Thinking Outside aBIZinaBOX

Facebook Advertising Review Bounces CPA Services

Well…this is insane…Facebook disapproved an ad as promoting illegal activity when we tried to offer CPA professional services to the cannabis industry in California. We attempted to promote this advertisement on Facebook.

Facebook….responded with “Your boosted post “Whoa…the largest…” wasn’t approved.,It didn’t meet this Facebook Advertising Policy: Your ad can’t promote illegal activity, products or services. ou may be able to make changes to get it approved. Here’s a link to view it so you can see more details…

Your ad wasn’t approved because it doesn’t follow our Advertising Policies. We don’t allow ads that promote illegal drugs. Ads like these are sensitive in nature and are usually contrary of local laws, rules or regulations. Please keep in mind that advocacy or awareness ads are allowed.
If you think your ad follows our Advertising Policies, you can appeal this disapproval.

This is beyond completely absurd, so we lodged an appeal which stated.

“Was this looked at by a human being? Do you understand that we are a firm of Certified Public Accountants that are licensed in the State of California? We are specifically seeking to provide professional services to the LEGAL CANNABIS INDUSTRY in California. There is absolutely nothing illegal about what we are doing, and either this was bounced by an AI BOT, or someone is just STUPID”

Facebook Advertising Review Bounces CPA Services
Facebook Advertising Review Bounces CPA Services

It boggles the mind that Facebook could have perfected “Machine Pseudo-Intelligence” so quickly. It is as if their advertising reviewers got their brains from @fucktrumpor Roy Moore. We surmise that raping children, and promoting slavery are somehow better than providing tax advice to the cannabis industry. Just to add insult to injury, here are a question that appears on Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives [“BATFE”] if one seeks to transfer the ownership of a firearm in the United States.

Facebook Advertising Review Bounces CPA Services
Facebook Advertising Review Bounces CPA Services

Yes, that says that even if you do everything pursuant to your state’s statutes, the Federal government will CONFISCATE any firearms you own if you use cannabis for medical purposes even with a physician’s direction.

Facebook Denies Appeal

Yep..they did it and wrote:

Our reply
Today
“Hi Jordan, <p><i>Here’s what’s preventing your ad from being approved:</i></p><p> Image:We don’t allow ads that promote illegal drugs.</p> <p><i>The reason behind our policies:</i></p><p>We don’t allow the promotion of such products because they’re illegal in many parts of the world. I suggest you have a look at our Advertising Policies for more details.</p> <p><i>What to do next:</i></p><p>Your ad was created through the “Boost Post/Promote” feature. The image, video, text and landing page can’t be edited on a promoted post. For these issues, please create a new ad that follows our policies. The audience targeting, however, can be fixed. In that case, please follow my recommendation above. You can do that through Ads Manager here.You can also check out Facebook Blueprint, which allows you to go through our self-paced e-learning module on Facebook’s Advertising Policies.</p> <p><p><a href=https://www.facebook.com/survey/?oid=388382157932113&cd=%7B%22ad_id%22%3A6087593416915%2C%22support_channel%22%3A%22SRT+Appeals%22%7D>Was this helpful? Let us know.</a></p></p> Thanks, Ashley Facebook Ads Team”

Our response to Facebook

our reply
Today

“Unacceptable…and candidly, we are going to involve counsel, CALCPA, the organization that represents CPA’s in California, and this is headed to court. Do you understand that what we are promoting is services to be provided by us as licensed certified public accountants in the State of California for services that are legal to provide in the State of California? Neither our business nor the services we provide have anything to do with anything that is even remotely illegal? Do you actually understand the issue here, or are you a complete idiot. Do we really need to GO TO WAR over this? 

We are fully prepared to fight this, and have already started…this is going to be picked up by the national press this coming week…perhaps this will make it a bit clearer. https://abizinabox.com/2017/12/09/facebook-advertising-review-bounces-cpa-services/

It is beyond unacceptable and unreasonable to have professional services singled out…would you deny legal services to someone that had been charged with a crime? If Facebook wants this fight…we are more than willing to bring it. You have no problem letting Russians use your platform to interfere with our Democracy, yet go Gestapo on a legit professional…beyond mental midget.” 

 

 

Los Angeles Advances Cannabis Ordinance

We have read numerous articles that have stated that the LA City Council Advanced an Ordinance, specifically Article Five. We caution everyone that there is no substitute for reading the flush language of the Ordinance for yourself or seeking the advice of a competent professional. However, we have made a tortured effort

Los Angeles Advances Cannabis Ordinance
Los Angeles Advances Cannabis Ordinance

to condense fifteen pages to a bit over 3,000 words. If you are affected by these provisions, our Cannabis Practice Group can assist your efforts.

Los Angeles Advances Cannabis Ordinance

The City Council in LA Advances Commercial Cannabis Regulation Ordinance with significant additions and changes to the permitted locations for commercial cannabis activity. The stated purpose of Article 5 of the Ordinance is:

The purpose of this article is to stem the negative impacts and secondary effects associated with Cannabis related activities in the City, including, but not limited to, those documented in case law and in the legislative histories of cannabis regulations in the City, including but not limited to: neighborhood disruption and intimidation caused in part by increased transient visitors; exposure of school-age children and other residents sensitive to cannabis; cannabis sales to minors; and violent crimes.

