bill:

Dear Senators and Staffers,

On the joint Congressional Committee that devoted four full days of public hearings to liquor taxes alone in December 1933 were a future Supreme Court Justice (Vinson), a future Speaker of the House (McCormack), and a future Vice President (Barkley).  That kind of work might well help Congress today.  The 1933 hearings were hardly a political graveyard for those who took time to listen and study tricky issues.

Those four days covered only taxes, and only liquor – not beer, not wine.  Marijuana legalization needs more work than liquor taxes did in 1933. Unlike with cannabis, we had already had lots of experience taxing liquor.  But Congress studied liquor taxation thoroughly anyway.

Hearings in the Senate Finance Committee on taxes would help, I’d say, as a tax scholar and a former staffer there.  The tax structure in the draft is going to receive severe criticism, only some of it from me, and things have changed dramatically from the Wyden-Blumenauer bill of 2017, whose tax provisions the CAOA basically copies.  Canada has started taxing THC in concentrates, for instance, and New York and Connecticut are going to try to tax it in flower.  These are new developments since 2017 – and warrant a new tax structure.  But what structure?  No one knows. 

There is lot of work for Senators and your staffs to do – and plenty of time to do it in, I suspect, as marijuana legalization will not happen overnight.

In 1933, the Committee heard input from staff, the executive branch, academics, and interested private parties (once known as special interests, now known as stakeholders).  The Ways & Means and Finance Committees reported out a bill in short order, and President Roosevelt signed it in January.  A success story — the result of listening and working.

Here’s the source material, attached. [Newrevenue readers — ask by email for a google drive copy of the large file if you want.]

 Tax on Intoxicating Liquor, Joint Hearings Before the Committee on Ways and Means, House of Representatives and the Committee on Finance, United States Senate, 73d Congress, Interim, 1st and 2d Sessions, Dec. 11-14, 1933, at 309.  

#CBD #Hemp
Hold Hearings before legalizaing marijuana federally
August 29, 2021 9:51 pm

Technical tax comment on federal marijuana bill

Technical tax comment on federal marijuana bill

Comment on the Cannabis Administration and Opportunity Act draft submitted to the Act’s authors:

I don’t understand what (B) is doing in new 26 U.S.C. 5902(a)(2).  


The term ‘THC-measurable cannabis product’ means any cannabis product—

‘‘(A) with respect to which the Secretary has made a determination that the amount of tetrahydrocannabinol in such product (or any particular category of products which includes such product) can be measured with a reasonable degree of accuracy—

 ‘‘(i) consistent with good commercial practice, and

 ‘‘(ii) sufficient to protect the revenue and the public, or

 ‘‘(B) which is not cannabis flower and the concentration of tetrahydrocannabinol in which
is significantly higher than the average such concentration in cannabis flower.


 If (A) is satisfied, OK, we know how to measure THC in this product.  Case closed.

If (A) is not satisfied, THC can’t be accurately measured, so at first blush, tax should not be calculated by THC.  

But maybe (B) taxes by THC content something where THC can’t be certifiably accurately measured.  I don’t understand.  (A) alone, without (B), seems to do the job.

(B) seems unnecessary and confusing.  What is (B) supposed to do?  I don’t know.

Thank you.

#CBD #Hemp
Technical tax comment on federal marijuana bill
August 28, 2021 3:43 pm

The profit motive and medical marijuana in North Carolina

The profit motive and medical marijuana in North Carolina

Here are comments on North Carolina SB711 sent to Senators on the Health Committee.


John D. Rockefeller, Jr., was a Baptist teetotaler who opposed alcohol and a Republican businessman who liked the profit motive.  When prohibition was repealed in 1933, Rockefeller didn’t want profit-maximizers retailing liquor.  For health and temperance, he said, let the states themselves sell liquor—and that’s the North Carolina way.  

This bill would let just 10 big companies sell medical cannabis.  If the recreational kind is legalized, those companies will say, “Hooray,” and line up to control the recreational market.  That’s the profit motive.

There’s a more restrictive way than SB711, proven in Canada: Sell medical cannabis only through government retailers—online only, delivered to the patient’s door.  No glitzy storefronts, no marketing to tempt the weak.  No lawsuits claiming cartoons and advertising are protected free speech under the North Carolina Constitution.

