WEBVTT - Marijuana Rescheduling in Washington

0:00:15.600 --> 0:00:18.360
<v Speaker 1>Hello, and welcome to the Votes in Verdicts podcast, hosted

0:00:18.360 --> 0:00:21.759
<v Speaker 1>by the litigation and policy team at Bloomberg Intelligence. Bloomberg

0:00:21.800 --> 0:00:25.160
<v Speaker 1>Intelligence is the investment research platform on the Bloomberg Terminal,

0:00:25.320 --> 0:00:28.200
<v Speaker 1>with five hundred analysts and strategists working across the globe

0:00:28.240 --> 0:00:30.880
<v Speaker 1>and focused on all major markets. Our coverage includes over

0:00:30.920 --> 0:00:33.400
<v Speaker 1>two thousand equities and credits, and we have outlooks on

0:00:33.440 --> 0:00:36.960
<v Speaker 1>more than ninety industries, one hundred market industries, currencies and commodities.

0:00:37.240 --> 0:00:40.560
<v Speaker 1>This podcast series examines the intersection of business policy and law.

0:00:40.800 --> 0:00:44.040
<v Speaker 1>I'm Nathan Dean, an analysts with Bloomberg Intelligence covering financials policy,

0:00:44.640 --> 0:00:47.199
<v Speaker 1>and joining me is Holly From, an analyst with Bloomberg

0:00:47.200 --> 0:00:51.479
<v Speaker 1>Intelligence covering consumer and trade litigation. We're delighted today to

0:00:51.520 --> 0:00:55.680
<v Speaker 1>be joined by Jeffrey Schultz, partner at Foley Hoag, where

0:00:55.680 --> 0:01:00.000
<v Speaker 1>he focuses on practice is practice, on representing cannabis, indie

0:01:00.040 --> 0:01:04.520
<v Speaker 1>street operators, investors in ancillary businesses, on corporate and security

0:01:04.600 --> 0:01:08.520
<v Speaker 1>law matters, early stage corporate structuring and financing, joint venture,

0:01:08.600 --> 0:01:12.320
<v Speaker 1>strategic partnerships, as well as state and federal regulatory matters

0:01:12.640 --> 0:01:17.160
<v Speaker 1>impacting the cannabis industry. Jeff also advises cannabis industry operators

0:01:17.160 --> 0:01:20.120
<v Speaker 1>on m and A, banking laws, and intellectual property matters.

0:01:20.400 --> 0:01:23.240
<v Speaker 1>So with that, Jeff, welcome to the Votes and Verdicts podcast.

0:01:23.760 --> 0:01:26.560
<v Speaker 1>Thank you very much for having me, No, thank you,

0:01:26.720 --> 0:01:29.240
<v Speaker 1>It's always great to have you on, especially the timing

0:01:29.280 --> 0:01:32.400
<v Speaker 1>of this podcast just giving me so much as happening

0:01:32.400 --> 0:01:36.160
<v Speaker 1>with reschedulization on marijuana. So just as a little bit

0:01:36.200 --> 0:01:37.720
<v Speaker 1>of a background, can you just tell us a bit

0:01:37.760 --> 0:01:39.399
<v Speaker 1>of how you got to where you are and what

0:01:39.520 --> 0:01:41.479
<v Speaker 1>drew you to the cannabis industry in the first place.

0:01:41.920 --> 0:01:42.800
<v Speaker 2>Sure, great question.

0:01:43.360 --> 0:01:46.119
<v Speaker 3>Nobody's in my root, and I don't think anybody's root

0:01:46.240 --> 0:01:47.960
<v Speaker 3>into this industry and through it is.

0:01:49.880 --> 0:01:51.200
<v Speaker 2>A straight line for sure.

0:01:51.320 --> 0:01:54.680
<v Speaker 3>But my background is a corporate insecurities law I've worked

0:01:54.680 --> 0:01:57.800
<v Speaker 3>on Wall Street for twenty years, and I got into

0:01:57.840 --> 0:02:03.240
<v Speaker 3>the industry because I started work at a hybrid venture

0:02:03.280 --> 0:02:06.520
<v Speaker 3>capital hedge fund private equity fund called Navy Capital in

0:02:06.520 --> 0:02:10.400
<v Speaker 3>twenty eighteen. I was deeply interested in the industry for

0:02:10.440 --> 0:02:15.320
<v Speaker 3>a variety of reasons, really recognizing that medical has cannabis

0:02:15.440 --> 0:02:20.360
<v Speaker 3>use many many many years ago, and also seeing the

0:02:20.400 --> 0:02:23.840
<v Speaker 3>opportunity in a total white space for this industry. Is

0:02:24.360 --> 0:02:27.560
<v Speaker 3>I've always viewed legalization as a one way road, and

0:02:28.520 --> 0:02:31.200
<v Speaker 3>here we are, eight years later, a little bit further

0:02:31.240 --> 0:02:31.839
<v Speaker 3>down that road.

0:02:32.800 --> 0:02:35.200
<v Speaker 1>No, that's great, and I think just I think, and

0:02:35.200 --> 0:02:37.800
<v Speaker 1>I'm just going based off of your LinkedIn profile that

0:02:37.880 --> 0:02:39.560
<v Speaker 1>you went to law school at the same time as

0:02:39.600 --> 0:02:43.799
<v Speaker 1>Holly did, and also as Elliott Stein, who is one

0:02:43.800 --> 0:02:47.680
<v Speaker 1>of our Vootz and Verdicts podcast individuals, and you are

0:02:47.760 --> 0:02:51.600
<v Speaker 1>a Michigan grad, which our text analyst Andrew Silverman is

0:02:51.639 --> 0:02:53.680
<v Speaker 1>also a Michigan grad I went to produce. So we

0:02:53.720 --> 0:02:57.080
<v Speaker 1>won't talk about football all right now. But so let's

0:02:57.120 --> 0:03:00.560
<v Speaker 1>just get a little bit further into the marijuana do discussion.

0:03:00.680 --> 0:03:04.000
<v Speaker 1>So we always have to timestamp this discussion today's June

0:03:04.000 --> 0:03:06.960
<v Speaker 1>twelfth at eleven oh one eight am. The reason why

0:03:07.000 --> 0:03:09.840
<v Speaker 1>we timestamp it is just because things happen so quickly

0:03:09.880 --> 0:03:12.280
<v Speaker 1>in the policy landscape. But let's start with the state

0:03:12.320 --> 0:03:14.320
<v Speaker 1>of play of marijuana and its role in both the

0:03:14.320 --> 0:03:18.040
<v Speaker 1>federal and state legal system. So, going back on April

0:03:18.120 --> 0:03:20.520
<v Speaker 1>twenty seventh, we saw orders on the federal register up

0:03:20.560 --> 0:03:25.000
<v Speaker 1>here after a long winded thought out there in terms

0:03:25.040 --> 0:03:28.919
<v Speaker 1>of rescheduling, where it took marijuana from Section three sorry,

0:03:28.960 --> 0:03:32.320
<v Speaker 1>Section one to Section three, and there were some limitations

0:03:32.320 --> 0:03:35.160
<v Speaker 1>about marijuana. This wasn't full marijuana, correct, this is just

0:03:35.200 --> 0:03:36.360
<v Speaker 1>a small subset, right.

0:03:37.360 --> 0:03:41.320
<v Speaker 3>The DOJ took two distinct actions a couple of months ago.

0:03:41.520 --> 0:03:46.440
<v Speaker 3>They immediately placed state licensed medical cannabis operators with state

0:03:46.480 --> 0:03:51.240
<v Speaker 3>licenses on Schedule three as well as FDA approved drugs,

0:03:51.680 --> 0:03:53.440
<v Speaker 3>and they use the treaty pathway to do that, which

0:03:53.440 --> 0:03:58.800
<v Speaker 3>we can get into. And they also established hearing that

0:03:58.960 --> 0:04:01.400
<v Speaker 3>that begins on anounces the hearing that begins on June

0:04:01.400 --> 0:04:05.480
<v Speaker 3>twenty ninth to deal with the best way to say

0:04:05.480 --> 0:04:08.840
<v Speaker 3>it is everything else anything that is not medical cannabis.

0:04:09.520 --> 0:04:13.440
<v Speaker 3>So two very different pathways. They do intersect with one another.

0:04:13.520 --> 0:04:16.800
<v Speaker 3>But I think the big headline and takeaway, which I

0:04:16.960 --> 0:04:20.160
<v Speaker 3>still think is syncing in, is that medical cannabis is now.

0:04:20.160 --> 0:04:21.640
<v Speaker 2>Legal at the federal level.

0:04:22.400 --> 0:04:26.040
<v Speaker 3>If you have a state licensed state medical license, you

0:04:26.120 --> 0:04:32.000
<v Speaker 3>are now invited to apply for a DEA license. There

0:04:32.040 --> 0:04:34.080
<v Speaker 3>is this whether there's a sixty day window.

0:04:34.080 --> 0:04:35.719
<v Speaker 2>We're in the middle of it. We're actually close to

0:04:35.760 --> 0:04:36.400
<v Speaker 2>the end of that.

0:04:36.400 --> 0:04:41.240
<v Speaker 3>That window ends essentially right before the hearing begins on

0:04:42.400 --> 0:04:44.560
<v Speaker 3>everything else type of cannabis.

0:04:45.160 --> 0:04:47.279
<v Speaker 2>So we're in the middle of that process right now.