This article is part of the City’s first comprehensive set of regulations addressing Commercial Cannabis Activity in the City. The purpose of this article is to strike a balance to protect local communities and neighborhoods from the known negative effects of cannabis activities, while also to provide for Commercial Cannabis Activity recognized by State law. This article may be reviewed by the City within four years after its adoption with the purpose to determine whether the public health, welfare, and safety would be served by either expanding or restricting the locations where Commercial Cannabis Activity occurs.

The detailed high-resolution map of permitted locations in Los Angeles can be found here.

Commercial Cannabis Activity

  • includes the cultivation, possession, manufacture, distribution, processing, storing, laboratory testing, packaging, labeling, transportation, delivery or sale of cannabis and cannabis products as provided for in Division 10 of the California Business and Professions Code as implemented by the California Code of Regulations, as currently defined or as may be amended.

Retailer Commercial Cannabis Activity

  • Type 10 – Retailer” in Section 26050 of the California Business and Professions Code
  • Type 9 – Non-Storefront Retailer’ in California Code of Regulations Title 16 Division 42 Chapter 3 Section 5414
  • Permitted Location Zones – 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10
  • Location Restriction – Outside of a 700-foot radius of a School, Public Park, Public Library, Alcoholism or Drug Abuse Recovery or Treatment Facility, Day Care Center, and Permanent Supportive Housing; and outside of a 700-foot radius of any other Retailer or Microbusiness Commercial Cannabis Activity having on-site retail sales, which is licensed by the state of California and licensed by the City to engage in the Commercial Cannabis Activity defined in this section.
    • Exception – Non-Storefront Commercial Cannabis Activity shall not be required to locate outside of a 700-foot radius of a Public Park, Public Library, Alcoholism or Drug Abuse Recovery or Treatment Facility, Day Care Center, and Permanent Supportive Housing; or outside of a 700-foot radius of any other Retailer or Microbusiness Commercial Cannabis Activity having on-site retail sales, which is licensed by the state of California and licensed by the City to engage in the Commercial Cannabis Activity. Type 9 – Non-Storefront Commercial Cannabis Activity shall be required to locate outside of a 600-foot radius of a School.

Microbusiness Commercial Cannabis Activity

  • Type 12 – Microbusiness” in Section 26050 of the California Business and Professions Code
  • Permitted Location Zones – 1,4,6,10
  • Location Restriction – Outside of a 700-foot radius of a School, Public Park, Public Library, Alcoholism or Drug Abuse Recovery or Treatment Facility, Day Care Center, and Permanent Supportive Housing; and outside of a 700- foot radius of any other Retailer or Microbusiness Commercial Cannabis Activity, having on-site retail sales, which is licensed by the state of California and licensed by the City to engage in the Commercial Cannabis Activity defined in this section
    • Exception – Any Microbusiness Commercial Cannabis Activity with sales to the public limited to off-site deliveries and having no on-site sales shall not be required to locate outside of a 700-foot radius of a Public Park, Public Library, Alcoholism or Drug Abuse Recovery or Treatment Facility, Day Care Center, and Permanent Supportive Housing; or outside of a 700-foot radius of any other Retailer or Microbusiness Commercial Cannabis Activity having on-site retail sales, which is licensed by the state of California and licensed by the City to engage in the Commercial Cannabis Activity. Any Microbusiness Commercial Cannabis Activity Commercial Cannabis Activity with sales to the public limited to off-site deliveries and having no on-site sales shall be required to locate outside of a 600-foot radius of a School.

Indoor Commercial Cannabis Cultivation Activity

  • Type 1A – Cultivation; Specialty indoor, Small”;
  • Type 1C – Cultivation, Specialty cottage, Small,” limited to indoor cultivation;
  • Type 2A – Cultivation; Indoor, Small”;
  • Type 3A-Cultivation; Indoor, Medium”;
  • Type 4 – Cultivation; Nursery,” limited to indoor cultivation;
  • Type 5A-Cultivation; Indoor, Large,” in Section 26050 of the California Business and Professions Code;
  • Processor –  cultivation license in California Code of Regulations Title 3 Division 8 Chapter 1 Section 8201(f), limited to indoor processing;
  • Permitted Location Zones – 1,4,6,10
    • Exception – Outside of a 600-foot radius of a School.

Level 1 Manufacturing Commercial Cannabis Activity.

  • Commercial Cannabis Activity falling under the category “Type 6 – Manufacturer 1” in Section 26050 of the California Business and Professions Code; or “Type N or “Type P” in California Code of Regulations, Title 17, Division 1, Chapter 13, Section 40118;
  • Permitted Location Zones – 1,4,6,10
    • Exception – Outside of a 600-foot radius of a School.

Level 2 Manufacturing Commercial Cannabis Activity

  • Commercial Cannabis Activity falling under the category “Type 7 – Manufacturer 2” in Section 26050 of the California Business and Professions Code.
  • Permitted Location Zones – 1,4,6
    • Exceptions – Outside of a 600-foot radius of a School; and Outside of a 200-foot radius of any Residentially Zoned Property.