Marijuana sellers will say state-run sales are a nonstarter because marijuana is federally illegal, but that’s a diversion.  The federal government simply doesn’t care.  The State of Louisiana has been openly growing and selling marijuana for years – with impunity.  The federal government hasn’t batted an eye.

How about the voters?  In a 2013 North Carolina poll, state marijuana sales beat private sales by 3-to-1.  The full poll with cross-tabs is at https://newtax.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/nc-marijuana-polling-march-2013.pdf.

Sure, if state sales are inept and bureaucratic, the illegal market will step up.  But the kind of licensing proposed in SB711 creates a host of problems.  Medicine will be delayed as folks who didn’t get licenses go to court to protest.  Out-of-state interests will go to court to say the bill’s residence restrictions are unconstitutional.  Winning licensees will go to court to say the bill’s advertising rules improperly restrict free speech under the North Carolina Constitution.  Winning licensees may “flip” valuable licenses for huge sums – and shareholders in winning corporate licensees may “flip” their ownership interests to new shareholders – all for huge windfalls.  And naturally enough, winning licensees will aim to maximize sales and profits.

State sales are no easy answer, but they can be safe, quiet, and restrictive.  The profit motive has its place, but for marijuana, maybe North Carolina can restrict it.


Thank you for this opportunity, and for listening to me and others.  

#CBD #Hemp
The profit motive and medical marijuana in North Carolina
August 28, 2021 2:25 pm

Improving the Medical Cannabis Production Commission in North Carolina

Improving the Medical Cannabis Production Commission in North Carolina

Draft statement of Pat Oglesby, Center for New Revenue, for the North Carolina Senate Judiciary Committee meeting August 18 at 2 p.m.

Medical marijuana is coming to North Carolina, like it or not.  Like most people, I’m for that.

But Senate Bill 711 could be improved in a lot of ways, I think.

Here’s one.

New N.C.G.S. section 90-113.122 would say the Medical Cannabis Production Commission is to have two industry representatives among its nine members.  The industry doesn’t need representatives on the Commission. Marijuana sellers can lobby the Commission quite readily, just as they can present their views to the North Carolina Senate without being Senators.

The industry naturally wants to maximize profits, and maximize sales.  That’s the American way.  But why should industry representatives vote about how to regulate themselves?  That’s regulatory capture.  The Commission needs to serve the general public interest.  We don’t mandate power companies on the Utilities Commission.  We don’t mandate liquor companies and bar owners on the North Carolina Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission.  We mandate professors on the UNC Board of Governors.  The way the bill is written now, the Commission is of the marijuana sellers, by the marijuana sellers, for the marijuana sellers.  

Let’s not put any foxes on the Henhouse Commission.

#CBD #Hemp
Improving the Medical Cannabis Production Commission in North Carolina
August 18, 2021 2:21 pm

Medical marijuana money in NC

Medical marijuana money in NC

Speaking to the North Carolina Senate Finance Committee on medical marijuana money, 19’26” mark on video:https://www.wral.com/nc-medical-marijuana-bill-approved-by-another-senate-panel/19782886/

And here’s a verbatim transcript, all too accurate, I’m afraid, in reporting my stream-of-consciousness delivery:

“I’m Pat Oglesby with the Center for New Revenue. I think you’re leaving a lot of money on the table here. $50,000 [for an intial license]. These folks would if you had an auction, I hesitate to think how many people, how much money people would pay for these licenses . . .  in Maryland last earlier this month, a medical marijuana license [sold] for $8 million dollars … there’s another way and Canada has done it. They have the provinces have, there have a monopoly on medical marijuana, That’s how it started delivery only. Online only. No glamour, no glitz. The patients just get the patients the medicine and the government gets the money.  In Louisiana. The government gets the money that the state of Louisiana has a monopoly on medical marijuana growing and it uses the L. S. U. And Southern University which correspond to our N. C. State and A. N. T. And they get that money. Now people say, well then the patient is not going to buy it from the government. They don’t trust the government and that may be true, but I trust the government and that’s why I’m here today and I really hope you all take a good look, getting some more revenue out of this thing. Thank you very much.”

