Connect with us

Business

Marijuana Ads Don’t Increase Use, Study Indicates

Published

on

People exposed to advertising from marijuana retailers aren’t significantly more likely to use cannabis. That’s one surprising finding of a new study, although its authors mostly buried that conclusion in the framing of their paper, published this week in the American Journal of Public Health.

Exposure to any marijuana advertising in the past month did not significantly differ by participant gender, race/ethnicity, highest level of education completed, home ownership, residence in a metro area, or marijuana use (Table 3).” [Bolded emphasis added.]

The study, funded by National Institute on Drug Abuse and published online on Tuesday, mostly focuses on describing the reach of marijuana advertisements across communities in Oregon.

A passing mention in its abstract notes that “people who do not use marijuana…were as exposed to advertising as other groups.”

But despite that being a major counterintiutive finding of the study, it is not a focus of the paper.

Although the researchers determined that “exposure to advertising was significantly higher among people who said they had a marijuana store in their neighborhood,” such ad reach apparently doesn’t make much of a difference on whether people shop at those retailers or otherwise consume cannabis.

Among people who saw a marijuana ad within the past 30 days, 53 percent said they have never consumed cannabis, 54.9 percent described themselves as former users or had “experimented” with the drug and 57.6 percent are current users.

The study even identified one possible benefit of marijuana dispensaries: they provide educational information about the possible risks of cannabis use that might not otherwise reach potential consumers.

“Our study found limited exposure to marijuana health risk messages among adults in Oregon,” the authors, who work for the Oregon Public Health Division, wrote. “Nearly 5 times as many adults overall reported near daily exposure to marijuana advertising (7.4%) compared with health risk messages (1.5%). However, during the time of this study the only health risk messages being broadly implemented were 3 posters required at the point of sale about preventing child poisonings, use during pregnancy, and impaired driving.”

As to the broader interesting findings about marijuana use and advertising, the results don’t necessarily mean that advertising is completely useless for the cannabis industry.

Even if sponsored messages don’t seem to convince people who otherwise wouldn’t use marijuana to do so, advertising is still likely an important way for cannabis businesses to differentiate their specific offerings from those of their competitors in the minds of already-active consumers.

If you value staying updated on cannabis news, please take a second to support Marijuana Moment on Patreon!
This content is for Patrons pledging $1 or more on Patreon

Business

GOP Senator Pulls Back Marijuana Tax Amendment

Published

on

Despite saying this week that he would offer an amendment to help marijuana businesses achieve tax fairness, Republican U.S. Sen. Cory Gardner of Colorado did not end up forcing colleagues to vote on the issue during consideration of a broad GOP-led tax reform bill.

As a result, the measure, which would have exempted cannabis growers and retailers who operate legally under state law from a federal penalty on illegal drug sellers, is not currently attached to a broad tax reform bill that Republicans are working to send to President Trump’s desk by the end of the year.

Following a lengthy session during which other members offered various amendments, the Senate approved the legislation on a largely party-line vote early Saturday morning with a margin of 51 to 49.

Gardner was unsure he had enough support in the chamber to approve the amendment in light of the $5 billion price tag that Congress’s Joint Committee on Taxation reportedly scored it with.

Because the tax bill was being considered under a budget reconciliation process that allowed Republicans to avoid a filibuster and advance the proposal with 51 votes instead of 60, the overall plan needed to avoid increasing the deficit by more than $1.5 trillion over the next decade.

Since Gardner’s measure, while focused on allowing marijuana operators to be taxed fairly like other businesses, would in effect amount to a cut from their current rates, it would reduce revenue and add to the deficit.

Nonetheless, conservative anti-tax group Americans for Tax Reform included the measure in a list of “key votes,” calling it “good tax policy.”

“Support for the legislation should not be conflated with support or opposition to legalizing cannabis,” the organization wrote. “Instead, this amendment is about ensuring the federal government does not use the tax code to discriminate against legal businesses.”

Under current federal law, a 1980s provision — section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code — effectively forces cannabis businesses to pay a much higher tax rate than other companies.

“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.”

The statute was originally intended to to stop drug cartel leaders from writing off yachts and expensive cars, but today its language means that that state-licensed growers, processors and sellers of marijuana — which is still a Schedule I substance under federal law — can’t take business expense deductions that are available to operators in other sectors.