Testing Commercial Cannabis Activity

  • Commercial Cannabis Activity falling under the category “Type 8 – Testing” in Section 26050 of the California Business and Professions Code
  • Permitted Location Zones –  1, 2,3,4,6,9,10
    • Exception – Outside of a 600-foot radius of a School

Conventions for Applying The Rules:

Measurement

  • The distance specified in this section between Commercial Cannabis Activity businesses shall be the horizontal distance measured in a straight line, without regard to intervening structures, from the closest exterior wall of each business.
  • The distance between any Commercial Cannabis Activity business and any School, Public Park, Public Library, Alcoholism or Drug Recovery or Treatment Facility, Day Care Center, or Permanent Supportive Housing, shall be the horizontal distance measured in a straight line, without regard to intervening structures, from the closest exterior wall of the business to the closest property line of the School, Public Park, Public Library, Alcoholism or Drug Abuse Recovery or Rehabilitation Treatment Facility, Day Care Center, or Permanent Supportive Housing

Who Prevails – Timing

  • Alcoholism or Drug Abuse Recovery or Treatment Facility, if the Alcoholism or Drug Abuse Recovery or Treatment Facility first opened for use by its patrons prior to the date the Commercial Cannabis Activity received licenses by the State and City for its location;
  • Day Care Center, if the Day Care Center first received a license from the State as a Day Care Center prior to the date the Commercial Cannabis Activity received licenses by the State and City for its location;
  • Permanent Supportive Housing, if the Permanent Supportive Housing first appeared on a list of addresses and parcel numbers of Permanent Supportive Housing developments that have received entitlement approvals or a building permit from the City, provided by the Housing and Community Investment Department to the Department of Cannabis Regulation, prior to the date the Commercial Cannabis Activity received licenses by the State and City, for its location
  • Public Park, Public Library, or private School, if the Public Park, Public Library, or private School: (a) first opened for use by its patrons or students before the Commercial Cannabis Activity received licenses by the State and City for its location, even if the Public Park, Public Library, or private School opened without a permit, authorization or approval for a Public Park, Public Library, or School; or (b) first received a permit, authorization or approval for Public Park, Public Library, or School before the Commercial Cannabis Activity received licenses by the State and City for its location.

  • Public School – if the public School: (a) first opened for use by students before the Commercial Cannabis Activity received licenses by the State and City for its location, even if the public School first opens without a permit, authorization or approval for a public School; or (b) first received a permit, authorization or approval by the Office of Public School Construction or California Department of Education or Division of the State Architect, before the Commercial Cannabis Activity received licenses by the State and City for its location.

No Authority Without Permitted Use

  • The use of any building, structure, location, premises or land for any Cannabis related activity is not currently enumerated in the Los Angeles Municipal Code as a permitted use in any zone, nor is the use set forth on the Official Use List of the City as determined and maintained by the Zoning Administrator.
  • The Commercial Cannabis Activity described in Subsections A(1) – A(7) of this article is limited to the term and activities provided by the licenses issued to such Commercial Cannabis Activity by the state of California and the City.
  • So long as this article remains in effect, the Zoning Administrator shall not have the authority to determine that the use of any building, structure, location, premises or land for any Cannabis related activity may be permitted in any zone; to add any Cannabis activity to the Official Use List of the City; or to grant any land use approval authorizing any Cannabis activity.
  • Subject to the restrictions of this section, the Zoning Administrator shall have authority to issue interpretations under Section 12.21A.2 of Chapter 1 of this Code as may be necessary to clarify any provision(s) of this article to remain consistent with any amendments to local or State law.

No Vested Or Non-Conforming Rights

  • Neither this article, nor any other provision of this Code, or action, failure to act, statement, representation, recognition, certificate, approval, permit or license issued by the City, the Department of Cannabis Regulation, the Cannabis Regulation Commission, or their respective representatives, agents, employees, attorneys or assigns, shall create, confer, or convey any vested or nonconforming right or benefit regarding any Commercial Cannabis Activity beyond the period of time and range of activities specifically provided by the licenses issued to such activity by the state of California and the City.
  • This article does not create, confer, or convey any right or benefit regarding any activity beyond the lawfulness of any License issued by the City to engage in Commercial Cannabis Activity or any applicable State of California license for such activity. If any City License or any applicable State license is held unconstitutional, invalid or unenforceable for any reason by any court or tribunal of competent jurisdiction, the Commercial Cannabis Activity subject to such license shall be prohibited in the City of Los Angeles and shall immediately cease all operations in the City. The owner of any City License or any applicable State license assumes all risk associated with the validity of such licenses. The owner of any license found to be unconstitutional, invalid or unenforceable and required thereby to cease Commercial Cannabis Activity, shall not be entitled to any compensation from the City based upon such license; the finding that such license is unconstitutional, invalid or unenforceable; or the requirement that any Commercial Cannabis Activity must thereby immediately cease in the City

 

 Unlawful Activity

  • Activity in the City without a license issued by the state of California and by the City, It is unlawful to conduct any Commercial Cannabis Activity in the City falling under Type 1 (Cultivation, Specialty outdoor, Small); Type 1B (Cultivation; Specialty mixed-light, Small); Type 1C (Cultivation, Specialty cottage, Small) (outdoor and mixed-light cultivation); Type 2 (Cultivation, Outdoor, Small); Type 2B (Cultivation; Mixed-light, Small); Type 3 (Cultivation, Outdoor, Medium); Type 3B (Cultivation; Mixed-light, Medium); Type 4 (Cultivation; Nursery) (mixed light cultivation); Type 5 (Cultivation; Outdoor; Large); or Type 5B (Cultivation, Mixed-light, Large), in Section 26050 of the California Business and Professions Code.