#CBD #Hemp
Medical marijuana money in NC
August 1, 2021 9:13 pm

Prepared remarks for NC Senate Finance Committee, July 22, 2021, on medical marijuana

Prepared remarks for NC Senate Finance Committee, July 22, 2021, on medical marijuana

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:

Thank you for having me.  I’m Pat Oglesby.  I live in Senator Foushee’s district now, but I’m originally from the home of the Shad Festival, Grifton.  I’ve practiced tax law, been a staff lawyer for the Joint Congressional Committee on Taxation and the U.S. Senate Finance Committee, taught classes at the Kenan-Flagler Business School, and been a member of angel investment groups.  I’ve founded the Center for New Revenue, a non-profit that looks at marijuana revenue, and advised state governments on marijuana, pro bono and for pay.  

I’m an analyst, not an advocate.  There’s a lot of money on the table.  A billion dollars’ worth of medical marijuana was soldin the first 40 months of medical-only legalization in Maryland.  This month, a single medical marijuana license there sold for $8 million.

There’s another way.  In Canada, provinces started out having a government retail medical marijuana monopoly – online only, delivery only, no glitz.  In Louisiana, the 2 land grant universities, LSU and Southern, have had a monopoly on growing medical marijuana for years.  Federally illegal!  Yes, but the federal government knows that, and is winking – and not lifting a finger.

There are pros and cons.  The for-profit model is likely to be more efficient and patient-friendly.  Government can be bureaucratic.  Buying from the government is like chowing down at the school cafeteria; buying from entrepreneurs is like dining on Restaurant Row. Government sales cost more to start up, though they bring in more revenue in the long run. Government sellers can set fair prices and prevent diversion.  They won’t try to boost demand, and won’t say advertising restrictions are unconstitutional. 

Maybe people don’t trust government.  But in a 2013 poll, North Carolina voters preferred government marijuana sales over private sales by a 3 to 1 margin.  The poll is available at www.newrevenue.org.  

Patients need medicine.  Someday, somehow, we’ll stop making them break the law.  There’s no single right way to do it – but a lot to think about.  I wish you well.


Speakers were given only 2 minutes instead of the 3 I hoped for, so I ad libbed. More to come.

#CBD #Hemp
Prepared remarks for NC Senate Finance Committee, July 22, 2021, on medical marijuana
July 28, 2021 8:05 pm

Marijuana sales in North Carolina, public or private? 2013 poll

Marijuana sales in North Carolina, public or private? 2013 poll

Full results with more cross-tabs are at https://newtax.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/nc-marijuana-polling-march-2013.pdf. I hope to refer to this poll at a meeting of the North Carolina Senate Finance Committee the afternoon of July 21, 2021.

#CBD #Hemp
Marijuana sales in North Carolina, public or private? 2013 poll
July 21, 2021 6:32 am

Senate Marijuana Bill’s Taxes Are Old-Fashioned.

Senate Marijuana Bill’s Taxes Are Old-Fashioned.

The new Schumer-Wyden-Booker marijuana legalization bill is available.

It’s disappointing that the sticks precisely to the early 2017 design of the Blumenauer-Wyden bill, with ad valorem taxes for five years before switching to “specific” (non-ad valorem) taxes, only at that late date taxing flower by weight and concentrates by THC.  See http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/economy-budget/327694-marijuana-legalization-grows-closer-with-senate-tax. 2017 is a long time ago for a drug that was first legalized in 2012; we’ve come a long way in what we know since then.

That five-year delay may have had some possible justification in 2017, but not now.  But even then, ad valorem taxes were outdated.  Sure, no one was taxing anything by THC content – but several states had already worked out taxing raw plant matter by weight, the state of the art tax system in 2017.  In the intervening four years, Canada, legalizing in 2018, moved straight into taxing flower by weight immediately, and concentrates by THC content almost immediately.  No five-year delay!  The system up north seems to be humming.  Lots of states tax by weight already, and Canada has the gold standard using both bases, weight and THC.  I don’t know why we don’t just go ahead and copy it — now.

#CBD #Hemp
Senate Marijuana Bill’s Taxes Are Old-Fashioned.
July 15, 2021 6:41 pm

Hemp & Fascism

Regarding Hemp in Italy, from Canapando:

“Cannabis & Fascism

A small excerpt from the history of Hemp at the time of Fascism.

Many know the numerous uses that can be made of hemp and that its cultivation and exploitation by man dates back more than 2500 years ago.

However, not everyone knows that Italy has a prestigious tradition in this field both for the quality and quantity of cannabis produced.

Among other things, paradoxically, the heyday for the Italian hemp sector was between the early 1920s and the mid 1940s, in the midst of the Fascist period.

Between the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, the Italian hemp yarn was renowned all over the world for its softness, luster and whiteness.