0:04:47.720 --> 0:04:49.840
<v Speaker 1>So can you explain a little bit more about like,

0:04:49.880 --> 0:04:55.520
<v Speaker 1>so federally illegal for state marijuana, So is this recreational

0:04:55.560 --> 0:04:59.040
<v Speaker 1>federal illegal or is this for certain types of product

0:04:59.320 --> 0:04:59.960
<v Speaker 1>use in service?

0:05:01.000 --> 0:05:04.720
<v Speaker 3>So adult use to recreational cannabis is still Schedule one,

0:05:05.000 --> 0:05:07.520
<v Speaker 3>meaning that according to the federal government, it has no

0:05:07.600 --> 0:05:11.279
<v Speaker 3>medical accepted use, and most importantly, it's still a crime

0:05:11.400 --> 0:05:15.640
<v Speaker 3>to possess it, let alone cultivate it or sell it

0:05:15.760 --> 0:05:16.600
<v Speaker 3>or distribute it.

0:05:17.480 --> 0:05:20.039
<v Speaker 2>That again is going to be subject that is going to.

0:05:20.040 --> 0:05:22.960
<v Speaker 3>Be the primary subject of the alj hearing that begins

0:05:22.960 --> 0:05:24.880
<v Speaker 3>on the twenty ninth very soon, and we'll be watched

0:05:24.960 --> 0:05:29.400
<v Speaker 3>very closely by a lot of folks. So it remains

0:05:29.440 --> 0:05:32.280
<v Speaker 3>as a Schedule one drug. I think the biggest impact

0:05:32.279 --> 0:05:35.520
<v Speaker 3>for the industry is remaining on Schedule one, at least

0:05:35.520 --> 0:05:37.960
<v Speaker 3>for the time being, is the tax status and the

0:05:38.000 --> 0:05:41.440
<v Speaker 3>distinction in the tax status between medical and adult use cannabis.

0:05:41.440 --> 0:05:43.960
<v Speaker 3>To that, well, the longest short of it is that

0:05:44.040 --> 0:05:46.800
<v Speaker 3>there's a section in the tax code called two AD

0:05:47.720 --> 0:05:54.440
<v Speaker 3>two ADE effectively treats it's a punishment for drug dealers.

0:05:54.800 --> 0:05:57.520
<v Speaker 3>And what it says is, if you're a drug dealer,

0:05:57.600 --> 0:05:59.479
<v Speaker 3>you may or may not end up going to jail,

0:05:59.480 --> 0:06:01.160
<v Speaker 3>but you serve, and they are going to pay taxes,

0:06:01.160 --> 0:06:03.240
<v Speaker 3>and you're going to going to pay taxes in a

0:06:03.279 --> 0:06:07.520
<v Speaker 3>punitive manner. Essentially, to ADE does not allow anyone to

0:06:07.520 --> 0:06:11.839
<v Speaker 3>deduct any ordinary business expenses. The only thing that a

0:06:11.920 --> 0:06:15.800
<v Speaker 3>company that's subject to to ADE can deduct from their

0:06:15.800 --> 0:06:17.480
<v Speaker 3>taxes are cost of goods sold.

0:06:18.160 --> 0:06:18.680
<v Speaker 2>It has a.

0:06:18.640 --> 0:06:25.040
<v Speaker 3>Particularly significant impact on standalone dispensaries whose only really material

0:06:25.080 --> 0:06:27.560
<v Speaker 3>cost to get sold as their inventory. So imagine a

0:06:27.600 --> 0:06:30.479
<v Speaker 3>business with effectively a call it seventy to seventy five

0:06:30.520 --> 0:06:34.800
<v Speaker 3>percent effective tax rate. It's very difficult to operate in

0:06:34.800 --> 0:06:39.000
<v Speaker 3>this industry, notwithstanding what the public may view of it.

0:06:39.960 --> 0:06:41.560
<v Speaker 1>So I want to back up a little bit and

0:06:41.600 --> 0:06:45.320
<v Speaker 1>just go back to the reschedulization decision. So you know,

0:06:45.560 --> 0:06:47.960
<v Speaker 1>this is something that started under the Biden administration. It's

0:06:48.000 --> 0:06:51.520
<v Speaker 1>been going on for a long time. President Trump signed

0:06:51.520 --> 0:06:54.919
<v Speaker 1>this executive order back in twenty twenty five, directing the

0:06:54.960 --> 0:06:58.479
<v Speaker 1>DEA to move forward. There's a little bit of hesitation,

0:06:58.680 --> 0:07:01.960
<v Speaker 1>I think least anecdote I've been hearing from the DEA.

0:07:02.120 --> 0:07:04.880
<v Speaker 1>So finally saw the Department of Justice go forth and

0:07:05.040 --> 0:07:08.719
<v Speaker 1>announce this reschedulization from Schedule one to Schedule three. You

0:07:08.800 --> 0:07:11.440
<v Speaker 1>mentioned the treaty aspect. Can you guy a little bit

0:07:11.480 --> 0:07:15.480
<v Speaker 1>deeper into specifically what the treaty impact of this is,

0:07:15.520 --> 0:07:19.760
<v Speaker 1>because I think, I think this is a fascinating justification

0:07:19.960 --> 0:07:21.920
<v Speaker 1>for what they did here. So can you explain a

0:07:21.920 --> 0:07:25.640
<v Speaker 1>little bit about why international treaties come to play in

0:07:25.880 --> 0:07:29.760
<v Speaker 1>something that's largely a domestic, you know product.

0:07:30.640 --> 0:07:34.480
<v Speaker 2>Sure, so, the treaty, the treaty pathway is.

0:07:36.280 --> 0:07:39.880
<v Speaker 3>Very interesting, not frequently used, and has been used before.

0:07:39.960 --> 0:07:42.800
<v Speaker 3>It is not the first time that we've we've gone

0:07:42.840 --> 0:07:48.480
<v Speaker 3>down that process. But essentially, what the treaty pathway does

0:07:48.800 --> 0:07:53.960
<v Speaker 3>and rescheduling is allow for an expedited process and it's

0:07:54.000 --> 0:07:56.880
<v Speaker 3>a look at section at eight eleven D one of

0:07:56.920 --> 0:08:01.880
<v Speaker 3>the Controlled Substances Act. It effectively allows us to it

0:08:01.880 --> 0:08:05.280
<v Speaker 3>allows the federal government to skip some of the notice,

0:08:05.400 --> 0:08:07.960
<v Speaker 3>a lot of the procedural aspects of this, which frankly,

0:08:08.680 --> 0:08:12.240
<v Speaker 3>uh we we dealt with under the Biden administration and

0:08:12.320 --> 0:08:16.960
<v Speaker 3>that process for rescheduling got caught up in an interlocatory

0:08:17.000 --> 0:08:22.360
<v Speaker 3>appeal and and of course the ALJ. Judd retired in

0:08:22.360 --> 0:08:26.000
<v Speaker 3>the middle of the hearing, and effectively everything just got

0:08:26.040 --> 0:08:27.200
<v Speaker 3>it delayed indefinitely.

0:08:28.520 --> 0:08:29.920
<v Speaker 2>Allowing going through the.

0:08:30.280 --> 0:08:34.360
<v Speaker 3>Treaty pathway allows us to allows the federal government really

0:08:34.400 --> 0:08:35.319
<v Speaker 3>to pick up.

0:08:37.200 --> 0:08:38.720
<v Speaker 2>Almost where they left off.

0:08:39.440 --> 0:08:43.080
<v Speaker 3>It allows the DOJ to follow through with the President's

0:08:43.200 --> 0:08:47.680
<v Speaker 3>order from December. His executive order was very specific about

0:08:48.920 --> 0:08:52.400
<v Speaker 3>getting this done in in an expeditious manner, and this

0:08:52.559 --> 0:08:57.320
<v Speaker 3>is the most expeditious manner. So it's it's really we've

0:08:58.080 --> 0:09:03.320
<v Speaker 3>short circuited part of that process in a completely legal manner,

0:09:03.360 --> 0:09:05.440
<v Speaker 3>in my opinion, But we're as supposed.

0:09:05.520 --> 0:09:07.079
<v Speaker 2>We'll find out and there will be challenges.

0:09:07.400 --> 0:09:09.520
<v Speaker 1>So I guess what's the next step. We have this

0:09:09.600 --> 0:09:13.160
<v Speaker 1>hearing on June twenty ninth. Can you walk us through

0:09:13.640 --> 0:09:16.480
<v Speaker 1>what's going to go through in that hearing and then

0:09:16.800 --> 0:09:19.240
<v Speaker 1>what's the process beyond that after the hearing.

0:09:19.920 --> 0:09:22.080
<v Speaker 3>So the hearing begins on the twenty ninth, and that

0:09:22.240 --> 0:09:24.200
<v Speaker 3>is really to determine what to do.

0:09:24.640 --> 0:09:27.800
<v Speaker 2>Where to schedule the rest of cannabis.

0:09:28.080 --> 0:09:32.160
<v Speaker 3>This is a very complicated, complex issue because even the

0:09:32.200 --> 0:09:35.520
<v Speaker 3>definition of the rest of cannabis is not entirely clear.