 

  • It is unlawful to conduct any Commercial Cannabis Activity on any lot located within the Alameda District Specific Plan Zone, Los Angeles International Airport Specific Plan Zone, Port Master Plan of the Port of Los Angeles, or any zone or other areas not identified in Section 105.02(a) of this article.

 

  • It is unlawful to plant, cultivate, harvest, dry, process, manufacture or store any living marijuana plants allowed by State law if such action or conduct occurs outdoors at any location in the City. This prohibition shall not apply to the limited conduct allowed under Health and Safety Code Section 11362.1(a)(3).

 

  • It is unlawful to possess, plant, cultivate, harvest, dry, process, manufacture, distribute, store, test, package, label, transport, deliver, sell, purchase, obtain or give away any Cannabis or Cannabis product allowed by State law, if such action or conduct occurs in any structure where any Cannabis or Cannabis derived Is visible from the exterior of the structure. This prohibition shall not apply to the limited conduct allowed under Health and Safety Code Section 11362.1(a)(3).

 

  • It is unlawful to transport or deliver by vehicle any Cannabis or Cannabis derived product allowed by State law, where any Cannabis or Cannabis derived product is visible from the exterior of the vehicle.

 

  • It is unlawful to establish, operate or participate in a medical marijuana collective or cooperative unless in a dwelling unit which has no more than three qualified patients, persons with identification cards or primary caregivers or a combination of these amounting to three.

 

  • It is unlawful to operate, use, or permit the operation or use of any land, structure, or vehicle in the City for any of the stated prohibited actions or conduct. It is unlawful to own, establish, or permit the establishment of any land, structure or vehicle in the City for any of the stated prohibited actions or conduct. It is unlawful to rent, lease or otherwise permit any of the prohibited actions or conduct at any location, structure or vehicle in the City.

Location Zones

  1. Chapter 1 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code: C1 Limited Commercial Zone, C1.5 Limited Commercial Zone, C2 Commercial Zone, C4 Commercial Zone, C5 Commercial Zone, CM Commercial Manufacturing Zone, M1 Limited Industrial Zone, M2 Light Industrial Zone, or M3 Heavy Industrial Zone, under Chapter 1 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code; or
  2. Commercial Manufacturing (Glencoe/Maxella) Zone: CM(GM) Zone under the Glencoe/Maxella Specific Plan; or
  3. Central City West Specific Plan Zone: RC4(CW) Residential Mixed-Use Category, RC5(CW) Residential Mixed-Use Category, C1(CW) Limited Commercial Category, C2(CW) Commercial Category, C4(CW) Commercial Category, or CM(CW) Commercial Manufacturing Category, under the Central City West Specific Plan; or
  4. Warner Center Specific Plan Zone: WC Warner Center Specific Plan Zone where “Retail Store, general merchandise” or “Hybrid Industrial” uses are permitted under the Warner Center Specific Plan; or
  5. Los Angeles Sports and Entertainment District Specific Plan Zone: LASED Los Angeles Sports and Entertainment District Specific Plan Zone under the Los Angeles Sports and Entertainment District Specific Plan; or
  6. Playa Vista Specific Plan Zone: M(PV) Industrial Zone and M2(PV) Industrial Zone under the Playa Vista Specific Plan; or
  7. Paramount Pictures Specific Plan Zone: Paramount Pictures Specific Plan Zone within the Lemon Grove Lot (Parcels A and B), South Bronson Lot, Windsor Lot, Camerford Lot, Waring Lot, and Gregory Lot (Parcels A and B) under the Paramount Pictures Specific Plan; or
  8. USC Specific Plan Zone: USC Specific Plan Zone within Subarea 3 under the USC Specific Plan; or
  9. Jordan Downs Urban Village Specific Plan Zone: CM(UV) Commercial Manufacturing Zone under the Jordan Downs Urban Village Specific Plan; or
  10. Comfield-Arroyo Seco Specific Plan Zone: UC(CA) Urban Center, UI(CA) Urban Innovation, UV(CA) Urban Village Zones under the Cornfield-Arroyo Seco Specific Plan; and

“Grandfathering Rules”

  • Limited Grandfathering of Existing Medical Marijuana Dispensaries [“EMMD”] Pending Receipt of a Final Response by the City to Application for a License. An EMMD that is operating in compliance with the limited immunity provisions (Los Angeles Municipal Code Section 45.19.6.3) of Proposition D notwithstanding those restrictions would have been repealed, including the tax provisions (Los Angeles Municipal Code Section 21.50) of Proposition D, may continue to operate within the City at the one location identified in its original or amended business tax registration certificate until such time that the EMMD applies for and receives a final response to its application for a City license for Commercial Cannabis Activity being conducted at that location. To avail itself of the terms of this Section, an EMMD must: (1) apply for a license from the City within sixty calendar days of the first date that license applications are made available by the City; and (2) limit on-site cultivation at the Business Premises to not exceed the size of the EMMD’s existing square footage of building space as of March 7, 2017, as documented by dated photographs, building lease entered into on or before March 7, 2017, or comparable evidence.
  • Limited Grandfathering if the City Issues a License. If the City issues the EMMD a City license for Commercial Cannabis Activity, the EMMD shall continue to operate at its location within the City in accordance with the rules and regulations set forth by the City. Such EMMD shall not be subject to the zone, distance and sensitive use restrictions stated in Section 105.02 of this article until after December 31, 2022, on the condition that the EMMD: (1) operates and continues to operate in compliance with the distance and sensitive use restrictions (Los Angeles Municipal Code Section 45.19.6.3(L) and (O) of Proposition D notwithstanding those restrictions would have been repealed; and (2) limits on-site cultivation at the Business Premises to not exceed the size of the EMMD’s existing square footage of building space as of March 7, 2017, as documented by dated photographs, building lease entered into on or before March 7, 2017, or comparable evidence. If the EMMD issued a License fails to operate in compliance with these provisions of Proposition D, the EMMD’s License shall be subject to revocation. This limited grandfathering shall not create, confer, or convey and vested right or nonconforming right or benefit regarding any activity conducted by the EMMD beyond the term and activities provided by the License. This limited grandfathering shall cease immediately after December 31, 2022. After December 31, 2022, all EMMDs shall be required to be located on a Business Premises that meets all the requirements of Article 5 of Chapter X of this Code. Any EMMD located on a Business Premises that does not meet all the requirements of Article 5 of Chapter X of this Code shall cease operating immediately after December 31, 2022.
  • Special Exception – the limited grandfathering provided by this Section 105.03 shall not create, confer, or convey any vested right or nonconforming right or other benefits regarding any activity conducted by the EMMD beyond the term and activities provided by the licenses issued by the State and City to such EMMDs.

