We wrote a couple of times about the Department of Cannabis Control’s (DCC) proposed emergency regulations. See here and here. Under those regulations, some interesting changes were proposed around the definitions of owners and financial interest holders, alongside restrictions on license stacking on “contiguous” premises (among other things). On September 15, 2021, the DCC submitted
I’ve preached before on the blog about how often our firm gets pulled into M&A deals where the parties have screwed up reporting the transaction to cannabis regulators on both the state and local levels. In California, in particular, changes of ownership have been a painful affair where the Bureau of Cannabis Control (“BCC”) routinely
Many people ignore or just don’t want to believe the fact that, until recently, California was a bit of a villain when it comes to the manufacture, distribution, and sale of industrial hemp derived products, namely hemp CBD in food, beverages, dietary supplements, animal products, and cosmetics. However, AB-45 is going to change all of
On September 8, 2021, the California Department of Cannabis Control (DCC) published proposed emergency cannabis regulations. These emergency regulations harmonize the previous regulations that were ported over from the prior three agencies into one combined set, and they modify some of those rules and add also new ones. The DCC also published a revised set
Most business purchase transactions we see in the cannabis space are structured to have a concept of “closing”, which I’ve described before here. Essentially, this means that the parties sign, there is some gap of time for them to take care of certain things, and then the business is sold. Today, I want to examine
For the past few years, I have been engaged as an expert witness on a series of cannabis litigation matters here in Oregon. The way litigants use experts varies across jurisdictions due to local rules of evidence and other factors, but in any jurisdiction, compelling expert testimony can make or break a case. In this
The City of L.A. has had no shortage of tweaks and changes to its cannabis laws and regulations over the past four years. Admirably, as industry issues have arisen, the City and its Department of Cannabis Regulation (“DCR“) have tried to keep pace. At times though, that pace has been glacial much to the chagrin
Last month, I wrote a post explaining some of the issues buyers of cannabis businesses face when dealing with the landlords for the purchased business. In a nutshell, leases almost always contain clauses restricting assignment and subletting, and these clauses will often note that certain changes of control of the cannabis tenant are considered assignments
Nationwide, cannabis companies and advocates are hailing the Cannabis Administration and Opportunity Act as the savior of the future of cannabis (a copy of the bill is here). If the Act passes, we will finally have federal legalization and the consequences of the current federal conflict will end, or, at least be reversed in the
Getting to closing on a cannabis M&A transaction is always a hurdle (read about that process in detail here). There are always a lot more contingencies to closing for cannabis M&A transactions than for run-of-the-mill businesses that don’t operate in highly regulated fields (e.g., cannabis acquisitions will require approval from state and possibly local agencies).
