Skymint acquired out of receivership

Skymint acquired out of receivership

Tropics LP, under a new entity called Skymint Acquisition Co., acquired the assets of Green Peak Industries, doing business as Skymint, for $109.4 million.

Nuff said

Please note that cannabis at the time of this post being published is still a controlled substance illegal drug federally.

26 U.S. Code § 280E – Expenditures in connection with the illegal sale of drugs

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.

More Posts

Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan Award Committee

Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan Award Committee

The Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan’s Award Committee has selected   Michael J. Komorn as the recipient of their Right to Counsel Award. This award recognizes the amazing contributions of a group or individual in the form of legal representation or other...

read more
Defense attorneys seek fed inquiry of MSP crime labs

Defense attorneys seek fed inquiry of MSP crime labs

Southfield — Three defense attorneys are asking the federal government to investigate the Michigan State Police crime laboratories, alleging misconduct in their testing for pending drug cases.   Southfield defense attorneys Neil Rockind and Michael Komorn, along...

read more
Trulieve seeks $143M federal refund for 280E taxes

Trulieve seeks $143M federal refund for 280E taxes

Would enforcing payment and accepting money from a federally illegal business cause you to be caught up in RICO, CCE and conspiracy charges that would put you away for decades? For you yes – For the government a big NO.

Multistate marijuana company Trulieve Cannabis Corp. is currently seeking a federal tax refund amounting to $143 million. The company firmly maintains that it does not owe the taxes it had diligently paid over a span of three years.

“This determination is supported by legal interpretations that challenge the company’s tax liability under Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code,” Florida-based Trulieve announced through a recent news release.

Section 280E poses a significant obstacle for state-legal marijuana companies, as it prohibits them from deducting their standard business expenses. Consequently, these companies are burdened with substantially increased tax bills.

26 U.S. Code § 280E – Expenditures in connection with the illegal sale of drugs

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.

More Posts

Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan Award Committee

Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan Award Committee

The Criminal Defense Attorney of Michigan’s Award Committee has selected   Michael J. Komorn as the recipient of their Right to Counsel Award. This award recognizes the amazing contributions of a group or individual in the form of legal representation or other...

read more
Defense attorneys seek fed inquiry of MSP crime labs

Defense attorneys seek fed inquiry of MSP crime labs

Southfield — Three defense attorneys are asking the federal government to investigate the Michigan State Police crime laboratories, alleging misconduct in their testing for pending drug cases.   Southfield defense attorneys Neil Rockind and Michael Komorn, along...

read more
Feds Clarify Doctor Prescribed Medical Cannabis Is No Excuse

Feds Clarify Doctor Prescribed Medical Cannabis Is No Excuse

The revised federal workplace drug testing guidelines, issued by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), are intended to provide clarity. These guidelines emphasize that individuals who use medical marijuana under a doctor’s recommendation in a legal state cannot use it as a valid justification for a positive THC test.

In notices published in the Federal Register, SAMHSA announced that it had amended guidance of saliva and urine testing to include the cannabis policy clarification, despite receiving comments opposing the proposal after they were first announced last year.

In the new notices, SAMHSA acknowledges receiving numerous comments advocating for reconsideration of the marijuana testing policy, with many individuals seizing the opportunity to advocate for federal cannabis legalization. Nevertheless, SAMHSA maintains that the current law justifies the revised guidance.

Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs

A Rule by the Health and Human Services Department on 10/12/2023

AGENCY:

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

ACTION:

Issuance of mandatory guidelines.

SUMMARY:

The Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS” or “Department”) has revised the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs using Oral Fluid (OFMG) which published in the Federal Register of October 25, 2019.

DATES:

The mandatory guidelines are effective October 10, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Eugene D. Hayes, Ph.D., MBA, SAMHSA, CSAP, DWP; 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 16N02, Rockville, MD 20857, by telephone (240) 276–1459 or by email at .