No Conflict With Laws

  • Federal – This article is not intended to conflict with Federal law or stand as an obstacle or conflict with any efforts by the Federal government to enforce Federal laws related to Cannabis related activities.
  • State – This article is not intended to conflict with State law. This article shall be interpreted to be compatible with State enactments and in furtherance of the public purposes that those enactments encompass.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Choosing Right Advisors California Cannabis

The process of choosing right advisors California cannabis Regulatory Compliance business can mean the difference between the success of a business and failure. The industry is experiencing rapid growth and substantial, even radical change in the regulatory environment. 

Who Are the WRONG Choices Advisors

The “wrong choices” for advisors fall into several general categories and a couple of specific categories. [Note: The comments which follow are generalizations, and not targeted at any specific individuals unless I specifically identify them by name. If I have had first-hand experience with a firm or an individual, I will not hesitate to call them out, publicly and by name. Obviously, I am careful not to do so lightly, with due consideration of professional standards, advice from our counsel and our insurance carrier, and a dose of common sense.] However, where I do call them out, they usually nominated for inclusion in the aBIZinaBOX “Asshole Academy.”  It takes some special talents to be nominated for inclusion in “Asshole Academy, the combination of “ignorance and arrogance” can make someone almost sure of being nominated. 

Now that we are clear on the general criteria, let’s continue our discussion by considering some examples of wrong advisors in general:

  • Buzzword Savants” – are the pseudo-experts that use terms and phrases that they couldn’t possibly understand if with death. You will recognize them using terms like “track and trace”, “Cannabis Czar”, and “designer cannabis strain”. 
  • Seminar Know-It-Alls – this is one of the scariest types of purveyors of wrong advice. You can recognize them by the way they are continually speaking at seminars, meetings, and webcasts, so often that they can’t possibly have any time to engage in real, substantive client work. The worst of them talk about their clients in public forums and likely expose them to a criminal investigation, tax audits and god knows what else. Anyone that engages one of them for advice deserves what they sought.  The Radical CPA is a classic example of the Seminar Know-it-All
  • and attempting to sell books and coaching are some of their other techniques.
  • Bookkeepers and “generic accountants that overstep their competence fall into the third broad category. There are individuals that fall within this group who provide some of the most valuable assistance that any business has. However, when they decide that a seminar they attended, or a publication that they read provided them with knowledge and skills of those professionals who are above their pay grade is usually the point at which the trouble begins.

The specific WRONG CHOICES are the general categories of wrong advisors only worse, usually due to their self-perceptions of expertise. It is what we refer to as the ignorance and arrogance disease that has reached end stage. 

  • Enrolled Agents get special excoriation [not necessarily due to the attributes of an individual EA] but rather due to CSEA Cannabisruthless self-aggrandizement campaign carried out by their emotionally brittle, mental-midget driven association, the National Association of Enrolled Agents.  Through a relentless campaign which is based on statements that they know to be untrue…through their preposterous claim that EA is “America’s Tax Experts“. I have thought through a solution to the “NAEA self-aggrandizement” problem, and anyone who may be can read about it here.  The EA that is presenting the seminar identified in the image above is competent, however, when the California Society of Enrolled Agents [‘CSEA”] refers to their members as “California’s Tax Experts,” my gag reflex kicks in and my response is to offer a bit of “Yiddish Wisdom”. 
  • [More coming]

Right Advisors California Cannabis

Now you know who the wrong choices are so who the right choices are? The simple answer is that there is no single “RIGHT CHOICE.” The longer answer is that a combination of two professionals is required to cover the bases.

  • Attorney – cannabis is subject to regulation, lots of supervision. I shouldn’t need to recite all of the control that marijuana is subject to in California…for a quick study of the topic, one could start with the California Cannabis Portal CCP.pngand its linkage to a myriad of agencies. Our firm is fortunate to share numerous California industry clients with William E. Taggart, whose knowledge and expertise in the cannabis industry is widely known. He gave an outstanding presentation at the California Cannabis Symposium sponsored by CALCPA entitled “How Do I Bring My Client Into The Light.” 