These crops were mainly distributed in Northern Italy and it is estimated that in 1923 the sector employed about 20,000 people as reported in the Catalog of the Linificio e Canapificio Nazionale. This catalog was an expression of the national industrial association. In short, it was not the stuff of long-haired junkies as a certain part of public opinion wants to pass those who do business with this plant, but prestigious businessmen.

Important processing plants for this plant were located in Cassano d’Adda, where already in 1895 there was a rope factory that exported all over the world and in Genoa which boasted a company of yarns for the naval industry first in the whole Mediterranean for production.

Italy was so advanced in Europe that in 1913 the Reich Office for the Interior drafted a report on the cultivation and processing of hemp in Italy.

This is an excerpt: “ The overall extension of hemp cultivation in Italy is currently to be estimated at around 90,000-100,000 hectares. In the first place is definitely Emilia, in particular the province of Ferrara, where about 12% of the entire surface is worked with hemp ”.

In 1918 the union of Spinners and Hemp Weavers was born.

Of course, this sector too was coordinated and supervised by the Fascist Farmers Confederation, which controlled all the consortia.

In practice, it regulated production, proportioning it to the demand for consumption, using the most suitable land and areas, but also valued the products, seeds and derivatives, and promoted the maceration processes of the fiber and the technical evolution.

The importance of the hemp sector was such that the Duce himself put it this way in 1925 : “Hemp was placed by the Duce, on the agenda of the nation, because autarchic par excellence is destined to emancipate us as much as possible from the heavy tax we have again abroad in the textile fiber sector. It is not only the agricultural economic side, there is also the social side whose impact could not be better highlighted than by the following figure: 30,000 workers to whom the Italian hemp industry employs”.

The beginning of the decline in the reputation of cannabis came a few years later when the historical process that led us to the falsifications and mystifications of today begins.

Hashish, its recreational derivative, is declared an enemy of race and drugs by “ner**i”.

Despite this, the industrial use of the plant continued to grow until the end of the Second World War.

In 1941, ENEC , the National Hemp Exporting Body, was born , which has a monopoly on the sale abroad of both raw and combed hemp and hemp tow and controls the export of manufactured goods. Also in the same year, the area cultivated with hemp went from 60 thousand hectares in 1934 to 102 thousand .

This is the peak of production in Italy, from here on an unstoppable meltdown will begin.

A decline desired by politics and international lobbies, which have pushed the use of fibers derived from petroleum such as rayon, nylon or cotton.

On the other hand, Italy had entered the western bloc and the Marshall Plan did not allow for replicas in terms of industrial and economic strategic choices.

Thus the American boycott together with its prohibition makes it an ideological question and defines the contours of an evil work: the slow decline of one of the most useful plants for man and its demonization.

The result was the national extinction of all types of crops in 1971.”

Congress: S. 1698: A bill to allow for hemp-derived cannabidiol and hemp-derived cannabidiol containing substances in dietary supplements and food.

S. 1698: A bill to allow for hemp-derived cannabidiol and hemp-derived cannabidiol containing substances in dietary supplements and food.
Introduced: Sponsor: Sen. Ron Wyden [D-OR]

This bill was referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions which will consider it before sending it to the Senate floor for consideration.

1 cosponsor is on that committee.

#CBD #Hemp
May 19, 2021 4:00 am

Cheese = Schedule 1?

Cheese is dangerous and of “no medical value” with a “high potential for abuse.” It meets all the requirements for Schedule I, unlike Cannabis.

I actually sold over $100 million in TofuRella cheese alternative, so I know all-too-well the heartbreak of cheese addiction. It starts with a little cheddar or jack, then increases to brie and gouda. Eventually they’re found hustling the streets for american processed cheese food slices.

“Oral administration of a form of sugar found in milk causes brain damage in rats. If we use the current model and justification for marijuana prohibition, it looks like milk, cheese and ice cream should be placed in Schedule 1.” Clint Werner

Read more at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26748256/

DEA Opens Up Pot Research With Scientist Agreements

DEA Opens Up Pot Research With Scientist Agreements The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration told researchers on Friday that it is likely to allow them to grow marijuana for their work, opening up the field of cannabis science after President Joe Biden said he wanted more information before he would consider federal legalization. #CBD #Hemp https://www.law360.com/cannabis/articles/1385153?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=section May 14, 2021 10:01 pm