0:09:39.000 --> 0:09:42.559
<v Speaker 3>There's a wide spectrum of potential outcomes. I won't begin

0:09:42.640 --> 0:09:47.520
<v Speaker 3>to predict which ones, but it could be anywhere from

0:09:47.640 --> 0:09:52.440
<v Speaker 3>keeping it on Schedule one, which seems exceedingly unlikely, to

0:09:52.640 --> 0:09:55.760
<v Speaker 3>moving it to Schedule two or three or below, or

0:09:55.800 --> 0:09:59.480
<v Speaker 3>potentially descheduling cannabis could be a potential outcome. Alvie, it

0:09:59.520 --> 0:10:04.640
<v Speaker 3>unlikely that is a potential outcome here. All of those

0:10:04.640 --> 0:10:08.640
<v Speaker 3>outcomes will have a significant and very different impact on

0:10:08.679 --> 0:10:12.720
<v Speaker 3>the industry and operators across the country and all the

0:10:12.760 --> 0:10:17.280
<v Speaker 3>investors in this industry. It's just difficult to really tell

0:10:17.320 --> 0:10:20.920
<v Speaker 3>what the outcome will be. However, what I can tell

0:10:20.960 --> 0:10:24.640
<v Speaker 3>you is that they've set a deadline to end the

0:10:24.679 --> 0:10:28.600
<v Speaker 3>hearing on July fifteenth. Whether that deadline is that here too,

0:10:28.760 --> 0:10:31.520
<v Speaker 3>I guess is to be determined. A lot can happen

0:10:31.559 --> 0:10:34.080
<v Speaker 3>between now and then, a lot can happen during that hearing.

0:10:35.000 --> 0:10:38.480
<v Speaker 3>But the President has been pretty clear. DFJ has been

0:10:38.520 --> 0:10:40.200
<v Speaker 3>pretty clear that they want this to wrap up by

0:10:40.280 --> 0:10:42.880
<v Speaker 3>July fifteen. Now, when I say wrap up, that means

0:10:43.040 --> 0:10:48.640
<v Speaker 3>end of the hearing. That does not mean that a binding, final,

0:10:48.800 --> 0:10:51.680
<v Speaker 3>conclusive decision will be made with respect to the rest

0:10:51.679 --> 0:10:52.280
<v Speaker 3>of cannabis.

0:10:52.320 --> 0:10:54.720
<v Speaker 2>What it does is the.

0:10:54.640 --> 0:11:01.160
<v Speaker 3>ALJ judge will notify DJ of their decision and and

0:11:01.160 --> 0:11:05.320
<v Speaker 3>and really DEA has an opportunity at that point to

0:11:05.320 --> 0:11:08.080
<v Speaker 3>to issue a final rule. There is not a clear

0:11:08.200 --> 0:11:11.880
<v Speaker 3>timeline on when the judge will relay that decision to

0:11:11.960 --> 0:11:14.920
<v Speaker 3>da or when the DEA will actually issue a final rule,

0:11:15.000 --> 0:11:17.680
<v Speaker 3>let alone what it will say. That said, you know,

0:11:17.720 --> 0:11:21.719
<v Speaker 3>we've we've heard it from political commentators from government officials

0:11:21.760 --> 0:11:25.440
<v Speaker 3>that they're looking to have everything complete and finalized by

0:11:25.440 --> 0:11:28.439
<v Speaker 3>the midterms, which would make a lot of sense politically.

0:11:29.160 --> 0:11:32.040
<v Speaker 1>And so if you see the DEA or the d

0:11:32.080 --> 0:11:34.760
<v Speaker 1>OJ come out and say, right, we're going to go

0:11:35.360 --> 0:11:38.400
<v Speaker 1>for all marijuana to schedule three or even deschedule it

0:11:38.440 --> 0:11:43.280
<v Speaker 1>is in itself. Is that does that remove all aspects

0:11:43.440 --> 0:11:48.800
<v Speaker 1>of federal Is that a full comparison to full federal decriminalization,

0:11:49.480 --> 0:11:52.480
<v Speaker 1>meaning that if they reschedule this then you can't be

0:11:52.559 --> 0:11:55.160
<v Speaker 1>arrested for it at the federal level or anything like that,

0:11:55.760 --> 0:11:59.160
<v Speaker 1>you know, for and I'm just thinking for recreational aspects.

0:12:00.080 --> 0:12:01.960
<v Speaker 3>Sure, And I think it's really important to point out

0:12:02.000 --> 0:12:05.520
<v Speaker 3>and answering your question, yes, it would, and it's really

0:12:05.559 --> 0:12:07.760
<v Speaker 3>important to point out that that has not happened yet. Right,

0:12:08.880 --> 0:12:14.760
<v Speaker 3>non non state sanctioned medical cannabis, any adult use, really

0:12:14.840 --> 0:12:21.280
<v Speaker 3>remains a federal crime. Right, possession, distribution, cultivation, or salved

0:12:21.360 --> 0:12:24.600
<v Speaker 3>it and so that has not changed. Now that will

0:12:24.720 --> 0:12:28.760
<v Speaker 3>change the criminal status of adult use cannabis. However, it

0:12:29.400 --> 0:12:33.679
<v Speaker 3>introduces a panoply of other issues. Who's going to regulate it,

0:12:33.760 --> 0:12:36.880
<v Speaker 3>which agency, and a lot of that's going to depend

0:12:36.920 --> 0:12:40.920
<v Speaker 3>on what the actual decision from ALJ is, what the

0:12:41.000 --> 0:12:43.640
<v Speaker 3>DEA final rule is as a result of that decision,

0:12:44.280 --> 0:12:47.960
<v Speaker 3>and really whether you know, whether it's moved to Schedule one, two, three, four,

0:12:48.120 --> 0:12:52.040
<v Speaker 3>five or descheduled completely will have a tremendous impact really

0:12:52.280 --> 0:12:55.680
<v Speaker 3>on what happens next. But suffice it to say, even

0:12:56.040 --> 0:12:59.560
<v Speaker 3>if and when adult use cannabis is decriminalized that the

0:12:59.600 --> 0:13:02.000
<v Speaker 3>federal level, that is not the end of the story.

0:13:02.280 --> 0:13:06.000
<v Speaker 3>The question then becomes who steps in to regulate it

0:13:06.080 --> 0:13:09.480
<v Speaker 3>and how would that happen? And there's you know a

0:13:09.559 --> 0:13:13.000
<v Speaker 3>variety of very interesting ways in which this can proceed

0:13:13.040 --> 0:13:13.840
<v Speaker 3>at that point.

0:13:13.960 --> 0:13:16.000
<v Speaker 1>Do you need Congress to step in at that point

0:13:16.040 --> 0:13:19.000
<v Speaker 1>to provide a framework? I mean, I just call it

0:13:19.040 --> 0:13:21.240
<v Speaker 1>like something like the Safer Banking Act. You know, do

0:13:21.320 --> 0:13:23.920
<v Speaker 1>you think if we were to see that type of

0:13:23.960 --> 0:13:27.440
<v Speaker 1>scenario where you know, on the regulatory side, they decide

0:13:27.480 --> 0:13:30.280
<v Speaker 1>to move forward with this, Do you foresee Congress is

0:13:30.320 --> 0:13:32.120
<v Speaker 1>stepping in here and saying, look, we need to put

0:13:32.120 --> 0:13:34.520
<v Speaker 1>a new regulatory framework on it. We need to actually

0:13:34.559 --> 0:13:37.240
<v Speaker 1>decide how this is going to be managed, because I

0:13:37.280 --> 0:13:40.040
<v Speaker 1>think pretty much every listener votes and verdicts. Plus I

0:13:40.040 --> 0:13:42.680
<v Speaker 1>think most Americans out there know it's very difficult to

0:13:42.679 --> 0:13:46.280
<v Speaker 1>get legislation through Congress these days. What happens in that

0:13:46.320 --> 0:13:47.600
<v Speaker 1>type of scenario.

0:13:48.200 --> 0:13:51.400
<v Speaker 3>Sure, I think I think Congress is going to have

0:13:51.440 --> 0:13:53.280
<v Speaker 3>to step in one way or another. I think the

0:13:53.320 --> 0:13:56.720
<v Speaker 3>extent to which they have to step in and at

0:13:56.800 --> 0:14:01.360
<v Speaker 3>least attempt to legislate a resolution to the regulatory framework

0:14:01.440 --> 0:14:06.840
<v Speaker 3>is TBD. I am not you know, I'm not terribly

0:14:06.840 --> 0:14:13.559
<v Speaker 3>optimistic about how quickly they'll get that done if necessary. However,

0:14:13.679 --> 0:14:17.640
<v Speaker 3>I will say if no matter what happens, the political

0:14:17.679 --> 0:14:22.000
<v Speaker 3>pressure to pass some legislation to handle everything here will

0:14:22.080 --> 0:14:27.440
<v Speaker 3>never has never been greater. And certainly if cannabis is descheduled,

0:14:27.560 --> 0:14:33.040
<v Speaker 3>it becomes decriminalized but pretty much on regulated at the

0:14:33.080 --> 0:14:36.680
<v Speaker 3>federal level, which will be unacceptable. That would, I think

0:14:36.960 --> 0:14:39.800
<v Speaker 3>place the most amount of pressure on lall makers to

0:14:39.840 --> 0:14:45.320
<v Speaker 3>come up with the resolution not just safer banking, but

0:14:46.480 --> 0:14:50.560
<v Speaker 3>essentially the Democrats have introduced their their federal legalization bill

0:14:50.640 --> 0:14:53.600
<v Speaker 3>and what you could call it the federal regulation of

0:14:53.640 --> 0:14:57.520
<v Speaker 3>the industry, and so has the GOP. That the Democrats

0:14:57.560 --> 0:15:00.680
<v Speaker 3>have a growing list of sponsors for the MORAC and

0:15:00.760 --> 0:15:03.360
<v Speaker 3>the GOP has a growing list of sponsors for the

0:15:03.360 --> 0:15:07.920
<v Speaker 3>state's reformat. They're different, they differ in ways that down

0:15:07.960 --> 0:15:13.720
<v Speaker 3>party lines with the amount of regulation, the addressing social

0:15:13.760 --> 0:15:18.000
<v Speaker 3>equity in similar issues, I think, you know, Congress has

0:15:18.000 --> 0:15:20.080
<v Speaker 3>to really would have to come together at that point

0:15:20.480 --> 0:15:25.800
<v Speaker 3>and agree on a bipartisan pathway that is likely borrowing

0:15:25.840 --> 0:15:27.320
<v Speaker 3>from both of those draft.