 

  • Certified Public Accountant [“CPA”] – if you can identify a CPA with verifiable experience in the cannabis industry….grab them. There aren’t many of them, and they aren’t easy to find. We believe that aBIZinaBOX is one such firm, and you can either contact us or look for the next blog in this series to learn more about the attributes that make for the RIGHT CHOICE in an advisor for your cannabis business in California.

 

 

California Cannabis FAQ

California Cannabis FAQ

We have been flooded this past week with posts and emails announcing that the California Regulators issued Emergency Regulations. We already knew that once the announcement hit my inbox.

California Cannabis FAQ
California Cannabis FAQ

How about something that no one else seems to be doing yet….addressing what they, together with existing tax, licensing and regulatory issues that impact the cannabis industry in California. So we present our California Cannabis FAQ.

If you are involved with the cannabis industry in California and could benefit from engaging with advisors that rather than “announcing” have moved on to explaining and implementing we should talk, and you can start the conversation here.

Xero Accounting Program Status – December 2017

Xero Accounting Program Status – December 2017 – aBIZinaBOX has been a member of the Xero Partner Program for thirty months. We were excited when we joined the program and an application with superb potential relative to QuickBooks Online [“QBO”]. We quickly became concerned about the management of the Americas Partner Program. We posted a series of questions and commentaries about the program which certainly kicked up some sparks. We questioned the pace of the process of designating Cloud Integrators in the Americas.

Cloud Integrators

 

 

 

At one point, we were threatened with expulsion from the program in a letter from Russ Fujioka, Xero Americas – President. The exchange led to an extraordinary relationship and exchange between Mr.Fujioka and myself.

 

 

The Google Cloud Partner Program [“GCP”] has numerous requirements for the ability to

Jordan S Zoot CPA – Google Cloud Certifications

resell and support each product, badges and certification exams for partners to demonstrate their expertise and ability to support customers.

The requirements detail both the certification levels and a number of professionals required to earn each. An example of my own participation is illustrated below.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Xero Breakfast of Champions
Xero Breakfast of Champions

 

 

MARCUSA Accounting Tax Regulations CA Cannabis

We have been warning our clients for months that the requirements for tax, accounting and recordkeeping were going to be broad and onerous. Yesterday, the California cannabis regulatory agencies

Issued a combined total of close to three hundred pages of Emergency Regulations [the “Regs”] covering a broad range of topics. This memorandum focuses on procedural provisions related to accounting, tax, recordkeeping, and administration.

MARCUSA Enforcement – Disciplinary Rules

Enforcement – Right of Access

  • Licensees shall provide the Bureau’s investigators, compliance monitors, agents, or employees full access to enter licensed premises; and inspect cannabis or cannabis products in the licensee’s possession, review and copy any materials, books, or records in the licensee’s possession.
  • Failure to cooperate and participate in the Bureau’s investigation may result in a licensing violation subject to discipline.
  • Prior notice of investigation, inspection, or audit is not required.notice to comply
  • The Bureau may issue a written notice to comply with a licensee for minor violations of MARCUSA or its implementing regulations, observed during an inspection.
  • The notice to comply will describe the nature and facts of the violation, including a reference to the statute or regulation violated, and may indicate the manner in which the licensee must correct the violation to achieve compliance.
  • Within 15 calendar days, the licensee may sign and return the notice to comply, declaring under penalty of perjury that the violation was corrected and describing how compliance was achieved. failure to do so may result in a disciplinary action,

Minor decoys

  • Peace officers may use a person under 21 years of age to attempt to purchase cannabis goods to ensure that licensees and their employees are not selling cannabis goods to minors.

Disciplinary Actions

  • The Bureau may take disciplinary action against any license by way of revocation, suspension, fine, restrictions upon any licensee, or any combination thereof.
  • The assessed penalty shall take into consideration: nature and severity of the violation; evidence that the violation was willful; history of violations of the same nature; the extent to which the person or entity has cooperated with the Bureau; the extent to which the person or entity has mitigated or attempted to mitigate any damage or injury caused by the violation; and the extent to which the conduct is a public nuisance or danger to public safety.
  •  Any Bureau accusation recommending disciplinary action will be served on the licensee and a hearing will be conducted to determine if cause exists to take action against the licensee.
  • An accusation may be terminated by written stipulation at any time prior to the conclusion of the hearing on the accusations and notices to comply
  • The Bureau may issue citations containing orders of abatement and fines to a licensee or unlicensed person in writing.
  • The Bureau may issue a notice to comply to a licensee for violations of the act or regulations observed during an inspection. The licensee may within 15 calendar days return the notice indicating the violation was corrected and how compliance was achieved

Practice of Public Accountancy Under the California Accountancy Act

We had some time this afternoon to review some of our old blog posts from the Fall of 2015. It quickly became clear that many of the concerns we wondered about back then continue as festering problems to this day. One of our last posts detailed the process we went through in connection with our opening a California office in Oakland. The process included:

  • Formation of a California professional corporation, registration as a taxpayer
    California Accountancy Act
    California Accountancy Act

    in California, and licensure as a California CPA Corporation.

  • Completion of the process of becoming licensed as a California CPA
  • Filing and paying California income taxes for both the corporation and personally. 

JUST BECAUSE BUSINESS IS DONE “IN THE CLOUD:, THE PRESENCE OF AN OFFICE ON EMPLOYEES IN CALIFORNIA, TOGETHER WITH OTHER ATTRIBUTED THAT NEED TO BE REVIEWED CAREFULLY IT IS UNWISE AND NEGLIGENT TO ASSUME THAT THE OBLIGATIONS DON’T EXIST.

