Medical Marijuana Raid in San Luis Obispo County Raises Questions

San Luis Obispo Tribune: “on Dec. 27, 45 to 50 officers started serving the search warrants over three days at seven locations. Fifteen people were arrested on various allegations of possessing and selling marijuana. . . . Law enforcement officials say the arrestees were selling and transporting marijuana illegally throughout San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Monterey counties, in violation of the state’s Compassionate Use Act and Medical Marijuana Program.   [The defendants] operated collectives. . . . groups that form to cultivate marijuana for medical purposes for patient and caregiver members. They should only provide a means for facilitating or coordinating transactions between members — and should not purchase marijuana from, or sell to, nonmembers.  They also cannot make a profit.”

By |2017-02-11T17:26:06-07:00January 9th, 2011|California News, Marijuana Crimes|Comments Off on Medical Marijuana Raid in San Luis Obispo County Raises Questions

Arizona Medical Marijuana Association is Alive!

Today the yet to be formed Arizona Medical Marijuana Association (AzMMA) had its attorney send a 17 page letter to the Arizona Department of Health Services with its suggested changes to the December 17, 2010, proposed rules.  For the most part, I think its suggested are good and should be adopted by DHS.  The only change I disagree with is AzMMA’s suggestion to increase the Arizona residency requirement to three years.  Proposition 203 does not contain a requirement that owners of medical marijuana dispensaries be residents of Arizona.  Query:  Could that requirement be an unconstitutional violation of the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution?

By |2011-01-18T19:13:56-07:00January 7th, 2011|Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Arizona Medical Marijuana Association is Alive!

Department of Health Services: Medical Marijuana Public Comments

The following was posted on the Arizona Department of Health Services’ blog today:

So far, we’ve received well over 1,300 comments on the Informal Draft Rules that we posted December 17.  Our first comment period ends today.  We’ll be reviewing the comments and revising our initial draft over the next couple of weeks.  We’ll be releasing new draft rules for public comment on Monday, January 31, kicking off our next comment period (which will go through February 18).  After that, we’ll craft the final Rules and publish the finished package on March 28.

The following issues are generating the most comments:

  • The definition/requirements for patient-physician relationship;
  • Adding additional medical conditions including mental illness, PTSD, fibromyalgia, depression, etc.;
  • The fee structure (especially for patients with limited income);
  • The 25 mile limit for patient/caregiver cultivation (which is actually in the Initiative, not the rules);
  • The requirement that dispensaries cultivate 70% of their own product;
  • The processes for approving dispensary registration certificate;
  • The requirement that dispensaries have a medical director;
  • The qualifications for medical directors (e.g. allow other medical professionals including a pharmacist, naturopathic physician, homeopathic physician, family nurse practitioner, physician assistant, or registered nurse to be the medical director);
  • The 2 year residency requirement for dispensary applicants; and
  • The requirement that cultivation facilities be licensed in association with a dispensary (which is actually in the Initiative).

Overall, the comments so far have been constructive and many have been positive and support much of the overall language in informal draft rules.  All the comments on the informal draft rule are part of the public record and will be available for review on our hub 203 website (with personal identifiers removed) by next Wednesday.

By |2011-01-18T19:14:36-07:00January 7th, 2011|DHS Rules|Comments Off on Department of Health Services: Medical Marijuana Public Comments

Medical Marijuana Bill Fails In Illinois State House

CBS Channel 2 Chicago:  “A push to legalize medicinal marijuana failed in the state House [of Illinois] on Thursday.  As WBBM Newsradio 780’s Brian Seay reports, the bill fell four votes short of the 60 it required for passage. The final vote was 60-56.”

By |2011-01-07T07:08:53-07:00January 7th, 2011|Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Medical Marijuana Bill Fails In Illinois State House

Arizona Pharmacy Alliance Comments on Medical Marijuana Rules

Mindy D. Smith, the Chief Executive Officer of the Arizona Pharmacy Alliance sent a letter dated January 7, 2011, to Will Humble, Director of the Arizona Department of Health Services, in which she states the AzPA’s suggested changes to the December 17, 2010, first draft of Arizona’s medical marijuana rules.

By |2011-01-18T19:15:03-07:00January 7th, 2011|DHS Rules|Comments Off on Arizona Pharmacy Alliance Comments on Medical Marijuana Rules

Mesa Tightening Medical Marijuana Rules

Arizona Republic:  “Medical marijuana shops in Mesa will be confined to industrial areas under an ordinance heading for City Council approval in early February.  The council’s third study-session discussion of the state’s new medical marijuana law resulted Thursday in a further tightening of the areas where the council prefers shops to be located.”