0:15:27.160 --> 0:15:28.320
<v Speaker 2>Pieces of legislation.

0:15:29.240 --> 0:15:31.400
<v Speaker 3>As it relates to safer banking, I think it's a

0:15:31.720 --> 0:15:35.440
<v Speaker 3>really fascinating issue. Because of the way things have transpired

0:15:35.440 --> 0:15:38.120
<v Speaker 3>over the last two months with medical cannabis being legal,

0:15:38.920 --> 0:15:42.440
<v Speaker 3>safer banking is still necessary and I'll continue to say that,

0:15:43.160 --> 0:15:45.400
<v Speaker 3>you know, in many respects, to allow for credit cards,

0:15:46.320 --> 0:15:52.000
<v Speaker 3>really to introduce much cheaper access to capital, both equity

0:15:52.040 --> 0:15:56.200
<v Speaker 3>and debt, and really remove a lot of the barriers

0:15:56.240 --> 0:15:58.600
<v Speaker 3>that create a lot a lot of the friction in

0:15:58.640 --> 0:16:02.400
<v Speaker 3>the industry right now, like being primarily cash. And I

0:16:02.440 --> 0:16:06.120
<v Speaker 3>say safe for banking is needed because the bank Secrecy

0:16:06.160 --> 0:16:09.200
<v Speaker 3>Act is the Bank Secrecy Act. At the end of

0:16:09.240 --> 0:16:12.760
<v Speaker 3>the day, if you are engaged in money laundering and

0:16:12.920 --> 0:16:16.080
<v Speaker 3>you are handling the proceeds of a crime, you're still

0:16:16.080 --> 0:16:19.800
<v Speaker 3>handling the proceeds of crime. So until adult use cannabis

0:16:20.000 --> 0:16:23.600
<v Speaker 3>is removed from Schedule one, that will be the case.

0:16:23.720 --> 0:16:27.920
<v Speaker 3>Whether we need safe safer banking will depend on the

0:16:27.920 --> 0:16:31.760
<v Speaker 3>outcome of the alj hearing. Uh, what's interesting about that,

0:16:31.800 --> 0:16:34.160
<v Speaker 3>and I think some people may disagree with the need

0:16:34.320 --> 0:16:36.120
<v Speaker 3>for for safer banking.

0:16:36.920 --> 0:16:37.600
<v Speaker 2>What it will say.

0:16:37.600 --> 0:16:40.720
<v Speaker 3>And then the last week right uh, two days ago

0:16:40.920 --> 0:16:43.840
<v Speaker 3>truly started trading publicly on the New York Stock Exchange.

0:16:44.680 --> 0:16:47.000
<v Speaker 2>What a massive paradigm shift.

0:16:46.760 --> 0:16:51.240
<v Speaker 3>And what a positive uh you know update that is

0:16:51.280 --> 0:16:53.640
<v Speaker 3>really for the entire industry. For that to have happened,

0:16:54.440 --> 0:16:57.480
<v Speaker 3>uplisting to the New York Stock Exchange, naw is deak

0:16:57.560 --> 0:16:59.720
<v Speaker 3>really unlocks I think, in my opinion it has been

0:16:59.760 --> 0:17:04.880
<v Speaker 3>for ae eight years the real value for publicly traded companies.

0:17:05.080 --> 0:17:09.520
<v Speaker 3>And they were able to do that by restructuring their

0:17:09.560 --> 0:17:15.320
<v Speaker 3>business to basically to hold non voting shares in any

0:17:15.359 --> 0:17:18.160
<v Speaker 3>of their adult use license operations.

0:17:18.280 --> 0:17:18.880
<v Speaker 2>They own it.

0:17:19.080 --> 0:17:22.360
<v Speaker 3>They don't have voting shares but its effectively they went

0:17:22.440 --> 0:17:24.960
<v Speaker 3>to you know, went to Nisen and said, we are Look,

0:17:25.000 --> 0:17:29.040
<v Speaker 3>we are a state sanctioned medical cannabis company. Yes, we

0:17:29.160 --> 0:17:33.639
<v Speaker 3>have financial exposure to adult use at the moment, but

0:17:34.320 --> 0:17:37.720
<v Speaker 3>look at us, we're federally legal now, notwithstanding the fact

0:17:37.720 --> 0:17:40.560
<v Speaker 3>that their DA registration is still very much in process.

0:17:41.280 --> 0:17:45.080
<v Speaker 3>That the final order said if you have a state

0:17:45.160 --> 0:17:47.840
<v Speaker 3>licensed state medical license, you are federally legal now, and

0:17:48.480 --> 0:17:51.960
<v Speaker 3>I'm certain that's what they relied on. So you already

0:17:52.040 --> 0:17:54.760
<v Speaker 3>have a company that is uplisted as a result of

0:17:54.800 --> 0:17:58.160
<v Speaker 3>the order, notwithstanding the fact that's safer banking has not passed.

0:17:58.920 --> 0:18:00.520
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, and I think this is probably a good time

0:18:00.520 --> 0:18:02.720
<v Speaker 1>for me to plug that. Every time I talk about

0:18:02.720 --> 0:18:05.840
<v Speaker 1>marijuana equities on Bloomberg TV or radio, I like to

0:18:05.840 --> 0:18:08.800
<v Speaker 1>say that these things have hot sauce because they're spicy,

0:18:08.840 --> 0:18:11.640
<v Speaker 1>they're volatile, and so anything happens in Washington. You see

0:18:11.640 --> 0:18:14.879
<v Speaker 1>these stocks go at fifteen percent and then people like you,

0:18:15.000 --> 0:18:17.200
<v Speaker 1>Jeff come in and say this is actually what it means,

0:18:17.200 --> 0:18:19.560
<v Speaker 1>and some of these investors are like, oh wait, wait wait,

0:18:19.600 --> 0:18:22.560
<v Speaker 1>and then subsequently they either declients, So it's it's really

0:18:22.600 --> 0:18:25.800
<v Speaker 1>a volatile trade out there. So We've talked about a

0:18:25.880 --> 0:18:28.360
<v Speaker 1>lot of like, you know, a lot of cool things

0:18:28.400 --> 0:18:30.320
<v Speaker 1>that are happening in the industry at the moment. We've

0:18:30.320 --> 0:18:33.520
<v Speaker 1>talked about, you know, the original decision. We've talked about

0:18:33.760 --> 0:18:36.440
<v Speaker 1>the DA hearing on June twenty ninth. We've talked about

0:18:36.440 --> 0:18:40.840
<v Speaker 1>Congress coming in potentially after the fact, depending on what

0:18:40.880 --> 0:18:43.800
<v Speaker 1>that decision says. What are and I think this is

0:18:43.840 --> 0:18:46.040
<v Speaker 1>my last question before I turn over to Holly. What

0:18:46.119 --> 0:18:48.880
<v Speaker 1>are probably the three things that you're advising your clients

0:18:48.960 --> 0:18:52.639
<v Speaker 1>right now that they should keep in mind for the

0:18:52.680 --> 0:18:54.880
<v Speaker 1>rest of the year or twenty twenty seven. Is their

0:18:54.960 --> 0:18:57.920
<v Speaker 1>business planning as they're trying to figure out the murkiness

0:18:57.920 --> 0:18:59.879
<v Speaker 1>that we're you know, looking at the moment. What are

0:18:59.880 --> 0:19:01.960
<v Speaker 1>the three things that you really think those clients should

0:19:01.960 --> 0:19:02.320
<v Speaker 1>be aware of.

0:19:03.480 --> 0:19:06.760
<v Speaker 3>So the top three things, I mean, there's there's one

0:19:06.760 --> 0:19:08.560
<v Speaker 3>in two and then the third one.

0:19:08.480 --> 0:19:09.400
<v Speaker 2>Is a little bit more general.

0:19:09.480 --> 0:19:12.000
<v Speaker 3>I'll start with that, which is everyone who is an

0:19:12.000 --> 0:19:14.360
<v Speaker 3>operator in this industry needs to be paying very close

0:19:14.400 --> 0:19:17.119
<v Speaker 3>attached to what is happening. You have to have your

0:19:17.119 --> 0:19:20.199
<v Speaker 3>head on a swivel because a lot can happen. It

0:19:20.240 --> 0:19:23.800
<v Speaker 3>can happen very quickly. Often with very little or known notice.

0:19:24.000 --> 0:19:27.520
<v Speaker 3>So it's a call to action to everybody's who's an

0:19:27.560 --> 0:19:30.960
<v Speaker 3>operator in the domestic cannabis industry to keep.

0:19:30.800 --> 0:19:32.639
<v Speaker 2>It extremely close on what's going on.