If a person is NOT licensed as a certified public accountant in California [or hold a limited purpose “Practice Permit”] and that list of persons would include

  • Enrolled Agents
  • a California CTEC
  • a person listed in the Federal Directory of Tax Return Preparer with “credentials and select qualifications.”

 then the restriction that applies to them under CA Accountancy Act 5051 is: 

a person shall be deemed to be engaged in the practice of public accountancy within the meaning and intent of this chapter if he or she does any of the following:

(a) Holds himself or herself out to the public in any manner as one skilled in the knowledge, science, and practice of accounting, and as qualified and ready to render professional service therein as a public accountant for compensation.

(b) Maintains an office for the transaction of business as a public accountant.

(c) Offers to prospective clients to perform for compensation, or who does perform on behalf of clients for compensation, professional services that involve or require an audit, examination, verification, investigation, certification, presentation, or review of financial transactions and accounting records.

(d) Prepares or certifies for clients reports on audits or examinations of books or records of account, balance sheets, and other financial, accounting and related schedules, exhibits, statements, or reports that are to be used for publication, for the purpose of obtaining credit, for filing with a court of law or with any governmental agency, or for any other purpose.

(e) In general or as an incident to that work, renders professional services to clients for compensation in any or all matters relating to accounting procedure and to the recording, presentation, or certification of financial information or data.

(f) Keeps books, makes trial balances, or prepares statements, makes audits, or prepares reports, all as a part of bookkeeping operations for clients.

(g) Prepares or signs, as the tax preparer, tax returns for clients.

(h) Prepares personal financial or investment plans or provides to clients products or services of others in implementation of personal financial or investment plans.

(i) Provides management consulting services to clients

The activities set forth in subdivisions (f) to (i), inclusive, are “public accountancy” only when performed by a certified public accountant or public accountant, as defined in this chapter.

A person is not engaged in the practice of public accountancy if the only services he or she engages in are those defined by subdivisions (f) to (i), inclusive, and he or she does not hold himself or herself out, solicit, or advertise for clients using the certified public accountant or public accountant designation.

There are two additional exceptions provided for persons that exclusively perform bookkeeping tasks under certain conditions. 

Sec 5052 states:

Nothing in this chapter shall apply to any person who as an employee, independent contractor, or otherwise, contracts with one or more persons, organizations, or entities, for the purpose of keeping books, making trial balances, statements, making audits or preparing reports, all as a part of bookkeeping operations, provided that such trial balances, statements, or reports are not issued over the name of such person as having been prepared or examined by a certified public accountant or public accountant.

A further exception exists for employees

Sec. 5053 states: 

Nothing contained in this chapter precludes a person who is not a certified public accountant or public accountant from serving as an employee of, or an assistant to, a certified public accountant or public accountant or partnership or a corporation composed of certified public accountants or public accountants holding a permit to practice pursuant to this chapter if the employee or assistant works under the control and supervision of a certified public accountant, or a public accountant authorized to practice public accountancy pursuant to this chapter and if the employee or assistant does not issue any statement over his or her name.

Finally, there is a catch-all if an individual is employed or affiliated with an out-of-state firm in Sec. 5054 which states:

Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, an individual or firm holding a valid and current license, certificate, or permit to practice public accountancy from another state may prepare tax returns for natural persons who are California residents or estate tax returns for the estates of natural persons who were clients at the time of death without obtaining a permit to practice public accountancy issued by the board under this chapter or a practice privilege pursuant to Article 5.1 (commencing with Section 5096) provided that the individual or firm does not physically enter California to practice public accountancy pursuant to Section 5051, does not solicit California clients, and does not assert or imply that the individual or firm is licensed or registered to practice public accountancy in California.

(b) The board may, by regulation, limit the number of tax returns that may be prepared pursuant to subdivision (a).

It is critical to understand that the exception described above is NOT available to business, or an individual who is  non-California CPA if the firm has:

  • employees or independent contractors who provide services for the company or individual that are resident in California OR
  • the firm maintains an office in California. [It is entirely clear that if a company subleases office space or supports a “hot desk” arrangement such as those provided by WeWork.com 
  • where a firm is listed on a “Find An Advisor” page on a website as “serving clients in California” could very easily be construed either as having a physical presence in California or “engaged in the solicitation of business from California taxpayers.
California Accountancy Act
California Accountancy Act

The status of an individual or firm’s licensure to practice public accountancy in California can be verified either on cpaverify.com or on the CBA website

If an individual is NOT a Circular 230 Practitioner [attorney, CPA or Enrolled Agent], then the following applies for California Tax Education Council members [“CTEC’s”]

Registered: Registered status indicates the individual has completed the annual registration requirements by completing the required education and maintaining a $5,000 tax preparer bond. Registered individuals are compliant with the California Business & Professions Code, Section 22250-22259, and are able to prepare taxes for a fee in California.

Just as a reminder, an individual preparing taxes for a fee may also be a CPA (www.dca.ca.gov/cba), an Enrolled Agent (www.irs.gov), or an attorney (www.calbar.ca.gov). You may wish to check the websites indicated to be sure the individual in question is not a CPA, EA or attorney, and, therefore, exempt from registering with CTEC. If you have any questions or concerns feel free to contact CTEC.