As a result, cannabis businesses often pay an effective tax rate upwards of 65-75 percent, compared with a normal rate of around 15-30 percent.

“Our current tax code puts thousands of legal marijuana businesses throughout Colorado at a disadvantage by treating them differently than other businesses across the state,” Gardner said in a press release upon cosponsoring a standalone bill to reform the provision last month. “Coloradans made their voices heard in 2012 when they legalized marijuana and it’s time for the federal government to allow Colorado businesses to compete. This commonsense, bipartisan bill will allow small businesses in Colorado and other states that have legal marijuana businesses to grow their operations, create jobs, and boost the economy.”

The marijuana reform provision was also not included in the version of the tax legislation recently passed by the House, where that chamber’s Rules Committee blocked floor consideration of an amendment on the issue two weeks ago.

Now, a bicameral conference committee will hammer out the overall differences between the two chambers’ bills into a single proposal that can be sent to the president. It is technically possible that the cannabis amendment could still be inserted in conference, though it would be unusual for congressional leaders to attach a provision that wasn’t approved by either chamber and which concerns a still fairly controversial issue like marijuana.

standalone House bill to shield state-legal marijuana businesses from 280E has 40 cosponsors. The companion Senate legislation has six cosponsors.

If you value staying updated on cannabis news, please take a second to support Marijuana Moment on Patreon!
This content is for Patrons pledging $1 or more on Patreon
Continue Reading

Business

GOP Senator Wants Tax Cut For Marijuana Businesses

Published

on

A Republican senator from a state where marijuana is legal is pushing this week to give cannabis businesses a measure of tax fairness.

Sen. Cory Gardner of Colorado wants to attach an amendment to a wide-ranging Republican-led tax reform bill that would allow state-legal marijuana growers, processors and sellers to deduct normal businesses expenses from their taxes, just like operators in other industries can.

Under current federal law, a 1980s provision — known as 280E — effectively forces cannabis businesses to pay a much higher tax rate than other companies.

The statute was originally intended to to stop drug cartel leaders from writing off yachts and expensive cars, but today its language means that that growers, processors and sellers of marijuana — which is still a Schedule I substance under federal law — can’t take business expense deductions that are available to operators in other sectors.

As a result, cannabis businesses often pay an effective tax rate upwards of 65-75 percent, compared with a normal rate of around 15-30 percent.

Gardner’s press secretary said in an email that “he plans to file an amendment” to the broader tax legislation this week to include a 280E fix so that the provision no longer applies to marijuana businesses that operate in accordance with state or local laws.

The senator also cosponsored a standalone bill to reform the provision this month.

“Our current tax code puts thousands of legal marijuana businesses throughout Colorado at a disadvantage by treating them differently than other businesses across the state,” he said in a press release about the bill. “Coloradans made their voices heard in 2012 when they legalized marijuana and it’s time for the federal government to allow Colorado businesses to compete. This commonsense, bipartisan bill will allow small businesses in Colorado and other states that have legal marijuana businesses to grow their operations, create jobs, and boost the economy.”

Marijuana businesses and their supporters failed to attach 280E reform language to the House version of the tax legislation this month. In that chamber, the Rules Committee blocked floor consideration of an amendment on the issue two weeks ago.

“When Congress passed 280E, they never envisioned an industry like ours meant to take ill-gotten gains from drug dealers,” Neal Levine, chairman of the New Federalism Fund, said in an interview. “The provision is misapplied to our industry. It’s actually helping the drug cartels it was meant to hurt,” he said, referring to the fact that extra taxes force legal providers to keep prices artificially high such that they sometimes can’t compete with the illegal market.

Levine’s group and others have been working to convince members of Congress to reform the provision, emphasizing that it’s not a pro-marijuana idea.

“Our industry is actually the only folks who have been able to take market share from the drug cartels,” he said.

Gardner mentioned the plan to attach the amendment to the tax bill to a Bloomberg reporter earlier this week.

The tax bill is currently on the Senate floor, and leaders are aiming to pass it before they go home for the weekend.

Even if 280E language is adopted on the Senate floor, in order to be enacted into law it will have to a survive a bicameral conference committee that merges the chamber’s bill with the House version that does not contain the provision.

In other financial legislative news of interest to the cannabis industry, House leaders also prevented consideration of an amendment to allow marijuana businesses to access banks this month.

This piece was originally published by Forbes.

