Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cash-only marijuana dispensaries flood California tax office with paper
The Guardian ^ | Tuesday 16 February 2016 | Anita Chabria

Posted on 02/16/2016 12:04:23 PM PST by TroutStalker

The Sacramento branch of the California tax collection agency reeks of marijuana.

That's because it's cash day at the collection center - when marijuana dispensary owners are allowed to bring in paper money to pay their quarterly sales tax bill - and the smell of their inventory clings to everything.

California, like all states with any form of legalized marijuana, faces a growing problem over the federal government's position that cannabis remains a Schedule 1 illegal drug, classified the same way as meth or cocaine, with no legal uses - and therefore no legal access to traditional banks.

That means medical marijuana dispensaries, along with growers, distributors and other marijuana-related businesses that are operating legally under state laws, have no choice but to be cash-only businesses. They can't write checks, deposit money in financial institutions or make credit card transactions.

"We've been a cash industry for ever and it has been quite a problem," said Kimberly, the director of a non-profit dispensary in Sacramento who asked that her last name not be used for safety reasons. "We don't want to drive around town paying our bills in cash. We want to be able to just go to the bank."

(Excerpt) Read more at theguardian.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: cannabis; corruption; crime; federal; imminent; marijuana; pot; wod
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-57 last
To: dmz

Why are you locked in to illicit always means illegal?

Why do you say morality simply does not apply?

Laws are in fact moral decisions.

“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.”

Is abortion legal? Sure is. Is it illicit?

You honestly are arguing it is not?


41 posted on 02/16/2016 1:49:33 PM PST by Responsibility2nd (Is Ted Cruz a US Citizen? Yeah? Then Shut Up and Vote for Him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Thank you for answering my question.


42 posted on 02/16/2016 1:51:07 PM PST by TroutStalker ("Protect the hypersensitive. Ban everything.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
My bank (top 50 in the US) does not accept accounts from sex industry businesses or from predatory payday lenders.

Nor are they forced to accept such despite their legality - so you've answered your own question.

43 posted on 02/16/2016 1:54:47 PM PST by ConservingFreedom (Trump fans:'he's no more conservative than Mitt'-www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3389209/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
More government

Wrong - regulating is less burdensome than banning.

and more taxes.

Should we ban every currently taxed product and service in order to have less taxes?

44 posted on 02/16/2016 1:58:28 PM PST by ConservingFreedom (Trump fans:'he's no more conservative than Mitt'-www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3389209/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: familyop

CO received $135 million in legal mj tax revenue in 2015, which is more than it got from alcohol.


45 posted on 02/16/2016 2:08:41 PM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ConservingFreedom

so you’ve answered your own question.

________________________________________________

Pretty sure there was no question in post 29 to be answered.

So thanks for an answer that was basically gibberish anyway.


46 posted on 02/16/2016 2:21:39 PM PST by Responsibility2nd (Is Ted Cruz a US Citizen? Yeah? Then Shut Up and Vote for Him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
so you've answered your own question.

Pretty sure there was no question in post 29

There was 2 posts further back in the chain: "are you going to FORCE the banks to accept illicit drug money accounts and deposits?"

47 posted on 02/16/2016 2:27:22 PM PST by ConservingFreedom (Trump fans:'he's no more conservative than Mitt'-www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3389209/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: ConservingFreedom

40,000 new laws (regulations) PER YEAR is not more than enough government for you?

http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2012/apr/27/ron-paul/ron-paul-says-40000-new-laws-were-put-books-first-/

And only a liar would believe the state is not relaxing dope laws so that they can fill their pockets with tax money.

Case in point: This very article (bttt) on the problems of collecting all that money.


48 posted on 02/16/2016 2:31:42 PM PST by Responsibility2nd (Is Ted Cruz a US Citizen? Yeah? Then Shut Up and Vote for Him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: ConservingFreedom
Sure, but what was the key question? I repeat it for you in large font.

Much the same way the Idiot Feds FORCE businesses to conduct gay marriages?

