A new bill filed in the Washington State Senate is seeking to prohibit local marijuana businesses from using bitcoin.
Sponsored by Senators Steve Conway and Ann Rivers, SB 5264 seeks to amend some of the state’s rules governing the sale and distribution of marijuana products. The move comes more than four years after Washington voters passed a ballot measure legalizing marijuana in November 2012.
Under the proposed rule, businesses that work in the local marijuana industry would not be allowed to either pay for goods with digital currency or accept those kinds of payments from customers. The bill also includes a definition of "virtual currency" that explicitly targets "digital representation[s] of value used as a medium of exchange, a unit of account, or a store of value", but excludes the "the software or protocols governing the transfer".
Digital currency offers a unique opportunity for the legal cannabis industry to grow at its current rate and prepare for Federal legalization. Payments with credit card and digital currency are highly trackable, cash is not. If it is the state's wish to not be able to track cannabis payments, incentivize money laundering and keep the industry a step behind, then this bill would do just that.
Forcing the industry into cash is not only a bad idea, but creates significant risk for community and surrounding businesses. Being a high volume cash business with no banking options creates significant strain within the industry and creates a target for would-be criminals.
Furthermore, collection of taxes is difficult and time consuming when using cash. Digital currency poses a unique opportunity to track the cannabis industries payments leaving a fully auditable trail.
It's time we move into the future and tell Senator Conway and Rivers to not limit innovation, but to protect it. Allow cannabis businesses to use digital currency, move into the future and keep our communities safe.
To sign the petition
Showing posts with label washington state. Show all posts
Showing posts with label washington state. Show all posts
Sunday, February 5, 2017
Wednesday, December 7, 2016
Legal bud reams the alcohol industry
Beer sales are taking a hit in states where marijuana is legal.
So far this year, beer volumes have dropped roughly 2% in Colorado, Oregon, and Washington, which have all legalized recreational pot, according to Neilsen data cited in a recent report from Cowen & Co.
At the same time, marijuana consumption has grown in those states.
The data indicates that many beer drinkers are swapping their six-packs for marijuana instead, and that has major implications for the beer industry — especially for makers of cheaper beers like Anheuser-Busch and Molson Coors Brewing Company.
"Mainstream beer" including Bud Light, Coors Light, Miller Lite, is "under siege" from legal marijuana, with volumes down 4.4% in the states studied, according to Cowen and Co. analysts.
Craft beer sales growth is slowing in those states, but not to the same degree.
The trends show significant overlap between buyers of cheaper beers and users of marijuana.
"The pressure we are seeing on lower-priced beers is consistent with the trends we are seeing in cannabis use by income group nationally," analysts wrote. "Indeed, while cannabis incidence has been on the rise nationally, over the last 10 years (through 2014, the most recently available) we have seen the biggest increases among lower-income households, where cannabis use is also highest."
As additional states consider legalizing marijuana, beer companies will be at an even greater risk.
"With Anheuser-Busch and Molson Coors Brewing Company controlling roughly 70% of the overall beer category in the US, there is clear risk that growing cannabis use will weigh on their businesses," analysts wrote.
Source
A lot of groups brought up the so-called disadvantages when it comes to marijuana. Most were just blowing hot air out of their asses. The alcohol industry is the most angry because they are finding out that legal marijuana is a wealth detriment-detriment to their wealth. When given a choice between a manmade concoction that causes health problems,broken marriages and abused children. Not to mention possible police involvement. That goes from the police arresting the drunk driver to a possible domestic disturbance. Or a natural plant that has been used for centuries from medicinal use to recreational use. This plant does not cause the problems that are mentioned above. Let's look at their following death rates: For alcohol: which category do you want to go with? Death by drunk driving? Cirrhosis? Other health problems? Criminal acts against family members? We're talking a lot of deaths here. I would say into the 1,000's. For marijuana: zero,nada,nilch,nothing. Which one of these is the wiser choice?
So far this year, beer volumes have dropped roughly 2% in Colorado, Oregon, and Washington, which have all legalized recreational pot, according to Neilsen data cited in a recent report from Cowen & Co.
At the same time, marijuana consumption has grown in those states.
The data indicates that many beer drinkers are swapping their six-packs for marijuana instead, and that has major implications for the beer industry — especially for makers of cheaper beers like Anheuser-Busch and Molson Coors Brewing Company.
"Mainstream beer" including Bud Light, Coors Light, Miller Lite, is "under siege" from legal marijuana, with volumes down 4.4% in the states studied, according to Cowen and Co. analysts.
