Here are some links to news stories about various spotlight cases Komorn Law has been involved in over the years. There are many that can not be posted due to various reasons. Some we are still engaged in because Attorney Michael Komorn does not fold easily…Enjoy
If you are interested in opening a cannabis business in Michigan you will need an attorney. Selecting a law firm is important and choosing one who has been fighting for medical marijuana patients and caregivers, adult recreational use and the legal rights of their clients for over 27 years is one of the first steps in achieving your goal in becoming a cannabis entrepreneur. Selecting an attorney who you are comfortable with and can develop a relationship with is extremely important. Search the internet and research our law firm and see how involved we are in the marijuana community. To learn more contact the office 248-357-2550 or do some research on the website Komorn Law.
Michigan Marijuana Acts and Laws
Although Michigan voters have legalized Marijuana it still remains on the controlled substance list schedule 1 and is federally illegal (Current Sept 16, 2020)
DISCLAIMER This post may contain re-posted content, opinions, comments, ads, third party posts, outdated information, posts from disgruntled persons, posts from those with agendas and general internet BS.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.
This registered nurse stood to lose their livelihood or were going to be quietly forced into rehabilitation.
Who Knew?
Who knew that LARA was punishing Registered Nurses merely because they are a medical cannabis patient?
Who knew that the same government agency (LARA) that regulates the licensing of the Physician (who recommended the use of medical cannabis,) and also regulates the licensing of Registered Nurses, punish those same Licensed Registered Nurses (by suspending and or attempting to revoke their Nursing Licenses) merely for following the medical advice and proscribed medical treatments made to them by their State Licensed Physician?
Who knew that “Cannabis Dependence” with “Cannabis use disorder,” “Mild” was a medical diagnosis?
Who knew that this so called disorder was categorized as “Mild” and or “Spicy”?
Who knew that the States protocol for this “diagnosis” , mandates that the registered nurse admit to this disorder, sign a contract to complete an unknown length and unknown terms of substance abuse treatment, as a condition of retaining that nursing license?
Who knew that this could be done without any evidence regarding the registered nurses performance at work?
Who knew this could be done with evidence that the registered nurses performance at work was impeccable?
Who knew that the Physicians contracted with the State (Health Professional Recovery Program -HPRP), and acting on behalf of LARA ( who diagnose medical cannabis patients with “Cannabis Dependence” with “Cannabis use disorder,” “Mild” ) and those that regulate nursing licenses don’t distinguish between active delta-9 THC, and any other cannabinoids, including the metabolite of THC, 11 Carboxy THC (which is not a controlled substance)?
See an important Michigan Supreme Court Opinion – People vs Feezel
Enter Komorn Law
All of the above are real, and circumstances that we encountered in this more than a year long battle, with the Michigan licensing agency. Because of my client’s relentless and passionate pursuit for justice in their case. This Licensed Nurse is no longer left .
Almost from day one, we were ready and looking forward to litigating this matter. My client, refused to settle, and there was no reason that they should.
Komorn Law PLLC, is proud to announce another huge win and a long hard fought victory.
Victory
This past week we received the final order dismissing the complaint, and re-activating their nursing license.
In light of the MMMA, the MMFLA and the MRTMA, this issue like many others remain overlooked, as unfinished business that the State of Michigan has failed to address.
For a full perspective of this issue, see the link to the complaint filed in Federal Court, relating to HPRP. HPRP-Class-Action-Complaint. Additional links on this topic. ( that nursing power point I sent earlier)
Huge Shout out to everyone at Komorn Law PLLC, specifically Ally McCormick, Steve Miller, Jenifer St. Amant, Jeff Frazier and Dan, nice job team!!
Why Are You Here?
Either you’re here just out of interest or you are searching for an attorney. If you need a law firm to protect and fight for your rights call our office 248-357-2550 or visit KomornLaw.com and do your research.
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 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.
Feezel was driving when he encountered an intoxicated pedestrian in the street. Feezel struck the pedestrian whom as a result of the accident passed away.
Feezel’s blood was analyzed which contained 6 nanograms of a THC metabolite called 11 Carboxy THC.
Feezel was charged with OWI causing death and operating with the presence of a schedule one controlled substance. The trial judge refused to admit the evidence that the victim was extremely intoxicated.
In order to be convicted of Operating with the presence of drugs it must be active THC and not a metabolite.
The court also ruled that the victim’s intoxication was material and should have been admitted into evidence.
The People vs Feezel opinion by the Michigan Supreme Court has been used in many cases since as well as other case law. Many can be found listed here.
Either you’re here just out of interest or you are searching for an attorney. If you need a law firm to protect and fight for your rights call our office 248-357-2550 or visit KomornLaw.com and do your research. The justice system doesn’t like winners unless it’s them…They don’t like us.
What are drug metabolites?
A drug metabolite is a byproduct of the body breaking down, or “metabolizing,” a drug into a different substance. The process of metabolizing a drug is predictable and certain; everyone metabolizes drugs the same way. Therefore, the presence of a drug metabolite can be a reliable indicator that a person used the “parent” drug of that metabolite.
Some metabolites remain in the body much longer than a drug. A drug test has a higher chance of identifying a user by looking for the metabolites of a drug, rather than the parent drug.
Some examples of drug tests that detect metabolites, rather than the drug:
Marijuana
THC is the active substance in marijuana. The body quickly metabolizes the THC molecule into several metabolites with long chemical names. Urine drug tests typically detect the THC-COOH (nor-delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol) metabolite to identify marijuana users because it stays in the body much longer than the active THC drug.
Cocaine
A typical cocaine drug test kit looks for the presence of the metabolite benzoylecgonine. The presence of benzoylecgonine in a person’s system indicates cocaine use. Benzoylecgonine stays in a person’s system significantly longer than cocaine.
Nicotine
Nicotine is metabolized into cotinine, which has a much longer life in the body than the nicotine drug. A urine drug test for “nicotine” looks for the presence of cotinine as a sign of tobacco use.
If you are looking for an attorney that will fight for you. You found him. Michael Komorn – provides DUI, drugged driving and criminal defense passionately an aggressively. Call The Office 248-357-2550 or visit KomornLaw.com
Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code forbids businesses from deducting otherwise ordinary business expenses from gross income associated with the “trafficking” of Schedule I or II substances, as defined by the Controlled Substances Act.
Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code forbids businesses from deducting otherwise ordinary business expenses from gross income associated with the “trafficking” of Schedule I or II substances, as defined by the Controlled Substances Act. The IRS has subsequently applied Section 280E to state-legal cannabis businesses, since cannabis is still a Schedule I substance.
Reagan Era Law
Created during the Reagan Administration, Section 280E originated from a 1981 court case in which a convicted cocaine trafficker asserted his right under federal tax law to deduct ordinary business expenses. In 1982, Congress created 280E to prevent other drug dealers from following suit. It states that no deductions should be allowed on any amount “in carrying on any trade or business if such trade or business consists of trafficking in controlled substances.”
With 23 states and the District of Columbia now allowing some form of legal marijuana, 280E is applied to state-regulated cannabis businesses more often than it is to the types of illegal drug dealers that the provision was intended to penalize.
What types of business expenses are under 280E?
Employee salaries
Payments to contractors
Utility costs
Internet
Health insurance premiums
Advertising costs
Repairs and maintenance
Rental fees
Security
and more
What deductions are challenged?
General and administrative costs (bookkeeping, legal expenses, technology costs)
The Tax Court denied Harborside’s deductions from 2007 to 2012, citing Code Section 280E, which prevents any trade or business that “consists of trafficking in controlled substances from deducting any business expenses.” Harborside has appealed the decision to the Ninth Circuit.
The Harborside case is not the first time that an entity specializing in the processing, sale or distribution of cannabis has challenged the constitutionality of Code Section 280E, but it is very likely the largest and the most closely watched case. And if the Ninth Circuit agrees with the appellant, it will ultimately be decided by the Supreme Court.
2019 Harborside Inc. Receives Final Ruling by US Tax Court on 280E
OAKLAND, CA and TORONTO, Oct. 21, 2019 /PRNewswire/ – Harborside Inc. (“Harborside” or the “Company”) (CSE: HBOR), today announced that the U.S. Tax Court has issued a final decision under Tax Court Rule 155 on the income tax deficiency for Patients Mutual Assistance Collective Corporation (“PMACC”), the Company’s 100% owned subsidiary and owner of the iconic Harborside Oakland cannabis dispensary. The U.S. Tax Court has ruled that PMACC owes an aggregate tax deficiency of approximately $11.0 million for the fiscal years 2007 through 2012. This amount is consistent with the Company’s one-time provision for its estimated tax obligation for PMACC expensed in its financial results for the three-month period ended June 30, 2019. All dollar amounts in this press release are expressed in U.S. dollars.