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Summary

These revised Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs using Oral Fluid (OFMG) establish a process whereby the Department annually publishes the authorized drug testing panel ( i.e., drugs, analytes, or cutoffs) to be used for Federal workplace drug testing programs; revise the definition of a substituted specimen to include specimens with a biomarker concentration inconsistent with that established for a human specimen, establish a process whereby the Department publishes an authorized biomarker testing panel ( i.e., biomarker analytes and cutoffs) for Federal workplace drug testing programs; update and clarify the oral fluid collection procedures; revise the Medical Review Officer (MRO) verification process for positive codeine and morphine specimens; and require MROs to submit semiannual reports to the Secretary or designated HHS representative on Federal agency specimens that were reported as positive for a drug or drug metabolite by a laboratory and verified as negative by the MRO. In addition, some wording changes have been made for clarity and for consistency with the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs using Urine (UrMG) or to apply to any authorized specimen type.

The Department is publishing a separate Federal Register Notification (FRN) elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register with the revised UrMG, which include the same or similar revisions as the OFMG, where appropriate.

Background

Pursuant to its authority under section 503 of Public Law 100–71, 5 U.S.C. 7301, and Executive Order 12564, HHS establishes the scientific and technical guidelines for Federal workplace drug testing programs and establishes standards for certification of laboratories engaged in drug testing for Federal agencies.

Using data obtained from the Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs and HHS-certified laboratories, the Department estimates that 275,000 urine specimens are tested annually by Federal agencies. No Federal agencies are testing hair or oral fluid specimens at this time.

HHS originally published the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs (hereinafter referred to as Guidelines or Mandatory Guidelines) in the Federal Register (FR) on April 11, 1988 (53 FR 11979). The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) subsequently revised the Guidelines on June 9, 1994 (59 FR 29908), September 30, 1997 (62 FR 51118), November 13, 1998 (63 FR 63483), April 13, 2004 (69 FR 19644), and November 25, 2008 (73 FR 71858). SAMHSA published the current Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs using Urine (UrMG) on January 23, 2017 (82 FR 7920) and published the current Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs using Oral Fluid (OFMG) on October 25, 2019 (84 FR 57554). SAMHSA published proposed Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs using Hair (HMG) on September 10, 2020 (85 FR 56108) and proposed revisions to the UrMG (87 FR 20560) and OFMG (87 FR 20522) on April 7, 2022.

There was a 60-day public comment period following publication of the proposed OFMG, during which 53 commenters submitted 204 comments on the OFMG. These commenters were comprised of individuals, organizations, and private sector companies. The comments are available for public view at https://www.regulations.gov/​. All comments were reviewed and taken into consideration in the preparation of the Guidelines. The issues and concerns raised in the public comments for the OFMG are set forth below. Similar comments are considered together in the discussion.

Summary of Public Comments and HHS’s Response

The following comments were directed to the information and questions in the preamble.

Some submitted comments were specific to transportation industry drug testing which is regulated by the Department of Transportation (DOT). The Department has noted these comments below, but responded only to comments that are relevant to these Guidelines. DOT issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on February 28, 2022 (87 FR 11156). Subsequently, DOT extended the comment period to April 29, 2022 (87 FR 16160), and published the final rule on May 2, 2023 (88 FR 27596).

Authorized Drug Testing Panel

The Department requested comments on its proposal to publish the drug testing panel separately from the OFMG in a Federal Register\[[[[p Notification (FRN) each year. Fifteen commenters submitted a total of 40 comments on this topic for the OFMG.

Nine commenters disagreed with publishing a revised drug testing panel without a public comment period, expressing concerns that stakeholders including individuals subject to federally regulated drug testing would not be given the opportunity to provide comment and that the Department would miss valuable input including information on costs and burden. Some of these commenters suggested alternate ways to permit public comment while enabling a quicker response to testing panel changes ( e.g., setting a shorter comment period, publishing the Guidelines as an interim final rule or issuing an advance notice of proposed rulemaking). The Department has reviewed these comments and suggestions and determined that no changes to the proposed Guidelines are needed. The Department has developed procedures which will allow review and comment before testing panel changes are published, as described below.