The answer is - while YOU may not care if banks are forced to accept money from illicit (meaning immoral) sources, conservative businesses DO WANT a say-so in these matters.

Just because it's legal doesn't make it right.

May I presume you still oppose abortion? It's legal, right, so who are we to gripe about our TAX DOLLARS paying for infanticide, right?

 

49 posted on 02/16/2016 2:39:10 PM PST by Responsibility2nd (Is Ted Cruz a US Citizen? Yeah? Then Shut Up and Vote for Him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
Wrong - regulating is less burdensome than banning.

40,000 new laws (regulations) PER YEAR is not more than enough government for you?

Opposite - burdensome banning laws are too much government for me.

and more taxes.

Should we ban every currently taxed product and service in order to have less taxes?

And only a liar would believe the state is not relaxing dope laws so that they can fill their pockets with tax money.

Only a liar would pretend I said or implied any such thing.

50 posted on 02/16/2016 2:43:44 PM PST by ConservingFreedom (Trump fans:'he's no more conservative than Mitt'-www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3389209/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
YOU may not care if banks are forced to accept money from illicit (meaning immoral) sources

The example you posted shows banks are not so forced: "My bank (top 50 in the US) does not accept accounts from sex industry businesses or from predatory payday lenders."

51 posted on 02/16/2016 2:45:30 PM PST by ConservingFreedom (Trump fans:'he's no more conservative than Mitt'-www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3389209/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: ConservingFreedom

Yeah. And that could change overnight. A regulation (which you are on record here supporting more regulations) could be passed tomorrow REQUIRING my bank to do business with whores and payday lenders.


52 posted on 02/16/2016 2:48:57 PM PST by Responsibility2nd (Is Ted Cruz a US Citizen? Yeah? Then Shut Up and Vote for Him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
Not necessarily. My bank (top 50 in the US) does not accept accounts from sex industry businesses or from predatory payday lenders. May be legal businesses, but they are illicit.

Cool. They don't need to accept business from people they don't approve of (unless the business they don't approve of is a gay bathhouse, at which point they either do business or get the "bake the damn cake or else" treatment).

Meanwhile, upon full legalization, there would be other banks to accept the business. Or the medical marijuana people could open THEIR OWN BANK.

53 posted on 02/16/2016 2:52:06 PM PST by PapaBear3625 (Big government is attractive to those who think that THEY will be in control of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
regulating is less burdensome than banning.

you are on record here supporting more regulations

False.

54 posted on 02/16/2016 2:53:25 PM PST by ConservingFreedom (Trump fans:'he's no more conservative than Mitt'-www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3389209/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: ConservingFreedom
regulating is less burdensome than banning.

you are on record here supporting more regulations

False.

 

 

 

Fine. Then you are on record here supporting more BANNING!

 

(God, arguing with you dopers is like arguing with brain damaged lib.)

55 posted on 02/16/2016 2:56:57 PM PST by Responsibility2nd (Is Ted Cruz a US Citizen? Yeah? Then Shut Up and Vote for Him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd; ConservingFreedom
(God, arguing with you dopers is like arguing with brain damaged lib.)

I find some of your conclusions and logic . . lacking. One example is your giving marijuana laws on equal ground to abortion. They are two totally different animals. Abortion is illicit because God has declared it so. Marijuana, not so much. Gen. 1:29 And God said, "See, I have given every herb that yields seeds which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seeds; to you it shall be for food."

56 posted on 02/16/2016 4:44:49 PM PST by BipolarBob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
regulating is less burdensome than banning.

you are on record here supporting more regulations

False.

Fine. Then you are on record here supporting more BANNING!

You've got it backward as usual. Banning is the greater burden, and I support the lesser burden of legalization with sensible constraints.

(God, arguing with you dopers is like arguing with brain damaged lib.)

The irony is priceless.

57 posted on 02/17/2016 7:24:53 AM PST by ConservingFreedom (Trump fans:'he's no more conservative than Mitt'-www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3389209/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-57 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson