California 2021-2022 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB725

Introduced
2/16/21  
Introduced
2/16/21  
Refer
2/25/21  
Report Pass
3/18/21  
Report Pass
3/18/21  
Refer
3/22/21  
Refer
3/22/21  

Caption

Cannabis tax: penalty.

Impact

If enacted, AB 725 would specifically ease financial penalties for licensed cannabis cultivators, potentially increasing compliance and encouraging growth within the legal cannabis industry. By removing the penalty for nonpayment of taxes for licensed retailers, the bill aims to motivate timely tax payment without the fear of exacerbating financial troubles through additional penalties. The removal of such penalties may help stabilize legal cannabis businesses that have struggled with the intricate financial and regulatory landscape since the introduction of AUMA.

Summary

Assembly Bill 725, introduced by Assembly Member Ward, aims to amend Section 34013 of the Revenue and Taxation Code concerning the penalties associated with cannabis taxation under the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA), which was enacted as Proposition 64. This bill seeks to eliminate the monetary penalty currently imposed on licensed cultivators who fail to pay excise or cultivation taxes, while maintaining penalties for unlicensed individuals who do not comply with these tax requirements. The legislation represents an effort to support licensed cannabis businesses by reducing their financial burdens, particularly for those facing the challenges of compliance in a regulated market.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding AB 725 appears to lean towards supportive views among those who advocate for the cannabis industry and its economic potential. Proponents argue that the removal of the monetary penalties will foster a more conducive environment for legal operators and ultimately enhance state revenues from cannabis taxation. On the other hand, there are reservations from critics who may perceive the removal of penalties as undermining accountability among licensed cultivators, questioning whether it might encourage laxity in tax compliance.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the decision to preserve penalties for unlicensed individuals while alleviating financial burdens for licensed operators. This dichotomy raises questions about fairness and equity within the cannabis industry. Opponents of the bill might argue that eliminating penalties for licensed businesses could potentially lead to situations where compliance becomes less strict, creating trust issues between regulators and cultivators. The discussions and evaluations in the legislative process will focus on balancing support for the cannabis economy while ensuring continued compliance with tax obligations.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Previously Filed As

CA SB1059

Cannabis: local taxation: gross receipts.

CA SB512

Cannabis: taxation: gross receipts.

CA AB3248

Cannabis excise tax: rate reduction.

CA AB1684

Local ordinances: fines and penalties: cannabis.

CA AB766

Cannabis: invoices: payment.

CA AB2223

Cannabis: industrial hemp.

CA AB1565

California Cannabis Tax Fund: local equity program grants.

CA AB1616

California Cannabis Tax Fund: Board of State and Community Corrections grants.

CA AB2643

Cannabis cultivation: environmental remediation.

CA AB687

California Cannabis Authority.

Similar Bills

CA SB1059

Cannabis: local taxation: gross receipts.

CA AB948

Cannabis: taxation: electronic funds transfer.

CA AB1741

Cannabis: taxation: electronic funds transfer.

CA SB1336

Planning and zoning: housing development: higher education institutions and religious institutions.

CA SB195

Cannabis.

CA AB195

Cannabis.

CA AB895

Personal Income Tax Law: Corporation Tax Law: credits: fast food restaurants.

CA AB110

In-home supportive services provider wages: emergency caregiver payments for foster care: civil immigration detainees: recording fees.