0:19:34.160 --> 0:19:38.560
<v Speaker 3>Two and more practically speaking, operators should be doing two things,

0:19:38.680 --> 0:19:42.320
<v Speaker 3>which is looking at their tax status whether you are

0:19:42.359 --> 0:19:47.800
<v Speaker 3>adult use, medical or hybrid, understanding what you may or

0:19:47.840 --> 0:19:50.239
<v Speaker 3>may not need to do, particularly if you're both. If

0:19:50.280 --> 0:19:54.040
<v Speaker 3>you operate in the medical and adult use industry together, right,

0:19:54.160 --> 0:19:57.840
<v Speaker 3>you can take advantage of to the removal or disapplication

0:19:57.920 --> 0:20:02.320
<v Speaker 3>of two ade, but only to the extent of your

0:20:02.400 --> 0:20:08.240
<v Speaker 3>medical operations. So that involves a few things, right, making

0:20:08.240 --> 0:20:12.320
<v Speaker 3>sure that your books and records are separate and effectively

0:20:12.520 --> 0:20:17.160
<v Speaker 3>bifurcating your operations both operationally and on paper. I think

0:20:17.160 --> 0:20:21.280
<v Speaker 3>it's critically important to be doing that now. The second,

0:20:21.520 --> 0:20:23.879
<v Speaker 3>the second piece of advice in the section called the

0:20:23.880 --> 0:20:27.000
<v Speaker 3>second call to action is really if you have a

0:20:27.040 --> 0:20:30.720
<v Speaker 3>medical license to be looking at and making a decision

0:20:30.840 --> 0:20:35.840
<v Speaker 3>in the very very near future, with only two weeks left,

0:20:36.119 --> 0:20:38.679
<v Speaker 3>is DEA registration. We have a number of clients who

0:20:38.720 --> 0:20:40.960
<v Speaker 3>are applying for DEA licenses right now.

0:20:42.000 --> 0:20:43.160
<v Speaker 2>It is, on.

0:20:43.080 --> 0:20:46.280
<v Speaker 3>Its face appears to be a relatively simple process, but

0:20:47.520 --> 0:20:51.199
<v Speaker 3>as you unpack the questions in the DEA application, a

0:20:51.240 --> 0:20:55.040
<v Speaker 3>lot of issues begin to rise. So I think that

0:20:55.440 --> 0:20:58.760
<v Speaker 3>anybody operating in this business, I'm sure they're already doing it,

0:20:58.800 --> 0:21:00.840
<v Speaker 3>but get to jump on it and try to figure

0:21:00.880 --> 0:21:03.840
<v Speaker 3>out whether it's appropriate for you to apply for a

0:21:03.920 --> 0:21:07.320
<v Speaker 3>DEA licenses and with with any of your medical licenses

0:21:07.440 --> 0:21:12.800
<v Speaker 3>or not, and really to manage your tax situation very

0:21:12.880 --> 0:21:15.199
<v Speaker 3>very carefully. Speak to your tax advisors, speak to your

0:21:15.200 --> 0:21:19.080
<v Speaker 3>attorneys about whether you need to take any actions proactively,

0:21:19.480 --> 0:21:23.040
<v Speaker 3>whether you know it could be a variety of things,

0:21:23.080 --> 0:21:25.560
<v Speaker 3>but they should be speaking to their professional advisors about

0:21:25.560 --> 0:21:26.160
<v Speaker 3>that now.

0:21:26.760 --> 0:21:30.080
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, So you talked about the final order that went

0:21:30.080 --> 0:21:34.960
<v Speaker 4>into effect April twenty second, rescheduling medical marijuana, about state

0:21:34.960 --> 0:21:38.880
<v Speaker 4>licensed medical marijuana and at the approved medical marijuana. And

0:21:39.440 --> 0:21:45.440
<v Speaker 4>the President did that by invoking international Treaty organized obligations,

0:21:46.440 --> 0:21:49.600
<v Speaker 4>and that allowed him to avoid notice and comment, which

0:21:49.680 --> 0:21:53.120
<v Speaker 4>he talked about, which expedited things. Is that the only

0:21:53.160 --> 0:21:57.040
<v Speaker 4>reason why he did it that way to expedite things?

0:21:57.119 --> 0:21:59.840
<v Speaker 4>Or do you see another reason why he avoided why

0:22:00.720 --> 0:22:02.080
<v Speaker 4>notice in comment was avoided?

0:22:02.680 --> 0:22:03.880
<v Speaker 2>Uh, it's a it's a good question.

0:22:03.920 --> 0:22:07.760
<v Speaker 3>I mean I think that it was done because it

0:22:07.840 --> 0:22:11.120
<v Speaker 3>made a lot of sense to pursue the Treaty pathway

0:22:11.600 --> 0:22:15.879
<v Speaker 3>on an independent legal basis, not simply not simply for

0:22:15.960 --> 0:22:19.080
<v Speaker 3>efficiency's sake, and and and it goes into a lot

0:22:19.080 --> 0:22:22.399
<v Speaker 3>of technical rules in the Controlled Substances Act around monopolization

0:22:23.160 --> 0:22:29.520
<v Speaker 3>and an inventory control related to the CSA, and specifically

0:22:29.560 --> 0:22:33.399
<v Speaker 3>around compliance with the Single with the Single Convention on

0:22:33.520 --> 0:22:37.639
<v Speaker 3>Narcotics uh UN Single Convention on Narcotics. So there's a

0:22:37.680 --> 0:22:42.920
<v Speaker 3>completely independent and valid reason for for pursuing the Treaty pathway,

0:22:43.080 --> 0:22:47.760
<v Speaker 3>why it was, why it was requested, beyond trying to

0:22:47.840 --> 0:22:51.639
<v Speaker 3>avoid some of the traps that frankly that the Biden

0:22:51.640 --> 0:22:52.879
<v Speaker 3>administration fell into.

0:22:53.720 --> 0:22:55.280
<v Speaker 2>So I think it had a dual purpose.

0:22:55.440 --> 0:22:59.040
<v Speaker 3>One, it was arguably required by law to pursue the

0:22:59.080 --> 0:23:02.119
<v Speaker 3>Treaty pathway. And too, yeah, it does have the It

0:23:02.160 --> 0:23:05.680
<v Speaker 3>certainly has the added benefit of accelerating the timeline here.

0:23:06.880 --> 0:23:13.959
<v Speaker 4>So do you foresee any legal challenges being raised based

0:23:14.000 --> 0:23:18.440
<v Speaker 4>on the invocation of the obligation, the treaty obligation rather

0:23:18.480 --> 0:23:21.680
<v Speaker 4>than you know, rescheduling and their normal procedures and the

0:23:21.720 --> 0:23:22.960
<v Speaker 4>Controlled Substances Act.

0:23:23.920 --> 0:23:27.359
<v Speaker 2>Sure, there is absolutely no doubt and as you can.

0:23:28.240 --> 0:23:29.840
<v Speaker 3>You can read a little bit more about it on

0:23:30.600 --> 0:23:34.399
<v Speaker 3>our blog, Cannabis and the Law. We're pretty clear about

0:23:34.440 --> 0:23:38.880
<v Speaker 3>it that litigation is a guarantee. It's a guarantee. There

0:23:38.920 --> 0:23:43.720
<v Speaker 3>are folks who do not want this happening, and it's

0:23:43.800 --> 0:23:47.720
<v Speaker 3>probably the same group of people who challenged at the

0:23:47.720 --> 0:23:50.880
<v Speaker 3>first go around. I'd be shocked if it isn't. There

0:23:50.920 --> 0:23:54.200
<v Speaker 3>may be some additional parties to this, but it will

0:23:54.240 --> 0:23:57.040
<v Speaker 3>get challenged, and I think it'll get challenged primarily on

0:23:57.280 --> 0:23:59.680
<v Speaker 3>procedural grounds.

0:24:00.119 --> 0:24:02.000
<v Speaker 4>What do you think of those challenges? Do you think

0:24:02.160 --> 0:24:04.000
<v Speaker 4>that they'll succeed or fail?

0:24:05.680 --> 0:24:08.679
<v Speaker 3>You know, it's it's very I think some may, but

0:24:09.200 --> 0:24:13.399
<v Speaker 3>probably most will not. It's somewhat air tight. What I

0:24:13.480 --> 0:24:17.000
<v Speaker 3>will note though, and it's it's impossible to predict right

0:24:17.080 --> 0:24:20.399
<v Speaker 3>the outcome here, but you know, what I'll note about

0:24:20.400 --> 0:24:25.720
<v Speaker 3>that is that the final rule was very, very clear

0:24:25.840 --> 0:24:29.479
<v Speaker 3>and explicit that the bill can be broken up into parts.

0:24:29.560 --> 0:24:32.080
<v Speaker 3>So if or not the bill, the final Rule can

0:24:32.080 --> 0:24:34.600
<v Speaker 3>be broken up into parts. So if anything is deemed

0:24:36.200 --> 0:24:42.240
<v Speaker 3>you know, deemed to be illegal, and anybody successfully challenges

0:24:42.280 --> 0:24:46.640
<v Speaker 3>any part of the final rule, it'll be isolated and

0:24:47.520 --> 0:24:49.760
<v Speaker 3>if something needs to change or be removed from that

0:24:49.800 --> 0:24:50.480
<v Speaker 3>final rule.

0:24:50.520 --> 0:24:54.640
<v Speaker 2>It will do so in a vacuum, preserving really preserving

0:24:54.640 --> 0:24:58.520
<v Speaker 2>the integrity of of of the rule itself. I don't

0:24:58.560 --> 0:25:00.720
<v Speaker 2>see the entire thing getting thrown out the door.

