It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Supporters of legal marijuana cited tax revenue as big factor in pushing through laws that have allowed medical marijuana sales in 23 states and recreational pot in four. But the businesses that grow and sell marijuana in those states are also staring at a steep federal tax bill, especially when compared with businesses in other industries.
That’s because of a little-known wrinkle in U.S. tax law that has turned out to be a major problem for pot businesses, even when operating where sales of medical or recreational marijuana are legal under state law. In 1982, Congress enacted Section 280E of the federal Tax Code to prevent drug traffickers from being able to claim business expenses related to illicit dealings on their federal tax returns. (Seriously, lawmakers decided to close the loophole after a drug dealer successfully wrote off travel expenses as well as the cost of a scale for weighing drugs.)
Of course, 280E predates the recent wave of marijuana legalization on a state-level by a couple of decades, but the federal laws outlawing marijuana remain in effect. That leaves marijuana cultivators and dispensary owners across the country in a tricky situation in which they may be operating legally under the laws of their respective states while the federal government — including the Internal Revenue Service — still technically consider them outlaws.
In terms of tax filings, specifically, the legal cannabis industry has failed to adjust 280E since it was enacted. The IRS still does not let pot growers and resellers deduct expenses related to their businesses. That means marijuana business owners are technically barred from claiming even the most basic of tax exemptions enjoyed by the rest of the corporate world: from advertising costs to most employees’ salaries.
As a result, many marijuana business owners end up paying effective tax rates of anywhere from 40% to 70%, according to Derek Peterson, the CEO of Terra Tech, a publicly-traded company that produces marijuana extracts and also has plans to open a handful of dispensaries in Nevada. Others in the industry have said business-owners face effective tax rates as high as 90%. That is compared to the typical corporate tax rate of around 35%, though many large, multinational companies in the U.S. reportedly pay closer to 12.5%.
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: lordcomac
I was under the impression that the alcohol lobby was more interested in keeping it illegal than drug companies.
originally posted by: darkbake
Over here in Washington State, companies that deal in pot also have to deal in cash. This results in a lot of cold, hard cash being trucked around. I wonder how they translate that to electronic money? Is the cash worthless if it can't become electronic?
originally posted by: Edumakated
Did you know the Empire State building only took 1 year and 45 days to build? It would take three years just to get an environmental study done nowadays.
originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
originally posted by: Edumakated
Did you know the Empire State building only took 1 year and 45 days to build? It would take three years just to get an environmental study done nowadays.
Exactly. It took over 10 years to get the Surrender Tower going.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: ratsinacage
What really gets me is how the presidential candidates are trying to treat the marijuana issue like it was treated for years beforehand. Only two candidates (one from each side of the aisle) support full out legalization. All the others are still terrified to show support for it even though candidates who do are celebrated for it.
originally posted by: jrod
I am just glad we can discuss this on ATS. For awhile any mention of cannabis, would get the thread/post trashed.
It is a slow process and the groups lobbying to keep it illegal need to be called out. Big pharma, the alcohol industry, prison guard unions, police unions, sherriff organization, and the Fraternal Order of Police are strongly opposed to legalization.
I think the citizens need to send them the message that we do NOT support prohibition.
originally posted by: the owlbear
What's the Surrender Tower?
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Edumakated
If we can somehow shove the ACA through Congress, I think we can get something like this that has bi-partisan support from the citizenry through.
originally posted by: Aleister
The coming full-country Canadian legalization will likely put quite a bit of new pressure on these topics in the U.S., Mexico, and Central and South America. The Federal Reserve is not part of the U.S. government, so the Fed probably wants a federal judge to step in and make the decision on this question, putting the ball in their court and not making this kind of change by themselves. It'll work out at some point soon, there is too much hard cash laying around for the process not to evolve.