(Marijuana Moment’s editor provides some content to Forbes via a temporary exclusive publishing license arrangement.)

If you value staying updated on cannabis news, please take a second to support Marijuana Moment on Patreon!
This content is for Patrons pledging $1 or more on Patreon
Continue Reading

Business

Republicans Block Marijuana Banking Measure

Published

on

Republican congressional leadership is blocking consideration of a measure to allow marijuana businesses to deposit their profits in banks.

Many financial institutions are currently afraid to serve cannabis businesses that are legal in a growing number of states because of ongoing federal prohibition and the associated risk of running afoul of money laundering and drug laws.

As a result, many marijuana growing, processing and retail operations carry out business on a cash-only basis, making them targets for robberies.

Congressman Ed Perlmutter (D-CO) wants to solve this problem. Last Wednesday, at a meeting of the House Financial Services Committee, he offered an amendment that would have prevented federal authorities for punishing banks just for working with legal marijuana businesses.

“The regulatory confusion around marijuana and banking needs to be resolved,” Perlmutter said during the markup. “Prohibition is over. This committee has a responsibility to align the laws of the United States with those of the states so that there isn’t confusion. Public safety is at risk.”

Perlmutter referred to the case of an Iraq War veteran who was killed during a robbery while working as a security guard at a marijuana retail operation in Colorado.

“This is a real issue that this committee must deal with and confront and cannot overlook any more,” he said.

“I don’t think there’s a single person on this committee that is in a state that doesn’t allow some level of marijuana use,” Perlmutter noted, referring to the 46 states that either have comprehensive medical cannabis laws or allow limited uses of low-THC marijuana extracts.

Nonetheless, Republicans on the committee used procedural moves to block the banking measure from even being voted on.

Congressman Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-MO) reserved a point of order against the measure, claiming it was not germane to the overall bill on stress testing for financial institutions. (As an aside, the GOP lawmaker did mention that his daughter resides in Colorado and that they talk about marijuana issues “a lot”).

Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) ruled to uphold Luetkemeyer’s point or order. Perlmutter then made a motion to appeal the ruling of the chair, but Luetkemeyer motioned to table consideration of Perlmutter’s move.

Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-CA) spoke in support of Perlmutter’s amendment.

“Someday we will realize that this is a federal issue that must be dealt with,” she said.

Congressman David Scott (D-GA) also argued that the panel needs to address the cannabis banking issue at some point.

“If…his amendment is not germane, I still believe that this whole burgeoning issue certainly falls in the bosom of the Financial Services Committee as we move forward,” he said.

But the vote on Luetkemeyer’s motion was approved on a strictly party-line vote of 28 to 14, effectively blocking the cannabis banking measure from being considered.

The text of Perlmutter’s amendment is similar to a standalone bill he is sponsoring in the House, which currently has 51 cosponsors. A Senate companion version has 12 cosponsors.

In 2014, the Obama administration released guidance intended to give banks some comfort in working with the marijuana industry. But, because the memos provided no permanent or assured protection from continuing federal prohibition laws that remain on the books, many financial services providers have remained wary.

Also in 2014, the U.S. House voted 231 to 192 in favor of an amendment to prevent federal authorities from punishing banks for working with the legal marijuana industry. But the language was not included in the final version of annual appropriations legislation that year and was not enacted into law. GOP leaders have since blocked similar measures from even being considered for attachment to subsequent spending bills.

The new banking measure’s fate marks the second time in recent days that House Republican leaders have prevented cannabis-related financial measures from even being voted on.

Also last week, GOP leaders blocked consideration of amendments concerning taxation of marijuana businesses that supporters wanted to attached a broader GOP tax reform plan moving through Congress.

Marijuana Businesses Don’t See 280E Reform Success, But There’s Still Hope

Over the course of the past year, congressional leaders have consistently prevented marijuana measures from coming to the House floor. Aside from banking and tax amendments, proposals to protect state laws from federal interference, allow industrial hemp and increase military veterans’ access to medical cannabis have all been shut down by the House Rules Committee.

Also last week, that panel blocked a measure from Congressman Matt Gaetz (R-FL) aimed at  increasing military veterans’ participation in medical cannabis research.

If you value staying updated on cannabis news, please take a second to support Marijuana Moment on Patreon!
This content is for Patrons pledging $1 or more on Patreon
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Stay Up To The Moment

Marijuana News
In Your Inbox

Support Marijuana Moment

Trending