Cannabis Bill Roundup: Neb. Advocates Eye Medical Pot Redo

Cannabis Bill Roundup: Neb. Advocates Eye Medical Pot Redo In the past week, Republican members of Congress pitched their own proposal for decriminalizing cannabis while medical marijuana advocates in Nebraska announced they would take the battle from the statehouse to the ballot box. Here are the major developments in cannabis law reform. #CBD #Hemp https://www.law360.com/cannabis/articles/1384905?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=section May 14, 2021 9:25 pm

REIT Innovative Industrial Buys Pa. Property For $42M

REIT Innovative Industrial Buys Pa. Property For $42M Innovative Industrial Properties has purchased an industrial property in Pittsburgh from cannabis operator Parallel for roughly $41.8 million, according to an announcement Friday from the cannabis-focused real estate investment trust. #CBD #Hemp https://www.law360.com/cannabis/articles/1384875?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=section May 14, 2021 5:58 pm

Minn. House OKs Legalizing, Taxing Recreational Marijuana

Minn. House OKs Legalizing, Taxing Recreational Marijuana Minnesota would legalize recreational marijuana and impose gross receipts and use taxes on sales of cannabis products under a bill passed by the state House of Representatives. #CBD #Hemp https://www.law360.com/cannabis/articles/1384910?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=section May 14, 2021 5:41 pm

Fla. Appellate Court Tosses Investors From $17M Pot Co. Suit

Fla. Appellate Court Tosses Investors From $17M Pot Co. Suit A Florida appellate panel dismissed nine investors’ fraud claims Friday against cannabis company American Patriot Brands in a wide-ranging lawsuit after finding they had agreed to litigate any disputes over their investments in the California-based company. #CBD #Hemp https://www.law360.com/cannabis/articles/1384988?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=section May 14, 2021 5:35 pm

Miss. High Court Overturns Medical Pot Ballot Measure

Miss. High Court Overturns Medical Pot Ballot Measure Mississippi’s Supreme Court on Friday overturned a voter-approved measure to legalize medical cannabis, ruling that the election law governing ballot referendums in the state has been out of date for nearly 20 years. #CBD #Hemp https://www.law360.com/cannabis/articles/1385105?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=section May 14, 2021 5:07 pm

Ex-Mayor Convicted In Boston's 1st Big Trial Of Pandemic

Ex-Mayor Convicted In Boston's 1st Big Trial Of Pandemic A Boston federal jury on Friday convicted the former mayor of Fall River, Massachusetts, on most counts in a case alleging he stole from investors and separately extorted cannabis businesses, handing prosecutors a win in the district’s first high-profile criminal trial since the COVID-19 pandemic began. #CBD #Hemp https://www.law360.com/cannabis/articles/1383266?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=section May 14, 2021 12:22 pm

Pot Businesses Face Texting Bans, Industry Group Says

Pot Businesses Face Texting Bans, Industry Group Says The National Cannabis Industry Association says some of its members that use text messaging to market their products and stores are finding themselves shut out of texting platforms, as the industry faces lawsuits over unwanted texts and cell service providers crack down on marketing messages. #CBD #Hemp https://www.law360.com/cannabis/articles/1384667?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=section May 13, 2021 9:56 pm

CDB Processor Wins Extension In Contract Dispute Case

CDB Processor Wins Extension In Contract Dispute Case A Kentucky federal judge granted a CBD processor an additional three weeks Thursday to potentially avoid a $634,500 default judgment arising from its dispute with a hemp supplier, despite months of inaction on the CBD company’s part. #CBD #Hemp https://www.law360.com/cannabis/articles/1383628?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=section May 13, 2021 8:48 pm

Okla. Says Pot's Federal Illegality Dooms Residency Challenge

Okla. Says Pot's Federal Illegality Dooms Residency Challenge The state of Oklahoma once again defended its residency rules for medical cannabis licensees, telling a federal judge on Wednesday that there can be no constitutional protections for interstate marijuana commerce because the drug is federally illegal. #CBD #Hemp https://www.law360.com/cannabis/articles/1384556?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=section May 13, 2021 8:22 pm

Trulieve Says Investors' Moldy Pot Suit Doesn't Pass Muster

Trulieve Says Investors' Moldy Pot Suit Doesn't Pass Muster Florida’s largest medical cannabis company has asked a federal judge to toss a consolidated securities suit once and for all, saying the investors had failed to allege that the company misled anyone about the risks of crop contamination. #CBD #Hemp https://www.law360.com/cannabis/articles/1383620?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=section May 12, 2021 9:21 pm