By |2012-08-18T09:41:57-07:00January 7th, 2011|Stories & Articles, Zoning|Comments Off on Mesa Tightening Medical Marijuana Rules

Richard Keyt’s Suggested Changes to the DHS Rules

What follows is the text of the suggested changes to the Arizona Department of Health Services’ December 17, 2010, rules that I posted in the comment area on the DHS website today.  Tomorrow, January 7, 2011, is the last day to submit online comments.

1.  Eliminate the requirement for a medical director.  This greatly increases operational costs that will be passed on to the patients.  It’s not in Prop 203 and is unreasonable.  Is there any other retail business in Arizona that must have a medical director?  Do you know if a doctor’s malpractice insurance would cover services to the dispensary?  The doctor may not be covered by malpractice insurance because the insurance company may say that being a medical director for a marijuana dispensary involves an industry that violates federal law and/or does not involve the practice of medicine.

2.  If you retain the medical director, allow licensed pharmacists to be a medical director.

3.  Do not require dispensaries to get a certificate of occupancy.  Many cities (Mesa for example) do not provide a CO,.  It was only a few years ago the Phoenix started issuing them.

4.  Do not require Arizona residency.  It’s not in Prop 203 and is unreasonable.  I don’t believe there is any other type of business in Arizona that must be owned by an Arizona resident.

5.  Give dispensaries guidance on what criteria you will use to select licensees.

6.  Create a preliminary approval so dispensaries can determine they will be able to get a license before spending a large amount of money without any assurance they will actually get a license.  Dispensaries could then build tenant improvements, purchase equipment and hire personnel knowing that they have a good chance of getting the license.  Applicants that are rejected and that do not get preliminary approval, will be spared wasting their money.

7.  Ease up on the requirements for a patient to get a recommendation from a doctor.  As one local doctor wrote recently, doctors can see a patient once and prescribe any number of drugs that are potentially much more harmful than marijuana.

8.  Eliminate or greatly reduce the requirement that a dispensary grow at least 70% of the marijuana it sells.  This growing requirements causes dispensaries to fund and operate a retail business and a farm, both of which are time-consuming and expensive.  Let dispensaries that want to grow more than they sell do so.  It would reduce the capital required by other dispensaries.

By |2011-01-18T19:15:42-07:00January 6th, 2011|DHS Rules, Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Richard Keyt’s Suggested Changes to the DHS Rules

What Legal Contracts Does My Medical Marijuana Dispensary Need?

Question:  What are the various types of contracts needed by all Arizona medical marijuana dispensaries?

Answer:  The following is a list of the contracts that all Arizona medical marijuana dispensaries need.  Because of the unique nature of the business and the risk that an improper action by an employee, independent contract or dispensary agent could cause the loss of a dispensary’s license, it is critically important that the dispensary have very tight contracts that protect the dispensary.  Each contract must be drafted by an attorney who is familiar with and takes into consideration the legal requirements imposed on dispensaries by Arizona’s medical marijuana law and the Arizona Department of Health Services’ rules.  Each dispensary needs:

  1. Lease for the dispensary site
  2. Lease for the cultivation site
  3. Application for Employment
  4. Employment Agreement
  5. Contract with the primary medical director (see “Clauses to Include in a Contract between a Medical Director & a Dispensary)
  6. Contract with the alternate medical director (see “Why Every Arizona Medical Marijuana Dispensary Must Hire a Primary & an Alternate Medical Director“)
  7. Contract with Marijuana Grower Personnel
  8. Authorization to Conduct Background Check
  9. Dispensary Agent Agreement
  10. Employee & Dispensary Agent MMD Law Knowledge Test
  11. Employee Policy Manual
  12. Nondisclosure & Confidentiality Agreement
  13. Independent Contractor Agreement
  14. Premises Security Agreement for security guards
  15. Information Technology Agreement for computer services
  16. Patient Registration Form
  17. Patient Disclosure Form with Receipt
  18. Retail Sales Contract Form with disclosures
  19. Contract to Purchase Marijuana from another Dispensary
  20. Contract to Sell Marijuana to another Dispensary
  21. Marijuana Delivery Contract for anybody who delivers marijuana
  22. Buy-sell Agreement for the Owners of the Dispensary (the exit strategy)

Richard Keyt is an Arizona business lawyer and Arizona medical marijuana attorney.  I’ve practiced business law in Arizona since 1980 and prepared thousands of business contracts.

