Nesteggg Accounting

BUREAU OF CANNABIS CONTROL; § 5734. Satisfactory and Unsatisfactory Proficiency Test Performance

(a) The laboratory shall be deemed to have successfully participated in a PT program for an analyte tested in a specific method if the test results demonstrate a “satisfactory” or otherwise proficient performance determination by the PT program provider. (b) The laboratory may not report test results for analytes that are deemed by the PT program provider as “unacceptable,” “questionable,” “unsatisfactory”, or otherwise deficient. (c) The laboratory may resume reporting test results for analytes that were deemed “unacceptable,” “questionable,” “unsatisfactory”, or otherwise deficient, only if both of the following conditions are met: (1) The laboratory satisfactorily remedies the cause of the failure for each analyte; and (2) The laboratory submits, to the Bureau, a written report demonstrating how the laboratory has fixed the cause of the failure. Authority: Section 26013, Business and Professions Code. Reference: Sections 26100 and 26110, Business and Professions Code.

Readoption of Emergency Cannabis Regulations

Licensing Authorities Announce Proposed Readoption of Emergency

Cannabis Regulations

The Bureau of Cannabis Control, California Department of Public Health and California Department of Food and Agriculture have proposed to readopt their emergency regulations that are currently in effect, extending the time those regulations are in effect for another 180-day period. The three licensing authorities are proposing some changes to the regulatory provisions to provide greater clarity to licensees and to address issues that have arisen since the emergency regulations went into effect.

Highlighted among the proposed changes is that applicants may now complete one license application and obtain one license to conduct medicinal and adult-use cannabis activity. Additionally, licensees may continue to engage in commercial cannabis activities with other licensees regardless of designation as this provision is no longer limited by time.

“These proposed changes to our emergency regulations are based on feedback from our stakeholders, and information gathered over the first four months of implementation,” said Bureau of Cannabis Control Chief Lori Ajax.

Other highlighted changes from each licensing authority’s proposed emergency regulations can be viewed by clicking the following links listed below:

Bureau of Cannabis Control:

California Department of Food and Agriculture:

California Department of Public Health:

PUBLIC COMMENT: The proposed readoption of the emergency regulations will be subject to a public comment period. The public comment period will begin when the California Office of Administrative Law (OAL) posts the proposed emergency regulations on its website and will last 5 calendar days. The posting may not occur before May 25, 2018, to allow for the 5 working day notice to the public that the licensing authorities provided today.

The emergency regulations were developed to implement the Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (MAUCRSA), which was signed into law in June 2017. The initial emergency regulations became effective on December 7, 2017, and remain in effect for 180 days. The readoption will allow the emergency regulations, as modified, to be in effect for an additional 180 days. During this time, the three licensing authorities will engage in the regular rulemaking process to develop final regulations.

For additional information about the proposed readoption of the emergency regulations, or to subscribe to email alerts to hear about updates as they become available, please visit the Bureau’s website at http://www.bcc.ca.gov/. For information on all three state licensing authorities, please visit the state’s California Cannabis Portal at https://cannabis.ca.gov/. Follow the Bureau on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram for daily news and updates.

Those looking to get in touch with the Bureau of Cannabis Control can call our Call Center at (833) 768-5880, or send an email to bcc@dca.ca.gov OR contact NestEggg’s Cannabis Compliant Accounting &Tax for more information on how this can effect your business.

FEDERAL CANNABIS UPDATE: 2018

FEDERAL CANNABIS UPDATE: 2018 SPENDING BILL KEEPS ROHRABACHER-BLUMENAUER AMENDMENT

Last week, despite controversy, criticism from both sides of the aisle, and talk of a veto, President Trump agreed to sign the federal government’s omnibus spending bill for 2018. To the relief of many in the legal cannabis industry, the spending bill retains a provision known as the Rohrabacher-Blumenauer (or Rohrabacher-Farr) amendment, which provides limited protection from federal prosecution for state-level legal cannabis activity.

Given both Trump’s and Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ tough talk on drugs and threats to crack down on the cannabis industry, the continued presence of this amendment is a silver lining for those anxious about the future of legal cannabis. While this won’t mean a change in the federal treatment of marijuana – the amendment has been included in every spending bill since 2014 – it does indicate that the government intends to keep on its current course with regard to cannabis, as the provision has to be renewed every year to remain in effect.

Likewise, though the actual protections afforded by the Rohrabacher-Blumenauer amendment are limited, its being signed into law was, and remains, an important indication of the federal government’s shift in attitude regarding cannabis: as the LA Times reported following the provision’s first inclusion in the spending bill, “Congress for years had resisted calls to allow states to chart their own path on pot. The marijuana measure, which forbids the federal government from using any of its resources to impede state medical marijuana laws, was previously rejected half a dozen times.” In this light, the amendment was a notable pivot from a top-down to a state-level approach to cannabis regulation.

California cannabis consumers and business owners shouldn’t get too comfortable, though: not only does the amendment not change anything about the federal government’s cannabis policy in and of itself, its terms only apply to medical marijuana, not recreational cannabis. So far, the government has rejected proposed amendments that would grant recreational cannabis operations the same protection from federal intervention. For the time being, California cannabis business owners’ best bet is to stay in full compliance with state and local law as the federal situation develops.

Special Thanks to MARGOLIN & LAWRENCE for Content Share

Stay Connected

Nesteggg Facebook

The Nesteggg Group ©2019
All Rights Reserved

Get in Touch

1127 St. Paul Ave
Tacoma WA 98421

1-(888) 987-NEST

accounting@nesteggg.com

Web Design & Maintenance by AquaZebra

constant contact