0:25:00.920 --> 0:25:01.320
<v Speaker 1>Got it.

0:25:01.600 --> 0:25:06.280
<v Speaker 4>So you also talked about the proposed the rule that

0:25:07.320 --> 0:25:11.960
<v Speaker 4>was proposed under the Biden administration, and that rule proposed

0:25:12.000 --> 0:25:18.960
<v Speaker 4>to legalize all marijuana, whether recreational or medicinal, and that

0:25:19.359 --> 0:25:21.320
<v Speaker 4>rule you said there was a hearing. I believe you

0:25:21.320 --> 0:25:25.359
<v Speaker 4>said in June. Do you think that rule, if it's

0:25:25.480 --> 0:25:30.600
<v Speaker 4>enacted with that with stand legal challenges? So the the

0:25:30.680 --> 0:25:35.080
<v Speaker 4>recreational adult recreational use rule, I'll call it that, So

0:25:35.160 --> 0:25:38.600
<v Speaker 4>the rule to legalize recreational use, so all marijuana, I

0:25:38.600 --> 0:25:43.680
<v Speaker 4>guess do you think that would withstand legal challenges?

0:25:44.600 --> 0:25:47.600
<v Speaker 3>It's difficult to predict whether you know the sharing process

0:25:47.720 --> 0:25:52.560
<v Speaker 3>is going to be successful for the administration. It's it's

0:25:52.600 --> 0:25:54.760
<v Speaker 3>difficult for me to believe that they haven't thought this

0:25:54.880 --> 0:25:59.560
<v Speaker 3>out in extreme detail. And they've also now this is

0:25:59.560 --> 0:26:02.960
<v Speaker 3>true everybody involved in the process, but they've also had

0:26:02.960 --> 0:26:05.600
<v Speaker 3>the opportunity to see how this did not work well

0:26:05.800 --> 0:26:09.080
<v Speaker 3>under the Biden administration and where the case where the

0:26:09.119 --> 0:26:14.280
<v Speaker 3>alj hearing really got caught up indefinitely there. They can

0:26:14.320 --> 0:26:17.480
<v Speaker 3>certainly navigate that and have a preview, right, They've been

0:26:17.480 --> 0:26:21.320
<v Speaker 3>able to look into the crystal ball and and glean

0:26:21.440 --> 0:26:24.240
<v Speaker 3>what some of the arguments may be for those who

0:26:24.400 --> 0:26:26.639
<v Speaker 3>intend to challenge it. So I think they're going to

0:26:26.680 --> 0:26:31.000
<v Speaker 3>be extremely deal to be extremely well prepared. Everybody involved

0:26:31.000 --> 0:26:33.040
<v Speaker 3>in this case, however, is going to be extremely well

0:26:33.080 --> 0:26:38.000
<v Speaker 3>prepared to litigate this in the hearing. Although, like I said,

0:26:38.119 --> 0:26:41.439
<v Speaker 3>very difficult to tell where where this ends up. But

0:26:41.600 --> 0:26:44.600
<v Speaker 3>I don't think that the Biden administration would go about

0:26:44.640 --> 0:26:47.400
<v Speaker 3>all of these deliberate Excuse me, the Trump administration would

0:26:47.400 --> 0:26:50.240
<v Speaker 3>go through all of these deliberate steps in the manner

0:26:50.280 --> 0:26:52.600
<v Speaker 3>that they did if they didn't have a high level

0:26:52.600 --> 0:26:54.399
<v Speaker 3>of confidence that it would be successful.

0:26:55.200 --> 0:26:55.600
<v Speaker 1>Got it.

0:26:56.600 --> 0:27:02.000
<v Speaker 4>I think there we still have some questions about this text. Go, Nathan,

0:27:02.080 --> 0:27:03.479
<v Speaker 4>did you want to talk about that?

0:27:04.160 --> 0:27:06.480
<v Speaker 1>Yeah? I mean, there's nothing more exciting in this world

0:27:06.480 --> 0:27:09.600
<v Speaker 1>than tax So let's let's go ahead and ask I

0:27:09.600 --> 0:27:11.560
<v Speaker 1>wanted to dive a little bit deeper about to ade

0:27:11.760 --> 0:27:15.439
<v Speaker 1>for a moment, you know, so you know, Treasury and

0:27:15.680 --> 0:27:19.400
<v Speaker 1>the irs have both indicated that forthcoming guidance is expected

0:27:19.440 --> 0:27:23.400
<v Speaker 1>to clarify how TO eighty applies, and it only applies

0:27:23.480 --> 0:27:26.480
<v Speaker 1>to those activities that are scheduled one Schedule two, so

0:27:26.560 --> 0:27:30.680
<v Speaker 1>not schedule three. How much of the relief is actually

0:27:30.800 --> 0:27:35.159
<v Speaker 1>coming and is it realistic that in the current scenario

0:27:35.240 --> 0:27:39.440
<v Speaker 1>that companies would have to separate medical marijuana business revenue

0:27:39.520 --> 0:27:43.520
<v Speaker 1>versus non medical business revenue to take the tax relief

0:27:43.560 --> 0:27:47.760
<v Speaker 1>from that.

0:27:45.800 --> 0:27:48.000
<v Speaker 3>They have to separate it to an extent right, and

0:27:48.080 --> 0:27:50.879
<v Speaker 3>the extent to which they need to do so really

0:27:51.040 --> 0:27:54.080
<v Speaker 3>is going to depend on that IRS guidance which is forthcoming.

0:27:54.119 --> 0:27:58.800
<v Speaker 3>And yeah, sure there is nothing sexier than talking about

0:27:58.840 --> 0:28:01.679
<v Speaker 3>tax but in this situation, we're talking about billions of

0:28:01.680 --> 0:28:05.800
<v Speaker 3>dollars at stake, So it is fascinating.

0:28:05.880 --> 0:28:07.280
<v Speaker 2>It's highly consequential.

0:28:08.520 --> 0:28:11.840
<v Speaker 3>How operators go about this, and what the ultimate interpretation

0:28:11.960 --> 0:28:13.879
<v Speaker 3>of the extent of the two eightyd relief is is

0:28:14.240 --> 0:28:16.960
<v Speaker 3>sort of tbda. But again that's that is why one

0:28:16.960 --> 0:28:19.960
<v Speaker 3>of my primary calls that one of my two main

0:28:20.000 --> 0:28:22.000
<v Speaker 3>calls to action really is to deal with this and

0:28:22.040 --> 0:28:23.960
<v Speaker 3>speak to your professional advisors.

0:28:23.520 --> 0:28:24.439
<v Speaker 2>Immediately about it.

0:28:25.720 --> 0:28:29.959
<v Speaker 3>Yes, so they will have to separate their businesses to

0:28:30.000 --> 0:28:33.080
<v Speaker 3>an extent right. Like I mentioned, earlier books and records,

0:28:33.800 --> 0:28:35.840
<v Speaker 3>the way that you're handling your operations. You need to

0:28:35.880 --> 0:28:39.000
<v Speaker 3>be able to draw some you know, sufficient level of

0:28:39.040 --> 0:28:40.200
<v Speaker 3>distinction between those.

0:28:40.480 --> 0:28:41.840
<v Speaker 2>But again, we're going to wait for the IRA.

0:28:42.160 --> 0:28:43.840
<v Speaker 3>I think most folks are gonna wait for that IRS

0:28:43.840 --> 0:28:47.440
<v Speaker 3>guidance to get a little bit more detail on exactly

0:28:47.440 --> 0:28:51.560
<v Speaker 3>how that should be pursued. And you know, as far

0:28:51.680 --> 0:28:54.600
<v Speaker 3>as how big of an impact it's going to be.

0:28:54.640 --> 0:28:56.840
<v Speaker 2>My next question, yeah, it's it's huge.

0:28:57.080 --> 0:29:02.400
<v Speaker 3>It's uh, this is the single most consequential event that's

0:29:02.440 --> 0:29:06.440
<v Speaker 3>occurred in the cannabis industry from a financial perspective, economic perspective,

0:29:07.120 --> 0:29:10.680
<v Speaker 3>really since the first state legalized medical cannabis.

0:29:10.720 --> 0:29:15.280
<v Speaker 2>Absolutely there are billions and billions.

0:29:14.960 --> 0:29:17.960
<v Speaker 3>Of dollars at stake right It's a very big number,

0:29:17.960 --> 0:29:22.360
<v Speaker 3>and on a going forward basis, it's it's it's critically important.

0:29:23.120 --> 0:29:25.280
<v Speaker 3>It may in fact save certain companies that may be

0:29:25.440 --> 0:29:29.080
<v Speaker 3>on the brink and those you know that are generally healthy,

0:29:29.160 --> 0:29:31.120
<v Speaker 3>I think just are going to have a larger war chest.

0:29:32.000 --> 0:29:35.480
<v Speaker 3>I will say, I think the number is huge, It's

0:29:35.480 --> 0:29:38.680
<v Speaker 3>going to be very significant, but.

0:29:41.520 --> 0:29:42.040
<v Speaker 2>You have to.