By |2019-06-14T08:27:46-07:00January 6th, 2011|Legal Issues, Questions People Ask|Comments Off on What Legal Contracts Does My Medical Marijuana Dispensary Need?

How Does My Dispensary Tie Up Land for its Retail & Cultivation Sites?

Question: Must I know my Arizona medical marijuana dispensary and cultivation locations before I file my application with Arizona Department of Health Services to obtain a dispensary license?

Answer:  Yes.  Arizona Revised Statutes Section 36-2804 states:

“Not later than ninety days after receiving an application for a nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary, the department shall register the nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary and issue a registration certificate . . . if . . . The prospective nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary has submitted . . . an application, including:

(i) The legal name of the nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary.

(ii) The physical address of the nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary and the physical address of one additional location, if any, where marijuana will be cultivated, neither of which may be within five hundred feet of a public or private school existing before the date of the nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary application.”

Therefore, Section 36-2804 requires that the application state the name of the dispensary owner and the actual address where the dispensary will sell to patients and where it will grow its marijuana.  Now is the time for all prospective dispensaries to be looking for an buying or leasing the premises where they will operate and grow.  Once you find a site, if the site makes sense and if the zoning allows for the use of the site for a dispensary or cultivation site, you must tie up the site, i.e., enter into a legally binding lease for the premises or a contract to buy it.

Note:  Before you find your site, you must have formed you limited liability company so that it can be the party that signs the lease or purchase contract.  You do not want the personal liability that goes with being the singer on a lease or contract.   If you need me to form your Arizona limited liability company, see the links near the top of the right column of this website.

Because no applicant will know if the applicant will actually receive a dispensary license, it does not make sense for the dispensary to enter into either a lease or a contract to buy unless the lease or contract contains provisions that are unique to the medical marijuana business.  For example, you want a clause in your lease or purchase contract that gives you the option to terminate the lease or purchase option if you do not actually get a license or if you get a license and later lose the license and cannot get it back.  You’ll want a use clause that is appropriate for the business as well as clauses that allow you to make tenant improvements and take actions inside and outside the premises that are necessary to comply with Arizona’s medical marijuana law and the ADHS rules.

By |2012-08-18T09:12:17-07:00January 6th, 2011|Dispensary Leases, Legal Issues, Questions People Ask, Real Estate Issues|Comments Off on How Does My Dispensary Tie Up Land for its Retail & Cultivation Sites?

Arizona Medical Marijuana: Public Comments to be Weighed when Redrafting Rules

Arizona Republic:  “More than 1,000 people have commented on the proposed medical-marijuana rules so far, responding most heavily to a handful of areas that include the definition of doctor-patient relationships and medical directors and limitations on where dispensaries get marijuana. . . .Department officials identified the top 10 suggestions as of Wednesday, including:”

By |2011-01-18T19:22:51-07:00January 6th, 2011|DHS Rules, Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Arizona Medical Marijuana: Public Comments to be Weighed when Redrafting Rules

Glendale to Limit Sites for Medical Marijuana Facilities

Arizona Republic:  “Glendale is proposing a zoning amendment to limit registered non-profit medical marijuana dispensaries to manufacturing and industrial areas of the city.  City staff will host a meeting to gather public comments on the proposed zoning code amendment. Under Proposition 203, the only distance limit prohibits dispensaries from locating within 500 feet of schools.”

By |2012-08-18T09:36:39-07:00January 5th, 2011|Stories & Articles, Zoning|Comments Off on Glendale to Limit Sites for Medical Marijuana Facilities

Arizona Association of Dispensary Professionals Declares War on Arizona Department of Health Services, Marijuana Policy Project & the Arizona Medical Marijuana Association

The Arizona Association of Dispensary Professionals (AZADP) fired a shot across the bow of the Arizona Department of Health Services today when AZADP issued a press release called “AZDHS and MPP Acting in Collusion to limit access to Dispensary Applicants, Monopolization abuses outlined in letter to Arizona Heath Department.”  The article starts:

“We believe that the AZDHS has been influenced by and is conspiring with other organizations, namely the Marijuana Policy Project, (MPP) and their recently established association, the Arizona Medical Marijuana Association, (AzMMA), to create an elitist and monopolistic program where only the wealthy influential, informed sponsors of MPP will qualify for one of the 125 licenses. We believe that the following evidence will show that the AZDHS in collusion with MPP are intentionally developing program rules that are so complicated and costly so as to preclude otherwise qualified applicants merely on the basis of wealth and influence. We believe it is the intention of MPP to control the marketplace.”