GOP Reps. Pitch Bill To Federally Decriminalize Cannabis

GOP Reps. Pitch Bill To Federally Decriminalize Cannabis Republican congressmen on Wednesday introduced a bill that would decriminalize cannabis federally, direct federal regulators to develop rules overseeing its sale and grant safe harbor to financial institutions that bank with the industry. #CBD #Hemp https://www.law360.com/cannabis/articles/1384247?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=section May 12, 2021 8:23 pm

2 Charged For Roles In $650M Weed, Cattle Ponzi Scheme

2 Charged For Roles In $650M Weed, Cattle Ponzi Scheme An indictment unsealed Tuesday in Colorado federal court charged an Illinois woman and a Georgia man over their roles in a Ponzi scheme involving cannabis and cattle that raised around $650 million from investors nationwide, the U.S. Department of Justice said Wednesday. #CBD #Hemp https://www.law360.com/cannabis/articles/1384177?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=section May 12, 2021 7:18 pm

Privately Held Pot Co. Raises $55M In Deal Led By 2 Firms

Privately Held Pot Co. Raises $55M In Deal Led By 2 Firms Privately held multistate cannabis company Holistic Industries raised $55 million through a convertible note in a transaction guided by Feuerstein Kulick LLP and Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP, it said Tuesday. #CBD #Hemp https://www.law360.com/cannabis/articles/1383728?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=section May 11, 2021 8:14 pm

Boston Weighing Tighter Restrictions On Pot Delivery

Boston Weighing Tighter Restrictions On Pot Delivery Boston’s cannabis regulator announced Tuesday that it was considering changing city rules to require marijuana sellers to get the agency’s permission in order to make deliveries. #CBD #Hemp https://www.law360.com/cannabis/articles/1383812?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=section May 11, 2021 7:43 pm

Court Tosses RICO Claims Against Cannabis Cos.

Court Tosses RICO Claims Against Cannabis Cos. A Massachusetts federal judge on Tuesday dismissed racketeering claims against a group of New Mexico cannabis companies, saying that a purported plan to open a medical marijuana treatment center did not amount to coordinated criminal activity. #CBD #Hemp https://www.law360.com/cannabis/articles/1383658?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=section May 11, 2021 7:35 pm

Cannabis Co. Says It Was Elbowed Out Of Extractor Deal

Cannabis Co. Says It Was Elbowed Out Of Extractor Deal Cannabis tech company SHO Products LLC is seeking at least $1 million in damages in California federal court from an inventor that it claims violated an exclusivity agreement by leasing a commercial cannabis resin extraction unit called the Hashatron without including SHO in the deal. #CBD #Hemp https://www.law360.com/cannabis/articles/1382837?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=section May 11, 2021 6:41 pm

Pepsi Must Cover Med Pot Costs After NJ High Court Ruling

Pepsi Must Cover Med Pot Costs After NJ High Court Ruling A New Jersey state appeals court on Tuesday said Pepsi Bottling Group must reimburse a onetime employee for his medical cannabis costs in light of a recent state Supreme Court decision that employers can be compelled to cover those expenses despite the federal marijuana prohibition under the Controlled Substances Act. #CBD #Hemp https://www.law360.com/cannabis/articles/1383507?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=section May 11, 2021 4:09 pm

Congress: H.R. 841: Hemp and Hemp-Derived CBD Consumer Protection and Market Stabilization Act of 2021

H.R. 841: Hemp and Hemp-Derived CBD Consumer Protection and Market Stabilization Act of 2021
New Cosponsors: New Cosponsor: Rep. Antonio Delgado [D-NY19]
New Cosponsor: Rep. Nancy Mace [R-SC1]

The bill now has 25 cosponsors (16 Democrats, 9 Republicans).

#CBD #Hemp
May 11, 2021 4:00 am

Canopy Didn't Mean To Mislead Investors, Judge Says

Canopy Didn't Mean To Mislead Investors, Judge Says A New Jersey federal judge has granted major pot company Canopy Growth’s bid to escape an investor class action accusing it of misleading them about the strength of the Canadian cannabis market, ruling the investors didn’t show that the company intentionally deceived them. #CBD #Hemp https://www.law360.com/cannabis/articles/1383075?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=section May 10, 2021 7:59 pm