Consistent with current procedures, prior to making a change to the drug or biomarker testing panel, the Department will conduct a thorough review of the scientific and medical literature, and will solicit review and input from subject matter experts such as Responsible Persons (RPs) of HHS-certified laboratories, Medical Review Officers (MROs), research scientists, manufacturers of collection devices and/or immunoassay kits, as well as Federal partners such as DOT, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). Further, the Department plans to provide notice and opportunity for public comment regarding any proposed changes to the drug and biomarker testing panels as part of Drug Testing Advisory Board (DTAB) meetings and procedures.

Information regarding any proposed changes to the drug and biomarker testing panels and a request for public comment will be included in an advance notice of the DTAB meeting published in the Federal Register , along with the timeframe and method(s) for comment submission. During the meeting, the Department will present the basis for adding or removing analytes ( i.e., including technical and scientific support for the proposed changes), as well as a discussion of related costs and benefits. This information will be provided in advance to DTAB members. The Department will review all submitted public comments and will share information during a DTAB session prior to DTAB’s review of SAMHSA’s recommendation to the Secretary regarding each proposed change.

The Department will make the final decision on any panel changes and include the effective date(s) in the annual Notice, to allow time for drug testing service providers ( e.g., immunoassay kit manufacturers, oral fluid collection device manufacturers) to develop or revise their products, and for HHS-certified laboratories to develop or revise assays, complete validation studies, and revise procedures.

Three commenters specifically agreed with the need to streamline and improve processes for making changes to the testing panels, but expressed concern over the process for testing panel review and who would be involved. These commenters suggested involving other stakeholders ( e.g., HHS-certified laboratories, DTAB, FDA). As noted above, the Department will use multiple methods and involve subject matter experts from various stakeholder groups to determine testing panel changes, and will provide opportunity for public review and comment before changes are made. FDA, DOT, and other Federal partners will have opportunities to review and provide input.

More Posts

An Independent Review of the Intoxilyzer 9000

An Independent Review of the Intoxilyzer 9000

An Independent Review of the Intoxilyzer 9000 Part 1 - Residual mouth alcohol detection Counterpoint Volume 2; Issue 2 - Article 3 (August 2017) An article in the Core Skills III-2 Module Jan Semenoff, BA, EMAForensic CriminalistThe opportunity to conduct an...

read more
The Intoxilyzer 9000 (part 1)

The Intoxilyzer 9000 (part 1)

The Intoxilyzer 9000 (part 1 of 2)Roll-Out The Michigan State Police (MSP) initiated Intoxilyzer 9000 (Intoxilyzer) training for police officers statewide, commencing in 2023. In order to participate, officers were required to complete both preliminary breath test...

read more
The Intoxilyzer 9000 (part 2)

The Intoxilyzer 9000 (part 2)

The Intoxilyzer 9000 (part 2 of 2)Using it The Intoxilyzer is user-friendly and equipped with a built-in feature to alert officers of any potential issues. As a precautionary measure, officers are specifically advised to switch off their portable radios prior to...

read more
Michigan Adult-Use Marijuana Laws Steady As She Goes

Michigan Adult-Use Marijuana Laws Steady As She Goes

Michigan Adult-Use Marijuana Laws: Steady As She Goes Michigan's adult-use marijuana legislation, established in 2018 through the Michigan Regulation and Taxation of Marihuana Act (MRTMA), remains stable. While there haven't been any major changes to the core tenets...

read more
Our Kids are Dying of Drug Overdoses

Our Kids are Dying of Drug Overdoses

THE KIDS AREN’T ALRIGHT, THEY’RE DYING OF DRUG OVERDOSESFrom May 2022 to May 2023, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported an alarming 37 percent increase in American lives lost due to overdoses, totaling over 112,000 fatalities. This staggering surge...

read more
Whitmer supports opt-out system for state park passes

Whitmer supports opt-out system for state park passes

Whitmer expressed her support in her 2025 budget recommendations for legislation that would automatically charge vehicle owners a fee for entry to state parks. Another fine piece of legislation introduced House Bill 5428, which would automatically take from vehicle...

read more
How DUI Charges Impact Your Child’s Future

How DUI Charges Impact Your Child’s Future

In Michigan driving is considered a privilege. with this privilege comes immense responsibility, especially when it comes to driving under the influence (DUI) as well as other responsibilities. The consequences of youth DUI extend far beyond the immediate legal...

read more
US Cannabis Industry-Just Another Sinking Ship?

US Cannabis Industry-Just Another Sinking Ship?

Is the cannabis industry just another sinking ship in the US? This story was picked up out in the cannabis news world. Read it for yourself.

Have the end times have begun for US weed companies as the first South American imports are approved by the DEA.

The US Federal Government Gives Approval for South American Cannabis Imports into the USA.

In an exclusive announcement from Benzinga, a breakthrough partnership between MMJ International Holdings and Global Cannabis Production (GCP) has just been announced – one that has the potential to alter how the worldwide marijuana industry operates entirely.

The two companies announced a joint partnership to get the enable the first-ever importation of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) products into the United States from Uruguay. In addition, they are also inking a deal to produce cannabis-based pharmaceuticals to sell internationally. Once established, this will revolutionize patient access to cannabinoid medicines while also marking a milestone in cannabis medicine and cannabis research.

Read the rest of the article here

More News from Cannabis.net

If you or someone you know has been accused of a crime or DUI.
Call Komorn Law and turn the odds in your favor.
Call Now 248-357-2550

Komorn Law Social Media

Recent Posts

Tag Cloud

Blog Cannabis Science Criminal Defense Attorney Michael Komorn Driving DUI Federal Laws Forfeiture Health Benefits of Marijuana Hemp Know Your Rights Komorn Law Blog LARA-MMFLA Info Legalization Marijuana Criminal Defense Attorney Michael Komorn Medical Marijuana Medical Marijuana Attorney Michael Komorn Michigan Laws Michigan Medical Marhuana Regulation Michigan Medical Marijuana Act Michigan Medical Marijuana Criminal Defense Michigan Medical Marijuana Criminal Defense Attorney Michael Komorn Michigan News Michigan Rules of Evidence News Planet Green Trees Radio Recent Victories Uncategorized USA news Victories Project Your Rights

DISCLAIMER
This website and/or post may contain re-posted content, opinions, comments, ads, third party posts, outdated information, posts from disgruntled persons, posts from those with agendas, private stuff, work related information, non work related information and general internet BS. Therefore…Before you believe anything on the internet regarding anything and everything – do your research on “Official Government and State Sites”, Call the Michigan State Police, Check the State Attorney General Website and Consult an Attorney – Use Your Brain. You’re on the internet.

The Marijuana Industry Paid an Extra $1.8 Billion in Federal Taxes Because of the 280E Tax Code

The Marijuana Industry Paid an Extra $1.8 Billion in Federal Taxes Because of the 280E Tax Code

News from the internet

Why legalize cannabis when 280E is the gift that keeps on giving to the Federal government?

Whitney Economics, a cannabis research firm, recently conducted a comprehensive analysis of the impact of federal taxes on the cannabis industry. The findings revealed that in 2022, cannabis operators incurred an astonishing $1.8 billion in additional taxes compared to conventional businesses. Looking ahead, it is projected that this excess burden will rise even further to reach $2.1 billion in 2023.

The Reason Behind The Higher Tax Burden for Cannabis Operators

Despite the growing number of states that have legalized medicinal or adult-use cannabis operations, cannabis’ classification as a Schedule I controlled substance under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) remains unchanged.

Under this classification, cannabis businesses that operate per state law are deemed criminal enterprises engaged in the trafficking of a controlled substance under federal law. This label treats law-abiding business owners and operators as drug dealers peddling substances as harmful as cocaine and heroin. As such, these businesses are subjected to Section 280E.

Section 280E is a provision that punishes those involved in the trafficking of Schedule I or II drugs by prohibiting the deduction of “ordinary and necessary” business expenses. This includes below-the-line deductions, even after reducing gross receipts by the cost of goods sold (COGS). This results in federal income tax liability being calculated based on gross income rather than net income.

Read the rest of the article here

If you or someone you know has been accused of a crime or DUI.
Call Komorn Law and turn the odds in your favor.
Call Now 248-357-2550

Komorn Law Social Media

Recent Posts

Tag Cloud

Blog Cannabis Science Criminal Defense Attorney Michael Komorn Driving DUI Federal Laws Forfeiture Health Benefits of Marijuana Hemp Know Your Rights Komorn Law Blog LARA-MMFLA Info Legalization Marijuana Criminal Defense Attorney Michael Komorn Medical Marijuana Medical Marijuana Attorney Michael Komorn Michigan Laws Michigan Medical Marhuana Regulation Michigan Medical Marijuana Act Michigan Medical Marijuana Criminal Defense Michigan Medical Marijuana Criminal Defense Attorney Michael Komorn Michigan News Michigan Rules of Evidence News Planet Green Trees Radio Recent Victories Uncategorized USA news Victories Project Your Rights

DISCLAIMER
This website and/or post may contain re-posted content, opinions, comments, ads, third party posts, outdated information, posts from disgruntled persons, posts from those with agendas, private stuff, work related information, non work related information and general internet BS. Therefore…Before you believe anything on the internet regarding anything and everything – do your research on “Official Government and State Sites”, Call the Michigan State Police, Check the State Attorney General Website and Consult an Attorney – Use Your Brain. You’re on the internet.

Federal Court Strikes Down Gun Ban For People Who Use Marijuana

Federal Court Strikes Down Gun Ban For People Who Use Marijuana

The federal government’s justification for upholding the law is “concerning,” according to a federal judge, who ruled that the ban on marijuana users owning firearms is unconstitutional.

A man was charged in Oklahoma in 2022 after police found marijuana and a handgun in his car while he was driving, and the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma dismissed the indictment on Friday.

 Judge Patrick Wyrick concurred with the attorneys that the Second Amendment of the Constitution is violated by the law that forbids “unlawful” cannabis users from owning firearms.

This ruling comes as the ban is still being contested in a separate federal court by several medical cannabis patients and former Florida Agriculture Commissioner Nikki Fried (D).

The Trump-appointed judge in this case heavily relied on an interpretation of a recent Supreme Court decision in which the justices generally set higher standards for policies that seek to restrict gun rights.

According to the ruling, any such limitations must be in line with the Second Amendment’s original ratification in 1791.

The judge said in his decision on Friday that the historical analogies the Justice Department relied on to support the ban, including allusions to outdated case law prohibiting Catholics, allies, slaves and Indians from owning weapons, “misses the mark” and “cannot provide the basis for a historical analogue.”

The government’s position that marijuana users who use it illegally are “both unvirtuous and dangerous” was also addressed. A user of marijuana does not automatically fall into that category, according to Wyrick, “because the mere act of using marijuana do not involve violent, forceful, or threatening conduct.”

Similar arguments have been made by the government in the Florida-based case, in which medical cannabis patients are actively contesting a federal district court’s decision that dismissed their DOJ lawsuit in November.

Because the state’s cannabis laws had made it possible for “habitual marijuana users” and other disqualified people to obtain firearms illegally, the ATF issued an advisory in 2020 that specifically targeted Michigan and mandated that gun sellers conduct federal background checks on all unlicensed gun buyers.

The Department of Justice will likely appeal Wyrick’s ruling to a higher federal court.

If you or someone you know has been accused of a crime, DUI or Drugged Driving. Call Komorn Law and turn your defense into an offense.
Call Now 248-357-2550

Komorn Law Social Media

Recent Posts

Tag Cloud

2020 2021 BMMR cannabis CBD corruption. prosecutors dispensary Driving DUI forfeiture gun rights hemp komornlaw lara law enforcement abuse laws Legalization marijuana Medical Marijuana Michigan michigan laws michigan news MMFLA MRA news police politics Recreational Cannabis science usa news

DISCLAIMER
This post may contain re-posted content, opinions, comments, ads, third party posts, outdated information, posts from disgruntled persons, posts from those with agendas, private stuff and general internet BS. Therefore…Before you believe anything on the internet regarding anything – do your research on “Official Government and State Sites”, Call the Michigan State Police, Check the State Attorney General Website and Consult an Attorney – Use Your Brain. You’re on the internet.