0:29:43.480 --> 0:29:45.720
<v Speaker 3>Weigh that against the fact that a lot of companies

0:29:46.160 --> 0:29:49.400
<v Speaker 3>have not always paid their tax is consistent with two

0:29:49.480 --> 0:29:56.200
<v Speaker 3>eighty eight right, and some have taken certain tax positions,

0:29:56.720 --> 0:29:59.640
<v Speaker 3>and some, frankly, some companies just have not been able

0:29:59.640 --> 0:30:02.520
<v Speaker 3>to af right and haven't paid it, and they owe

0:30:02.560 --> 0:30:05.680
<v Speaker 3>the IRS a lot of money. One thing that is

0:30:05.720 --> 0:30:10.280
<v Speaker 3>absolutely worth noting here is a little detail in the

0:30:10.440 --> 0:30:15.480
<v Speaker 3>order that suggested that the IRS or Treasury look at

0:30:15.520 --> 0:30:20.120
<v Speaker 3>the potential retroactive application of too ADE. In other words,

0:30:20.320 --> 0:30:22.400
<v Speaker 3>if you've been paying two ADE, if you've been paying

0:30:22.440 --> 0:30:24.920
<v Speaker 3>taxes complying with two ADE this whole time as a

0:30:24.920 --> 0:30:28.200
<v Speaker 3>cannabis company in the US, are you now going to

0:30:28.200 --> 0:30:32.400
<v Speaker 3>be entitled to a refund? And if you haven't paid

0:30:32.520 --> 0:30:35.200
<v Speaker 3>or you owe money to the IRS because you've underpaid

0:30:35.240 --> 0:30:38.440
<v Speaker 3>as a result of your position on two ADE, will

0:30:38.520 --> 0:30:42.240
<v Speaker 3>you ever need to pay that now? And I think

0:30:42.280 --> 0:30:45.840
<v Speaker 3>those are two questions the answers to which everybody in

0:30:45.880 --> 0:30:47.960
<v Speaker 3>the industry is very eager to understand.

0:30:49.320 --> 0:30:55.000
<v Speaker 1>Do you think that if recreational marijuana gets the look,

0:30:55.040 --> 0:30:58.400
<v Speaker 1>call it hallucinating, call it deschedulization. We'll go there, We'll

0:30:58.440 --> 0:31:03.959
<v Speaker 1>say deschiedulization. If recreational in marijuana gets deschedulized, do you

0:31:04.000 --> 0:31:06.000
<v Speaker 1>see Congress stepping in and saying we need to do

0:31:06.040 --> 0:31:08.480
<v Speaker 1>a new federal tax on marijuana.

0:31:09.120 --> 0:31:10.840
<v Speaker 3>Uh, it's hard for me to believe that they don't

0:31:10.840 --> 0:31:12.400
<v Speaker 3>want to put their hands in the cookie jar they

0:31:12.400 --> 0:31:16.080
<v Speaker 3>already have, right. Yeah, I've always joked the biggest the

0:31:16.080 --> 0:31:19.120
<v Speaker 3>biggest launderer of money in the United States must be

0:31:19.320 --> 0:31:22.320
<v Speaker 3>like the US Treasury because they're collecting taxes from state

0:31:22.440 --> 0:31:27.640
<v Speaker 3>licensed cannabis companies for all these years. So, uh, we're

0:31:27.640 --> 0:31:30.880
<v Speaker 3>gonna need are they going to add something to If

0:31:30.880 --> 0:31:33.200
<v Speaker 3>Congress does need to act, I could see a tax

0:31:33.280 --> 0:31:35.160
<v Speaker 3>being placed back onto cannabis.

0:31:35.160 --> 0:31:36.960
<v Speaker 2>I don't think it's going to look like too AD.

0:31:37.160 --> 0:31:40.320
<v Speaker 3>It's completely you know, the way that two AD applies

0:31:40.400 --> 0:31:41.560
<v Speaker 3>is absolutely egregious.

0:31:41.600 --> 0:31:42.880
<v Speaker 2>It's intended to be a penalty.

0:31:43.040 --> 0:31:45.560
<v Speaker 3>You raise money. You need to raise tax revenue. Look

0:31:45.600 --> 0:31:48.160
<v Speaker 3>that this is a way to do it. When you

0:31:48.240 --> 0:31:50.400
<v Speaker 3>introduce a bill into Congress and it has to go

0:31:50.440 --> 0:31:53.440
<v Speaker 3>through the Congressional Budget Office, uh, it's going to get

0:31:53.720 --> 0:31:56.080
<v Speaker 3>a budd it's going to get a score. And if

0:31:56.080 --> 0:32:00.000
<v Speaker 3>it's budget neutral, great. I don't know how many lawmakers

0:32:00.080 --> 0:32:03.360
<v Speaker 3>introduced bills to the floor that have a negative impact

0:32:03.360 --> 0:32:06.680
<v Speaker 3>on the federal budget. So if you're now going to

0:32:07.040 --> 0:32:09.760
<v Speaker 3>introduce a piece of legislation that's going to require a

0:32:09.760 --> 0:32:13.280
<v Speaker 3>lot of resources from a variety of federal agencies, the FDA,

0:32:13.440 --> 0:32:17.280
<v Speaker 3>the DEA, the USDA, you name it. There are a

0:32:17.320 --> 0:32:20.920
<v Speaker 3>ton right that comes at a cost. How are they

0:32:20.960 --> 0:32:23.760
<v Speaker 3>going to offset that cost? It would seem very convenient

0:32:23.800 --> 0:32:28.800
<v Speaker 3>if they introduce some federal tax I. Hope they don't,

0:32:28.960 --> 0:32:30.200
<v Speaker 3>but it wouldn't surprise me.

0:32:31.160 --> 0:32:33.920
<v Speaker 1>So let's just game it out. It's the year is

0:32:33.960 --> 0:32:38.680
<v Speaker 1>twenty thirty, maybe twenty thirty one. We're all retired because

0:32:38.720 --> 0:32:40.840
<v Speaker 1>we've all made millions and we're sitting on the beach somewhere.

0:32:40.880 --> 0:32:43.160
<v Speaker 1>But you know, let's just let's game it out. So

0:32:43.200 --> 0:32:46.680
<v Speaker 1>it's twenty thirty or twenty thirty one. Deschedulization occurs this year,

0:32:46.760 --> 0:32:50.440
<v Speaker 1>and we've gone to a world that marijuana is effectively decriminalized.

0:32:51.200 --> 0:32:54.080
<v Speaker 1>You know, five years from now, are we in a

0:32:54.160 --> 0:32:58.360
<v Speaker 1>scenario where the marijuana industry is thriving or are they

0:32:58.440 --> 0:33:02.920
<v Speaker 1>struggling because of high taxation, high regulation. One of the

0:33:03.040 --> 0:33:05.360
<v Speaker 1>questions I've always I've always had, and I just I'm

0:33:05.400 --> 0:33:09.160
<v Speaker 1>turning to you for your expertise here is if you've

0:33:09.200 --> 0:33:12.480
<v Speaker 1>got a product that will be taxed they'll be regulated,

0:33:12.480 --> 0:33:14.920
<v Speaker 1>et cetera. And it's competing against something that people can

0:33:14.920 --> 0:33:17.840
<v Speaker 1>grow in their basement. You know, how does the what

0:33:17.880 --> 0:33:20.640
<v Speaker 1>does the marijuana industry look for you in four years?

0:33:20.960 --> 0:33:23.640
<v Speaker 3>I wish I knew the answer to that question. Probably

0:33:23.680 --> 0:33:26.520
<v Speaker 3>would't be sitting here if I knew. And it doesn't

0:33:26.560 --> 0:33:28.600
<v Speaker 3>look I could tell you this, It doesn't. This is

0:33:28.680 --> 0:33:33.320
<v Speaker 3>not the the This is not the uh, the story

0:33:33.320 --> 0:33:35.160
<v Speaker 3>that I thought i'd be telling right the way that

0:33:35.200 --> 0:33:38.480
<v Speaker 3>it's happened now, it's so unique and very few people

0:33:38.520 --> 0:33:43.000
<v Speaker 3>I think have have really could have predicted how it's happened.

0:33:43.040 --> 0:33:45.600
<v Speaker 3>So I have no clue really what will happen, But

0:33:45.600 --> 0:33:48.600
<v Speaker 3>I have a sense and what I think happens that

0:33:48.640 --> 0:33:51.640
<v Speaker 3>you know, take it five years from now, the cannabis

0:33:51.640 --> 0:33:54.880
<v Speaker 3>industry is not going to mean the same thing that

0:33:54.920 --> 0:33:58.040
<v Speaker 3>it means today, and in all likelihood you have an

0:33:58.080 --> 0:34:03.600
<v Speaker 3>industry that's really multiple industries with a connective tissue of

0:34:03.640 --> 0:34:10.000
<v Speaker 3>the cannabis plant. We are already seeing the pharmaceutical application

0:34:10.520 --> 0:34:13.440
<v Speaker 3>of cannabinoids happening now.

0:34:13.760 --> 0:34:16.200
<v Speaker 2>There already are FDA approved drugs.

0:34:16.880 --> 0:34:21.360
<v Speaker 3>The pharmaceutical and drug discovery pathway is going to create

0:34:21.440 --> 0:34:25.560
<v Speaker 3>massive opportunity. It is creating, has created, and there is

0:34:25.840 --> 0:34:28.640
<v Speaker 3>a tremendous amount of opportunity in that space. There will

0:34:28.680 --> 0:34:31.879
<v Speaker 3>be a pharmaceutical aspect to the cannabis industry. It will

0:34:31.920 --> 0:34:34.760
<v Speaker 3>be you know, on its own, which is very different

0:34:34.800 --> 0:34:39.280
<v Speaker 3>and completely distinct from the adult use industry. The adult

0:34:39.360 --> 0:34:43.200
<v Speaker 3>use industry instead of looking like perhaps the pharmaceutical pathway

0:34:43.520 --> 0:34:44.920
<v Speaker 3>will probably.