Craft beer sales growth is slowing in those states, but not to the same degree.
The trends show significant overlap between buyers of cheaper beers and users of marijuana.
"The pressure we are seeing on lower-priced beers is consistent with the trends we are seeing in cannabis use by income group nationally," analysts wrote. "Indeed, while cannabis incidence has been on the rise nationally, over the last 10 years (through 2014, the most recently available) we have seen the biggest increases among lower-income households, where cannabis use is also highest."
As additional states consider legalizing marijuana, beer companies will be at an even greater risk.
"With Anheuser-Busch and Molson Coors Brewing Company controlling roughly 70% of the overall beer category in the US, there is clear risk that growing cannabis use will weigh on their businesses," analysts wrote.
Source
A lot of groups brought up the so-called disadvantages when it comes to marijuana. Most were just blowing hot air out of their asses. The alcohol industry is the most angry because they are finding out that legal marijuana is a wealth detriment-detriment to their wealth. When given a choice between a manmade concoction that causes health problems,broken marriages and abused children. Not to mention possible police involvement. That goes from the police arresting the drunk driver to a possible domestic disturbance. Or a natural plant that has been used for centuries from medicinal use to recreational use. This plant does not cause the problems that are mentioned above. Let's look at their following death rates: For alcohol: which category do you want to go with? Death by drunk driving? Cirrhosis? Other health problems? Criminal acts against family members? We're talking a lot of deaths here. I would say into the 1,000's. For marijuana: zero,nada,nilch,nothing. Which one of these is the wiser choice?
Sunday, August 28, 2016
Good news about recreational marijuana
Legal Marijuana: Why the States Are Loosening The Leash
Sam Becker
August 28, 2016
It appears we’re witnessing the marijuana industry’s transition out of the experimental phase. With only a few actual, accessible legal markets in the United States, marijuana – though attractive and promising – has been viewed with a high level of skepticism by both lawmakers and investors. There’s room for explosive growth, but also the possibility that the whole industry could be shut down overnight. But booming sales, coupled with little or no trace of negative externalities, is leading states to loosen up a bit, and let the hidden hand work its magic.
For states with planned legal marijuana markets in operation – as of right now, that’s Washington, Colorado, and Oregon (Alaska’s working on it) – the industry has been a boon. Jobs are being created, revenues are being redirected away from street dealers and to voter-approved coffers, and law enforcement agencies are freeing up resources to be used elsewhere.
Just look at the numbers: Colorado alone saw nearly $1 billion in sales in 2015. Experts are projecting the industry nationwide to top $6.8 billion this year. The industry is on fire, and as a result, regulators are easing up a bit.
Take a look at Washington state, which took a much more conservative approach to legalization than Colorado did. Washington put control of its pot laws in the hands of the state’s Liquor Control Board, whose handling has been criticized as being too slow and stringent. But now that we’re a couple of years in, the board is relaxing requirements, and issuing new business licenses to those looking to get into the industry.
Washington also relaxed its taxation policies, which ultimately increased prices of cannabis product at retail stores well-above street value. That meant that instead of going through legal channels, people would still purchase from street dealers, or through (unregulated) medical cannabis dispensaries. But again, we’re seeing the government bodies in control take a more hands-off approach, with lower taxes, and by allowing more businesses to open up.
Colorado’s more liberal approach has attracted more attention, more business, and more revenues. Washington lawmakers are recognizing that, and planning their next moves accordingly.
Washington’s legislators’ caution wasn’t completely unwarranted. From a regulator’s perspective, crafting marijuana policy is tricky. Prior to the 2012 voter-backed initiatives, no one had done it before. So putting together a plan from scratch presented a lot of challenges. Needless to say, legislators stepped lightly, putting together laws that kept the industry on a tight leash.
But we reiterate, Colorado’s laws were a bit less stringent than Washington’s, and as a result, the state saw better results. Other states, like Oregon, took note, and mirrored Colorado’s policies more so than Washington’s when making its own laws. This is ideally how things are supposed to work; it’s the idea of the 50 states acting as laboratories.
What this means for the future of the legalization movement, and for the economy as a whole, is that open, freer markets – in cannabis cultivation and trade, anyway – are clearly winning out over heavy state control. Nobody knew how the legalization “experiment” was going to work out, and the good news is that states (as we’re seeing with Washington) are adapting. Colorado keeps bringing in revenues from fees related to cannabis business licenses, and is better off for it. Washington’s catching up.