If you are interested in obtaining a medical marijuana dispensary license in Arizona, this article is a must read.

FYI:  According to a search of the Arizona Corporation Commission’s website today, there is no entity in Arizona called “Arizona Association of Dispensary Professionals,” but Allan Sobol reserved the name Arizona Association of Dispensary Professionals, Inc., on 11/21/10.

By |2019-06-14T08:24:51-07:00January 4th, 2011|Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Arizona Association of Dispensary Professionals Declares War on Arizona Department of Health Services, Marijuana Policy Project & the Arizona Medical Marijuana Association

Proposed Rules on Medical Marijuana are Illegal, “Cruel and Unreasonable,” Says Valley Doctor

Phoenix New Times:  “Proposed restrictions on Arizona’s voter-approved medical marijuana law are worse than illegal, says one Valley doc — they’re ‘cruel and unreasonable.’  Edgar Suter, a Mesa doctor of nuclear medicine, writes in an a lengthy call-to-arms today that the state Department of Health Services’ suggested rules concerning Proposition 203 probably violate the 1998 Voter Protection Act.”

By |2011-01-05T16:46:06-07:00January 3rd, 2011|Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Proposed Rules on Medical Marijuana are Illegal, “Cruel and Unreasonable,” Says Valley Doctor

Would be Referring Doctor Not happy with First Draft of Rules

Arizona Medical Marijuana:  “The Green Leaf recently asked Dr. Ed Suter, a board certified physician and medical marijuana activist, to share his thoughts on the first draft of medical marijuana regulations released on Dec. 17 by the Arizona Department of Health Services.  Here’s his reaction:”

By |2017-02-11T17:26:04-07:00January 3rd, 2011|DHS Rules, Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Would be Referring Doctor Not happy with First Draft of Rules

Phoenix Seeks Balance in Governing Medical Marijuana

Arizona Republic:  Phoenix Planning and Development Services Director Debra “Stark said the city tried to strike a balance with its zoning laws that would be strict enough to protect the community and neighborhoods, but not too strict that they wouldn’t be allowed in the city at all.   Phoenix divided medical marijuana land uses into three categories

By |2012-08-18T10:01:22-07:00December 31st, 2010|Stories & Articles, Zoning|Comments Off on Phoenix Seeks Balance in Governing Medical Marijuana

5 San Luis Obispo County California Medical Marijuana Delivery Services Raided & 13 People Arrested

Americans for Safe Access:  “A Narcotics Task Force (NTF) made up of local and state law enforcement agencies aggressively raided 5 collectively-run medical marijuana delivery services on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday this week, arresting at least 13 people on felony charges and holding them on bails of up to $100,000. Several of those arrested were charged with child endangerment, after Child Protective Services (CPS) removed at least 6 children from the homes of 3 different families.”

By |2015-04-06T18:49:24-07:00December 30th, 2010|California News, Marijuana Crimes|Comments Off on 5 San Luis Obispo County California Medical Marijuana Delivery Services Raided & 13 People Arrested

Long Beach Pot Law Gets Legal Setback

Press Telegram:  “The future of Long Beach’s medical marijuana regulations – and potentially of medical marijuana throughout the state – is in question after an appeals court ruling Wednesday.  The 2nd District Court of Appeals ruled that a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge must reexamine his decision Nov. 2 upholding Long Beach’s new medical marijuana ordinance.  At issue is whether Long Beach’s issuance of permits for medical marijuana collectives is a violation of federal law, which considers marijuana an illegal drug.”

Whatever the outcome  of the case when it is reconsidered by the trial court, the losing party will surely appeal.  It appears that in the not too distant future a California appellate court will determine if federal law preempts California law.  If the appellate court answers the question in the affirmative, that could be the beginning of the end of California’s medical marijuana law and other states that have legalized medical marijuana can expect to have the same battle in their courts.

By |2017-10-07T09:54:50-07:00December 30th, 2010|California News, Legal Issues, Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Long Beach Pot Law Gets Legal Setback

October 19, 2009, Department of Justice Guidelines to Federal Prosecutors on Medical Marijuana in States that Have Legalized Its Use

Department of Justice Guidelines for Federal Prosecutors in States that Legalize Medical Marijuana

On October 19 , 2009, “Attorney General Eric Holder announced formal guidelines for federal prosecutors in states that have enacted laws authorizing the use of marijuana for medical purposes. Those guidelines are contained in a memo from Deputy Attorney General David W. Ogden.”  The following is the text of the Department of Justice  medical marijuana letter.

October 19,2009

MEMORANDUM FOR SELECTED UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS

FROM: David W. Ogden, Deputy Attorney General

SUBJECT: Investigations and Prosecutions in States Authorizing the Medical Use of Marijuana

This memorandum provides clarification and guidance to federal prosecutors in States that have enacted laws authorizing the medical use of marijuana. These laws vary in their substantive provisions and in the extent of state regulatory oversight, both among the enacting States and among local jurisdictions within those States. Rather than developing different guidelines for every possible variant of state and local law, this memorandum provides uniform guidance to focus federal investigations and prosecutions in these States on core federal enforcement priorities. (more…)

By |2015-04-06T18:49:24-07:00December 30th, 2010|Legal Issues, Marijuana Crimes|Comments Off on October 19, 2009, Department of Justice Guidelines to Federal Prosecutors on Medical Marijuana in States that Have Legalized Its Use

Business Proposals for Arizona’s Budding Medical Marijuana Industry

Phoenix New Times:  “Next spring means all kinds of green in Arizona. Sometime in April, medical marijuana will be available to qualified patients across the state, and as we’ve already pointed out, that means big business in the form of dispensaries, doctor recommendations, and grow houses.  But most people can’t afford to launch any of the above businesses, and many won’t qualify under the Arizona Department of Health’s super-strict proposed guidelines. Luckily, there are plenty of fringe businesses one can start. Here are eight business proposals that could get a piece of the Pot, Inc. pie:”

By |2011-05-09T07:26:33-07:00December 30th, 2010|Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Business Proposals for Arizona’s Budding Medical Marijuana Industry

12 San Luis Obispo County Residents Arrested in Investigation of Mobile Marijuana Dispensaries

San Luis Obispo Tribune:  “Twelve San Luis Obispo County residents were arrested this week after a two-month investigation into mobile marijuana dispensaries on the Central Coast.  The investigation began after law enforcement agencies learned that several people were selling marijuana through mobile dispensaries in San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Monterey counties, according to a news release from the San Luis Obispo County Narcotic Task Force.”

By |2017-02-11T17:33:43-07:00December 30th, 2010|California News, Marijuana Crimes|Comments Off on 12 San Luis Obispo County Residents Arrested in Investigation of Mobile Marijuana Dispensaries

Can I Get a License to Grow Medical Marijuana in Arizona, but Sell Only to Dispensaries?

Question:  Can I create a business in Arizona that only grows marijuana and sells it to licensed medical marijuana dispensaries?

Answer as of 1/31/11:  Yes.  The January 31,2011, second draft of the rules eliminated the requirement that all dispensaries grow any portion of the marijuana.  A condition to growing, however, is that the grower must have a license to operate a dispensary.  It is not possible to get a license to grow without operating a dispensary.

Answer Before 1/31/11:  Not unless the Arizona Department of Health Services changes its proposed rules.  Proposition 203 and the December 17, 2010, first draft of the proposed rules allow only licensed dispensaries to grow and sell medical marijuana.  The  proposed rules contains this provision:

“R9-17-307. Administration.  C. A dispensary:

1.  Shall cultivate at least 70% of the medical marijuana the dispensary provides to qualifying patients or designated caregivers;

2.  Shall only provide medical marijuana cultivated or acquired by the dispensary to another dispensary in Arizona, a qualifying patient, or a designated caregiver authorized by A.R.S. Title 36, Chapter 28.1 and this Chapter to acquire medical marijuana;

3.  May only acquire medical marijuana from another dispensary in Arizona, a qualifying patient, or a designated caregiver;

4.  May acquire up to 30% of the medical marijuana the dispensary provides to qualifying patients and designated caregivers from another dispensary in Arizona, a qualifying patient, or a designated caregiver; and

5.  Shall not provide more than 30% of the medical marijuana cultivated by the dispensary to other dispensaries.”

By |2011-02-01T07:02:29-07:00December 28th, 2010|DHS Rules, Questions People Ask|Comments Off on Can I Get a License to Grow Medical Marijuana in Arizona, but Sell Only to Dispensaries?

Colorado’s Elevations Credit Union Refuses Business with Medical Marijuana Dispensaries

Boulder Weekly:  “Add one of Boulder County’s local financial institutions, Elevations Credit Union, to the ever-growing list of financial institutions that are refusing to do business with Colorado’s medical marijuana dispensaries.  Elevations started sending letters to its commercial account holders in January saying that its “Member Due Diligence Program” requires identifying the nature of each of its business accounts.  ‘With the growing number of medical marijuana dispensaries and related business,’ the letter says, ‘we must determine if your business provides any of the following services: Sale of marijuana, production of marijuana, storage of marijuana’.”

By |2012-08-25T08:07:26-07:00December 28th, 2010|Banking Issues, Colorado News|Comments Off on Colorado’s Elevations Credit Union Refuses Business with Medical Marijuana Dispensaries

Will Some Banks Refuse to Give My Dispensary a Bank Account?

Question:  I’ve formed my nonprofit entity and want to open a bank account in the name of the entity.  Will my bank refuse to open an account because the business is growing and selling medical marijuana?

Answer:  Maybe.  If your entity has the word “marijuana” in its name, you may be dead in the water with many banks.  Unfortunately, many banks and credit unions refuse to do business with a medical marijuana business.  You may have to search to find a bank that is willing to open an account for your medical marijuana business.

In a  May 20, 2010, letter six members of the  U.S. House of Representatives asked Treasury Secretary Geithner to help solve the problem of banks refusing to do business with state legal medical marijuana businesses.  The letter states:

“dispensary operators are finding it increasingly difficult to maintain accounts with financial institutions, due to what a spokesman for Chase bank called, ‘financial operational and compliance risk.’  Thus, it seems clear that legitimate state-legal businesses are being denied access to banking services, which does not serve the public interest. Among other concerns, the effects of this denial of service include: (1) an increased risk to public safety with potential theft or robbery that any cash-only or cash-reliant business faces; (2) a decreased likelihood that medical marijuana vendors will have the ability to accurately account for tax liability; and (3) an affront to fundamental fairness. since forcing businesses to operate with cash exposes the owners to greater legal risk under the Bank Secrecy Act.

we respectfully request that your office issue formal written guidance for financial institutions assuring that Department priorities do not include targeting or pursuing institutions whose account holders are involved in a business ostensibly operating in compliance with a state medical marijuana law.”

In a  July 30, 2010 letter to Congresswoman Zoe Loftgren, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Office of Thrift Supervision, Office of Thrift Supervision, National Credit Union Administration responded to the May 20, 2010, letter to Secretary Geithner and politely said the equivalent of the federal government couldn’t care less.  Here’s the conclusion reached in the letter:

“The decision to open, close or refuse a particular account or relationship should be made by a depository institution without involvement by its supervisor. An institution must make its own assessment of whether or not to accept an account based on its business objectives, an evaluation of the risks associated with offering particular products or services to customers or members, as well as its capacity to effectively manage those risks.”

By |2015-04-06T18:49:24-07:00December 28th, 2010|Banking Issues, Questions People Ask|Comments Off on Will Some Banks Refuse to Give My Dispensary a Bank Account?

Medical Cannabis Dispensaries: Minimizing the Cost of IRC Section 280E

Luigi Zamarra, CPA is the Chief Financial Officer of Harborside Health Center, recognized as one of the largest medical cannabis dispensaries in the United States.  Mr. Zamarra has written an interesting article entitled “Medical Cannabis Dispensaries: Minimizing the Cost of IRC Section 280E” that is a must read for all prospective owners of Arizona medical marijuana dispensaries.  The article explains how a medical marijuana business that is legal under state law can allocate its expenses between deductible and nondeductible expenses so as to comply with the Californians Helping to Alleviate Medical Problems, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Tax Court case and also deduct a substantial portion of its “nontrafficking” expenses.  Mr. Zamarra says:

“Making a 280E calculation is a three-step process. First, allocate all occupancy costs between Retail (this term is used herein to denote those operations, a portion of which would ordinarily be considered “trafficking” as this term is used in Section 280E) and Non-Retail operations. Second, make the same allocation for all payroll-related costs. Third, apply the ‘Transactional Factor’.”

Circular 230 Notice:  Pursuant to U.S. Treasury Department regulations, I am required to advise you that, unless otherwise expressly indicated, any federal tax advice contained in this communication, including  links, is not intended or written to be used, and  may not be used, for the purpose of  (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein.

