Most people who aren’t familiar with California cannabis regulation are surprised to learn that legal cannabis is actually pretty rare throughout the state. Most cities and counties prohibit or severely restrict cannabis licensing. This includes most cities in Los Angeles county, and until recently, the county itself. But that’s all changing, because LA County will
我曾犹豫是否该写篇"节日反思"，盘点2021年大麻产业遭遇的所有挫折。但转念一想，更想聚焦2022年的积极面——随着产业在美国及全球持续成熟扩张，值此岁末之际，以下是我对新年的展望：
试着问任何一位优秀的律师：“大麻企业的公司治理重要吗？”答案必然是肯定的。那么，为什么它常常被忽视呢？为什么这么多大麻企业将治理视为清单上只需勾选一次的选项？以下是我们的大麻法律顾问们屡见不鲜的一个典型案例：
加州大麻税持续困扰着整个行业。加州大麻税无疑很高（尽管并非全美最高）。现实情况是，这种状况短期内不会改变。几周前，我在KCRW电台的访谈中，多位从业者对当前加州大麻税收状况表示痛心疾首。鉴于现状，他们的抱怨完全合理。
On the 25th anniversary of Prop. 215, I was recently interviewed on KCRW to give my take on how California (and specifically the City of Los Angeles) has done when it comes to legalizing and licensing cannabis businesses. I’m a pretty tough critic of California in general if you read any of my writings on
Cannabis licensing has a pretty standard trajectory by this point in time. States tend to start out with medical programs and later adopt recreational programs. What usually happens is that the recreational cannabis market swallows up the medical market. The majority of medical operators will seek out and get authorization to sell recreational cannabis, and
正如我们预期的那样，加州全面规范（并合法化）工业大麻产品的AB-45法案现已正式生效。纽森州长本周签署该法案使其成为法律。这对蓬勃发展的加州大麻产品市场而言，无疑是朝着正确方向迈出的重大一步。当加州在工业大麻领域取得如此进展时，
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
许多人忽视或不愿承认这样一个事实：直到最近，加利福尼亚州在工业大麻衍生产品的生产、分销和销售方面仍扮演着某种反派角色——这些产品包括食品、饮料、膳食补充剂、动物产品及化妆品中的大麻CBD。然而，AB-45法案即将改变这一切。