“The Tax Court’s final computation of our tax obligation in PMACC’s long-standing 280E case is a good outcome for Harborside shareholders. By challenging the IRS’s overly aggressive interpretation of the tax law as it applies to cannabis businesses operating legally under State law, we have succeeded in reducing Harborside’s liability from the $36 million originally sought by the IRS to approximately $11 million – a $25 million reduction. The reduction includes $6 million in penalties that the court previously ruled we did not need to pay because of the unclear state of the law, and because Harborside acted in good faith,” said Harborside CEO Andrew Berman. “This ruling is also an important one for the cannabis industry in that, through this litigation, the court recognized there are legitimate deductions that legal cannabis companies can take in cost of goods sold. Harborside still intends to appeal the Tax Court’s ruling with regard to aspects of the decision as it pertains to the calculation of cost of goods sold, and has already retained appellate tax counsel.”
Steve DeAngelo, Harborside’s co-founder and Chairman Emeritus, also commented, “Harborside’s policy towards the federal government has always been to exhaust all reasonable available legal options to pursue justice. That policy has been validated by the Tax Court’s downward adjustment of PMACC’s liability. This outcome has strengthened our already strong resolve to continue pursuing justice by appealing the decision, with the goal of modifying or reducing 280E liability for Harborside, and in the future, eliminating it for every other state legal cannabis business in the United States. The issues at stake are of importance to the entire cannabis industry.”
The Company has 90 days within which to file an appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Harborside Inc. Announces Filing Appeal in Tax Case
The Tax Court decision was issued on Nov. 29, 2018. The ruling became final on Oct. 11, 2019, when liability of US$11,013,237 was formally entered by the Tax Court. Harborside is properly filing its appeal within 90 days from that date.
What impact does this have on the cannabis industry and states attempting to regulate marijuana?
Most cannabis business owners would like to be considered legitimate by paying federal and state taxes. But the current tax scenario has some convinced to ignore 280E on their tax filings, or don’t pay taxes at all. These businesses would rather gamble on the IRS overlooking their filing than see their revenues evaporate due to 280E.
Treasury Inspector General Recommends More Tax Audits for Cannabis
The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) issued a report on March 30, 2020 which made recommendations to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) regarding tax compliance and the cannabis industry.
The purpose of the report was to “evaluate the IRS’s examination and education approach to certain cash-based industries with an emphasis on legal marijuana operations,” as stated by the TIGTA.
ANN ARBOR, MI – There are mixed messages about whether Ann Arbor’s Hash Bash will happen this year.
Thousands in the cannabis community have gathered throughout the city on the first Saturday of every April since 1972.
And, while a Hash Bash social media message has announced this year’s April 2 celebration will be postponed because it can’t get a permit, “Mr. Hash Bash” plans to smoke it up anyway.
“You can’t cancel Hash Bash,” said Adam L. Brook, who calls himself by the moniker. “I just got off the phone with the Legendary John Sinclair, who will be joining me and others at what Hash Bash was always intended to be…a protest and smoke-in.”
Sinclair, who has protested for marijuana usage for the last five decades, served two years of a 10-year prison sentence between 1969-71 for possession of marijuana that he was accused of giving to an undercover Detroit cop. His case was overturned by the Michigan Supreme Court, and he said he has smoked marijuana everyday since.
The University of Michigan student group that organizes Hash Bash will not get a permit for the event, as the university has disallowed all events of at least 100 people due to the threat of the spread of coronavirus.
“It is with a heavy heart that we must postpone the 49th Hash Bash,” said Nick Zettell, founding board member of MI Legalize. “To protect the health and safety of our participants, we will not be gathering on the Diag this April.
But Brook, Sinclair and the toking traditionalists will still gather by the University of Michigan Diag at “high noon” on April 2, Brook said. (actually 4/4/20)