Oregon’s industry is still getting off the ground. The Oregon Liquor Control Commission is still in the process of figuring out ways of licensing legal stores, and according to Oregon Public Radio, it looks as though none of the businesses themselves will open up until late this year. Sales are still happening, though, at the state’s medical marijuana shops. Once legal shops open, that will be phased out.
Going forward, with a slew of states on top to legalize (or try to legalize) during this year’s election period, legislators will continue to watch what’s happening out west. We’re seeing states adapt and take a more hands-off approach, which is evidently working to funnel people away from black and gray markets. That’s the biggest issue – if the legal market is too difficult or expensive to access, consumers will go someplace else.
Ohio tried to push through a legalization effort that was heavily regulated – some might say it was cronyism – and the voters didn’t buy it. So, consumers are paying attention, and it seems that people favor open, hands-off approaches from the states.
If states go that route, as it seems most should, consumers, entrepreneurs, and ultimately state legislators should all come out as winners.
Source
Sam Becker
August 28, 2016
It appears we’re witnessing the marijuana industry’s transition out of the experimental phase. With only a few actual, accessible legal markets in the United States, marijuana – though attractive and promising – has been viewed with a high level of skepticism by both lawmakers and investors. There’s room for explosive growth, but also the possibility that the whole industry could be shut down overnight. But booming sales, coupled with little or no trace of negative externalities, is leading states to loosen up a bit, and let the hidden hand work its magic.
For states with planned legal marijuana markets in operation – as of right now, that’s Washington, Colorado, and Oregon (Alaska’s working on it) – the industry has been a boon. Jobs are being created, revenues are being redirected away from street dealers and to voter-approved coffers, and law enforcement agencies are freeing up resources to be used elsewhere.
Just look at the numbers: Colorado alone saw nearly $1 billion in sales in 2015. Experts are projecting the industry nationwide to top $6.8 billion this year. The industry is on fire, and as a result, regulators are easing up a bit.
Take a look at Washington state, which took a much more conservative approach to legalization than Colorado did. Washington put control of its pot laws in the hands of the state’s Liquor Control Board, whose handling has been criticized as being too slow and stringent. But now that we’re a couple of years in, the board is relaxing requirements, and issuing new business licenses to those looking to get into the industry.
Washington also relaxed its taxation policies, which ultimately increased prices of cannabis product at retail stores well-above street value. That meant that instead of going through legal channels, people would still purchase from street dealers, or through (unregulated) medical cannabis dispensaries. But again, we’re seeing the government bodies in control take a more hands-off approach, with lower taxes, and by allowing more businesses to open up.
Colorado’s more liberal approach has attracted more attention, more business, and more revenues. Washington lawmakers are recognizing that, and planning their next moves accordingly.
Washington’s legislators’ caution wasn’t completely unwarranted. From a regulator’s perspective, crafting marijuana policy is tricky. Prior to the 2012 voter-backed initiatives, no one had done it before. So putting together a plan from scratch presented a lot of challenges. Needless to say, legislators stepped lightly, putting together laws that kept the industry on a tight leash.
But we reiterate, Colorado’s laws were a bit less stringent than Washington’s, and as a result, the state saw better results. Other states, like Oregon, took note, and mirrored Colorado’s policies more so than Washington’s when making its own laws. This is ideally how things are supposed to work; it’s the idea of the 50 states acting as laboratories.
What this means for the future of the legalization movement, and for the economy as a whole, is that open, freer markets – in cannabis cultivation and trade, anyway – are clearly winning out over heavy state control. Nobody knew how the legalization “experiment” was going to work out, and the good news is that states (as we’re seeing with Washington) are adapting. Colorado keeps bringing in revenues from fees related to cannabis business licenses, and is better off for it. Washington’s catching up.
Oregon’s industry is still getting off the ground. The Oregon Liquor Control Commission is still in the process of figuring out ways of licensing legal stores, and according to Oregon Public Radio, it looks as though none of the businesses themselves will open up until late this year. Sales are still happening, though, at the state’s medical marijuana shops. Once legal shops open, that will be phased out.
Going forward, with a slew of states on top to legalize (or try to legalize) during this year’s election period, legislators will continue to watch what’s happening out west. We’re seeing states adapt and take a more hands-off approach, which is evidently working to funnel people away from black and gray markets. That’s the biggest issue – if the legal market is too difficult or expensive to access, consumers will go someplace else.
Ohio tried to push through a legalization effort that was heavily regulated – some might say it was cronyism – and the voters didn’t buy it. So, consumers are paying attention, and it seems that people favor open, hands-off approaches from the states.
If states go that route, as it seems most should, consumers, entrepreneurs, and ultimately state legislators should all come out as winners.
Source
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