0:34:44.400 --> 0:34:45.880
<v Speaker 2>Look a lot like alcohol.

0:34:46.280 --> 0:34:47.920
<v Speaker 3>There are a lot of reasons to believe that it

0:34:47.960 --> 0:34:52.240
<v Speaker 3>will be regulated in a very similar fashion. This looks

0:34:52.320 --> 0:34:55.399
<v Speaker 3>a lot like of course it's different, but you can draw,

0:34:55.520 --> 0:34:58.839
<v Speaker 3>you know, a lot of similarities here. History doesn't offer

0:34:58.920 --> 0:35:02.600
<v Speaker 3>repeat but it usually times. The way that prohibition ended

0:35:02.800 --> 0:35:06.520
<v Speaker 3>and what happened following that, you have federal regulation of

0:35:06.560 --> 0:35:13.080
<v Speaker 3>an industry around interstate commerce and transport, and the end

0:35:13.080 --> 0:35:17.319
<v Speaker 3>of organized crime in the liquor industry post prohibition in

0:35:17.360 --> 0:35:22.439
<v Speaker 3>the thirties. However, I believe it was Mississippi, could be wrong.

0:35:22.440 --> 0:35:24.719
<v Speaker 3>It's one of the southern states, but Mississippi was dry

0:35:24.840 --> 0:35:28.200
<v Speaker 3>until nineteen sixty four. So it's not going to be

0:35:29.640 --> 0:35:32.840
<v Speaker 3>legalized regulated cannabis as ubiquitous across the country.

0:35:32.840 --> 0:35:33.800
<v Speaker 2>That's not going to happen.

0:35:33.840 --> 0:35:36.640
<v Speaker 3>Certain states may never or may not for many, many years,

0:35:36.640 --> 0:35:39.480
<v Speaker 3>if not decades, legalized cannabis in any form or fashion.

0:35:40.520 --> 0:35:42.880
<v Speaker 3>They may just not allow it in their state, and

0:35:43.280 --> 0:35:46.319
<v Speaker 3>they'll instead of being dry, I guess, they won't be green.

0:35:47.040 --> 0:35:49.759
<v Speaker 3>And so it's important to note that it won't be

0:35:49.840 --> 0:35:53.040
<v Speaker 3>everywhere right, It's a state level decision in all likelihood

0:35:53.040 --> 0:35:55.120
<v Speaker 3>as it relates to adult use, but it probably is

0:35:55.160 --> 0:35:56.880
<v Speaker 3>going to look quite a bit like alcohol at the

0:35:56.960 --> 0:36:00.600
<v Speaker 3>end of the day, cannabis when even framing it under

0:36:00.640 --> 0:36:04.240
<v Speaker 3>the within the Controlled Substances Act and what we're about

0:36:04.239 --> 0:36:06.840
<v Speaker 3>to see in the herring adult use cannabis may not

0:36:06.960 --> 0:36:09.200
<v Speaker 3>have a currently accepted medical use is if it does,

0:36:09.239 --> 0:36:13.239
<v Speaker 3>it's already that's scheduled three cannabis. But you know it

0:36:13.280 --> 0:36:16.520
<v Speaker 3>has some potential for abuse. What looks like that? What

0:36:16.600 --> 0:36:18.839
<v Speaker 3>else can we compare that to? We can compare it

0:36:18.880 --> 0:36:25.239
<v Speaker 3>to caffeine, alcohol, nicotine, and those things are all regulated

0:36:25.640 --> 0:36:29.160
<v Speaker 3>by a variety of agencies. And you know the one

0:36:29.160 --> 0:36:31.280
<v Speaker 3>that it looks most like is probably alcohol.

0:36:32.040 --> 0:36:34.799
<v Speaker 1>No, it makes sense. And you know when I was

0:36:34.880 --> 0:36:36.840
<v Speaker 1>I mentioned before I had gone to Purdue. You know,

0:36:37.080 --> 0:36:39.680
<v Speaker 1>Purdue was in a dry county for a certain extent.

0:36:39.719 --> 0:36:41.720
<v Speaker 1>So on Sundays we had to drive thirty five miles

0:36:41.719 --> 0:36:44.000
<v Speaker 1>to Hoops in Illinois to buy alcohol. Not that we

0:36:44.040 --> 0:36:47.520
<v Speaker 1>did my dad's listening. I was studying. But you know, obviously,

0:36:48.560 --> 0:36:50.920
<v Speaker 1>you know, obviously state laws have to come to play here.

0:36:51.040 --> 0:36:53.560
<v Speaker 1>So let's go to our last fun question. This is

0:36:53.560 --> 0:36:56.920
<v Speaker 1>a question that we always asks our guests, you know,

0:36:57.000 --> 0:37:00.799
<v Speaker 1>each episode we ask them which three records albums would

0:37:00.800 --> 0:37:03.520
<v Speaker 1>you take on a deserted island? So, Jeff, if you

0:37:03.560 --> 0:37:06.319
<v Speaker 1>were stuck on that deserted island, and to be fair,

0:37:07.160 --> 0:37:09.600
<v Speaker 1>we use records of albums very loosely. It could just

0:37:09.600 --> 0:37:12.680
<v Speaker 1>be bands, could be whatever you'd like. What would you

0:37:12.719 --> 0:37:13.040
<v Speaker 1>bring with.

0:37:14.520 --> 0:37:17.480
<v Speaker 2>It's a great question and very difficult answer. I could

0:37:17.520 --> 0:37:18.080
<v Speaker 2>say that I'll.

0:37:17.920 --> 0:37:20.080
<v Speaker 3>Give you three albums, but I probably would swap them

0:37:20.080 --> 0:37:24.480
<v Speaker 3>out with a long number behind it. The top three

0:37:24.520 --> 0:37:27.080
<v Speaker 3>album What would I bring with me? I would take

0:37:27.120 --> 0:37:32.719
<v Speaker 3>with me? I would take with me the first one

0:37:32.800 --> 0:37:35.560
<v Speaker 3>I'm gonna go with A live show. It's not available

0:37:35.560 --> 0:37:39.719
<v Speaker 3>on Spotify, but A Grateful Dead show, Oh, excellent, five

0:37:39.760 --> 0:37:43.000
<v Speaker 3>eight seventy seven. I know that's a controversial show, but

0:37:43.200 --> 0:37:45.319
<v Speaker 3>it was my favorite. That's how I started listening to

0:37:45.360 --> 0:37:48.880
<v Speaker 3>the group, and it's my opinion their best performance of

0:37:48.880 --> 0:37:51.439
<v Speaker 3>all time. Number two would be an album called jay

0:37:51.480 --> 0:37:55.680
<v Speaker 3>Dilla Donuts. He's a hip hop producer whos passed away

0:37:56.480 --> 0:38:00.840
<v Speaker 3>from Detroit, from suburban Detroit, and I think it's the

0:38:00.880 --> 0:38:04.000
<v Speaker 3>best best hip hop album that's that's ever been produced,

0:38:04.040 --> 0:38:05.800
<v Speaker 3>and I listened to it all the time.

0:38:06.680 --> 0:38:09.800
<v Speaker 2>Last one, i'd say, Miles Day is kind of blue. Okay,

0:38:10.600 --> 0:38:13.360
<v Speaker 2>probably the most listened to albums of the three.

0:38:13.480 --> 0:38:16.040
<v Speaker 3>But I've got a nicalactic interest and could replace this

0:38:16.160 --> 0:38:17.120
<v Speaker 3>with almost anything.

0:38:17.800 --> 0:38:19.920
<v Speaker 1>No, that's great. Now, I'm actually going to google the

0:38:20.520 --> 0:38:22.279
<v Speaker 1>second one you just mentioned. I'm going to pick that

0:38:22.360 --> 0:38:24.960
<v Speaker 1>up and listen to the Doughnuts. Yeah, I'm going to

0:38:25.000 --> 0:38:27.560
<v Speaker 1>listen to that this afternoon because I've never I've never

0:38:27.600 --> 0:38:30.239
<v Speaker 1>heard that before. So we're we're definitely going to do that,

0:38:30.320 --> 0:38:34.000
<v Speaker 1>and but you know, we'll go ahead and end that there. So, Jeff,

0:38:34.040 --> 0:38:36.600
<v Speaker 1>thank you very much. We are extremely grateful you for

0:38:36.840 --> 0:38:40.279
<v Speaker 1>attending whats and Verdicts. As a reminder, you can read

0:38:40.280 --> 0:38:43.040
<v Speaker 1>all of our Bloomberg intelligence research on the Bloomberg terminal

0:38:43.080 --> 0:38:45.279
<v Speaker 1>at BI go. You can access all of our BI

0:38:45.400 --> 0:38:48.880
<v Speaker 1>litigation and policy dashboard research at BI Laws. We'd like

0:38:48.920 --> 0:38:51.440
<v Speaker 1>to thank our producers at DTA Somoni and Mariam Treori,

0:38:51.520 --> 0:38:53.680
<v Speaker 1>who without whom this episode would never publish on time,

0:38:53.800 --> 0:38:56.000
<v Speaker 1>or maybe at all. So thank you again and have

0:38:56.040 --> 0:38:56.640
<v Speaker 1>a great date.