By |2015-04-06T18:49:23-07:00December 27th, 2010|Tax Issues|Comments Off on Medical Cannabis Dispensaries: Minimizing the Cost of IRC Section 280E

Internal Revenue Code Section 280E

How to Calculate the Taxable Income of a Medical Marijuana Dispensary Business Under Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code

In the U.S. Tax Court case of Californians Helping to Alleviate Medical Problems, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 128 T.C. No. 14 (2007), the issue before the court was whether the Petitioner (CHAMP) could deduct ordinary expenses of $213,000 incurred in its medical marijuana business, a business that was legal under California law.  The Tax Court held that Internal Revenue Code Section 280E prohibited the deductions.  Here are some relevant statements made by the Court in its opinion:

Accrual method taxpayers such as petitioner may generally deduct the ordinary and necessary expenses incurred in carrying on a trade or business. See sec. 162(a).

Items specified in section 162(a) are allowed as deductions, subject to exceptions listed in section 261. See sec. 161. Section 261 provides that“no deduction shall in any case be allowed in respect of the items specified in this part.”

The phrase “this part” refers to part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1, entitled “Items NotDeductible”. “Expenditures in Connection With the Illegal Sale of Drugs” is an item specified in part IX. Section 280E provides:

No deduction or credit shall be allowed for any amount paid or incurred during the taxable year in carrying on any trade or business if such trade or business (or the activities which comprise such trade or business) consists of trafficking in controlled substances (within the meaning of schedule I and II of the Controlled Substances Act) which is prohibited by Federal law or the law of any State in which such trade or business is conducted.”

In the context of section 280E, marijuana is a schedule I controlled substance. See, e.g., Sundel v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998-78, affd. without published opinion 201 F.3d 428(1st Cir. 1999). Such is so even when the marijuana is medical marijuana recommended by a physician as appropriate to benefit the health of the user.

As a result of the CHAMP case and Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code, it is very easy to calculate the taxable income of a business that’s only business is growing or selling medical marijuana.  Here’s how it works:

Gross Income – Cost of Goods Sold = Taxable Income

By |2012-08-05T10:31:54-07:00December 27th, 2010|Tax Issues|Comments Off on Internal Revenue Code Section 280E

Californians Helping to Alleviate Medical Problems, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

In 2007 the U.S. Tax Court held that Internal Revenue Code Section 280E prevents expenses incurred in a business of growing or selling medical marijuana that is legal under California law from being deductible in determining the taxable income of the business for federal income tax purposes.

128 T.C. No. 14

UNITED STATES TAX COURT

CALIFORNIANS HELPING TO ALLEVIATE MEDICAL PROBLEMS, INC., Petitioner
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE
, Respondent

Docket No. 20795-05
Filed May 15, 2007

P provided counseling and other caregiving services (collectively, caregiving services) to its members, who were individuals with debilitating diseases. P also provided its members with medical marijuana pursuant to the California Compassionate Use Act of 1996, codified at Cal. Health & Safety Code sec. 11362.5 (West Supp. 2007). P charged its members a membership fee that generally reimbursed P for its costs of the caregiving services and its costs of the medical marijuana. R determined that all of P’s expenses were nondeductible under sec. 280E, I.R.C., because, R determined, the expenses were incurred in connection with the trafficking of a controlled substance.

Held: Sec. 280E, I.R.C., precludes P from deducting its expenses attributable to its provision of medical marijuana.

Held, further, P’s provision of its caregiving services and its provision of medical marijuana were separate trades or businesses for purposes of sec. 280E, I.R.C.; thus, sec. 280E, I.R.C., does not preclude P from deducting the expenses attributable to the caregiving services.

Matthew Kumin, Henry G. Wykowski, and Willian G. Panzer, for petitioner.

Margaret A. Martin, for respondent.

LARO, Judge: Respondent determined a $355,056 deficiency in petitioner’s 2002 Federal income tax and a $71,011 accuracy related penalty under section 6662(a) . (Note 1)  Following concessions by respondent, including a concession that petitioner is not liable for the determined accuracy-related penalty, we decide whether section 280E precludes petitioner from deducting the ordinary and necessary expenses attributable to its provision of medical marijuana pursuant to the California Compassionate Use Act of 1996, codified at Cal. Health & Safety Code sec. 11362.5 (WestSupp. 2007).   (Note 2)  We hold that those deductions are precluded. We also decide  whether section 280E precludes petitioner from deducting the ordinary and necessary expenses attributable to its provision of counseling and other caregiving services (collectively, caregiving services). We hold that those deductions are not precluded.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Certain facts were stipulated and are so found. The stipulation of facts and the exhibits attached thereto are incorporated herein by this reference. When the petition was filed, petitioner was an inactive California corporation whose mailing address was in San Francisco, California. Petitioner was organized on December 24, 1996, pursuant to the California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation Law, Cal. Corp. Code secs. 5110-6910. (West 1990). (Note 3)  Its articles of incorporation stated that it “is organized and operated exclusively for charitable, educational and scientific purposes” and “The property of this corporation is irrevocably dedicated to charitable purposes”. Petitioner did not have Federal tax-exempt status, and it operated as an approximately break-even (i.e., the amount of its income approximated the amount of its expenses) community center for members with debilitating diseases. Approximately 47 percent of petitioner’s members suffered from Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS); the remainder suffered from cancer, multiple sclerosis, and other serious illnesses. Before joining petitioner, petitioner’s executive director had 13 years of experience in health services as a coordinator of a statewide program that trained outreach workers in AIDS prevention work. (more…)

By |2010-12-27T19:00:28-07:00December 27th, 2010|Tax Issues|1 Comment

Bylaws – We Don’t Need No Stinking Bylaws or Do We?

Question:  What are Bylaws & Must My Dispensary Adopt Bylaws?

Answer:  Black’s law dictionary defines Bylaws as “a rule or administrative provision adopted by an organization for its internal governance and its external dealings.”  Bylaws have traditionally been a set of rules adopted by the Board of Directors of a corporation to govern the internal affairs of the corporation.   In fact, Arizona Revised Statutes Section 10-3206 requires all Arizona nonprofit corporations to have Bylaws.

Arizona enacted its limited liability company laws in 1992, but nothing in the Arizona LLC Act refers to Bylaws or requires Arizona LLCs to adopt Bylaws.  As a result, Arizona LLCs that have Bylaws are exceptions to the general rule that Arizona LLCs do not have Bylaws.  The Operating Agreement is the Arizona LLC’s governing document that replaces corporate Bylaws.  Because the most commonly formed entity in Arizona today is the LLC, and because many people who seek to obtain a license to own and operate an Arizona medical marijuana dispensary may form an Arizona LLC for that purpose, the question is does an LLC that seeks a license to own and dispensary need to adopt Bylaws?

The answer to that questions is Yes!  Arizona Revised Statutes Section 36-2806.A states: “The Bylaws of a registered nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary shall contain such provisions relative to the disposition of revenues and receipts to establish and maintain its nonprofit character.”  The rules of the Arizona Department of Health Services also require Bylaws and that the Bylaws contain certain provisions. Therefor, the law requires the dispensary to have Bylaws so you must make sure your nonprofit entity adopts ADHS acceptable Bylaws.

By |2012-05-13T16:26:38-07:00December 27th, 2010|Legal Issues, Questions People Ask|Comments Off on Bylaws – We Don’t Need No Stinking Bylaws or Do We?

Legal Concerns Spur Oakland’s Suspension of Plan for Four Big Pot Farms

Los Angeles Times:  “Oakland —California’s most cannabis-friendly city has temporarily suspended a plan to permit and tax four large marijuana-growing facilities because of ongoing legal concerns.  The Oakland City Council voted 7 to 1 this week to send the measure back to legal staff for reworking after the city received a letter from the Alameda County district attorney”  The DA said:

“It remains an open question whether public officers or public employees who aid and abet or conspire to violate state or federal laws in furtherance of a city ordinance, are exempt from criminal liability”

By |2019-06-14T08:24:50-07:00December 24th, 2010|California News|Comments Off on Legal Concerns Spur Oakland’s Suspension of Plan for Four Big Pot Farms

Juries are Giving Pot Defendants a Pass

Los Angeles Times:  “In cases involving small amounts of marijuana, some people aren’t willing to uphold the law in court. . . . a phenomenon that prosecutors say they are increasingly mindful of as marijuana use wins growing legal and public tolerance: Some jurors may be reluctant to convict for an offense many people no longer regard as serious.  ‘It’s not on a level where it’s become a problem.  But we’ll hear, ‘I think marijuana should be legal, I’m not going to follow the law’ “

By |2019-06-14T08:24:50-07:00December 24th, 2010|California News|Comments Off on Juries are Giving Pot Defendants a Pass

Restrictions High on Medical Marijuana Dispensaries

Kingman Daily Miner:  “Arizona residents interested in obtaining a medical marijuana card or opening a medical marijuana dispensary will find themselves digging deep into their pockets and poring over 47 pages of strict rules.”

By |2017-02-11T17:29:35-07:00December 24th, 2010|Stories & Articles|Comments Off on Restrictions High on Medical Marijuana Dispensaries
Go to Top