The penalty for being a NON-COMPLIANT preparer in California is:

As of January 1, 2005, the California Franchise Tax Board (FTB) has the authority to identify and penalize unregistered tax preparers.“Failure to register as a tax preparer with the California Tax Education Council, as required by Section 22253 of the Business and Professions Code, unless it is shown that the failure was due to reasonable cause and not due to willful neglect.

(1) The amount of the penalty under this subdivision for the first failure to register is two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500). This penalty shall be waived if proof of registration is provided to the Franchise Tax Board within 90 days from the date notice of the penalty is mailed to the tax preparer.

(2) The amount of the penalty under this subdivision for a failure to register, other than the first failure to register, is five thousand dollars ($5,000).”

Consumers can report unregistered tax preparers by filling out the Noncompliant Complaint Form through CTEC’s website. All reports are kept confidential.

We have additional resources for registration and regulation of tax professionals on our website.

There are several additional points that need to be mentioned.

  • Where a firm or individual tax return preparer is doing business in a state such as California, there is an obligation to ascertain where the business entity or the individuals have obligations to file or pay income, sales, excise or franchise taxes to California FTB, EDD, and CDTFA. The authorities are certainly within their rights to hold tax professionals to a higher standard concerning knowing what their obligations are than the general public.
  • California has very specific rules for income tax withholding at the source for non-residents of California that perform services within California. Withholding is required when a nonresident payee:
    • Provides services in California. Compensation is considered earned where the payee performs the services. Services include covenants not to compete, options, bonuses, non-employee compensation,
    • receives cash and non-cash distributions.
    • Nonresident payees are subject to withholding on California source income regardless of where they live, enter into a contract, or receive payment.

An example of the latter situation might be where an individual accountant or bookkeeper provides services for a California corporation like a Xero Ambassador where some portion of their services is performed while present in California for an event or a project. 

As a final thought, we note that many “cloud accounting firms” provide services on a Good, Better, and Best package basis. While core bookkeeping services clearly fall within a safe harbor, certain enhanced services such as “virtual controller and CFO” falls outside the safe harbors and is deemed to be the practice of public accountancy. There is a compelling reason for both CALCPA and the California Board of Accountancy to perform aggressive oversight for the protection of the public. 

 

Proposed Legislative Fix Enrolled Agents

Proposed Legislative Fix Enrolled Agents

Everyone seems to be apoplectic over the status of the evolving tax legislation wending its way through Congress. What hasn’t been talked about much is enhancing the protection of taxpayers rights, privacy and ability to obtain competent representation. It is difficult to imagine that any reasonable member of Congress of either party would be opposed to that goal.

Attorneys and certified public accountants have been subject to education and experience requirement for decades, and the reality demonstrates that the requirements work. This stands in sharp contrast to other tax practitioners, particularly the “tax resolution” companies that seem to constantly be under investigation, sanction, suit or prosecution by state attorneys’ general and other agencies.It would seem like an opportune time for Congress to assist in the upgrade of professional standing and credibility of the “runt” of the Circular 230 practitioner ranks…”Enrolled Agents” [“EA’s”]. At present, EA’s have neither education or experience requirements, and only have to pass a multiple choice exam to be credentialed. There is a simple fix for that which would be added to the current tax legislative proposal with minimal effort. It would look something like this:

31 USC § 330 (a) by adding new subparagraph (E) to read
“(1)Notwithstanding anything else contained in this Title, the Commissioner is directed to modify Circular 230 to expressly require that the grant of full representation rights to an Enrolled Agent shall require that the Enrolled Agent meet the minimum education requirements [specifically inclusive of accounting course hours] to be not less than the current requirements for IRS Revenue Agent, Grade GS5, Series 0512.
(2) Effective as of the date of enactment, any Enrolled Agent that does not meet the education requirement in (1) above shall be required to be supervised by an attorney, certified public accountant, or Enrolled Agent that does meet the requirement of (1) above.
(3) For purposes of classification under (2) above each Enrolled Agent shall be classified based upon a review of the educational background and reclassified as though they had become an Enrolled Agent upon the date of the enactment of this legislation”.

A rather elegant way to give Enrolled Agents parity with attorneys and CPA’s. It is beyond baffling why any EA could identify a plausible objection to such a magnanimous effort to help improve their self-image.

 

Critique of Xero’s 10-step checklist for choosing an accountant

aBIZinaBOX continues its efforts to assist Xero in seeking to improve its America’s Partner Program, whether they seek the help or not, their customer’s deserve it. We have spent countless words seeking to elucidate the difference between a “generic accountant” and a “professional accountant” including offering “Yiddish Wisdom” explaining why Enrolled Agents are NOT professional accountants.

More recently, we offered a proposed legislative fix to bring Enrolled Agents to parity with attorneys and certified public accountants [“CPA’s”] by adding experience and education requirements to the current version of the “Horse Act” 31 USC Sec. 330.

Our starting point for today’s critique is Section 5 of the Xero 10-step checklist which states

We agree with the idea of verifying the professional licenses and credentials of accounting and tax professionals and offer an outstanding resource with links to accomplish precisely that at Regulation of Tax Professionals.

Professional Accountant Credentials

As a simple example, when we look our firm up on cpaverify.org, we find:

Nada…no listings…which is not entirely uncommon. When that happens, one needs to go state by state, which turns up listings for the firm in Illinois,

California

and Florida

Then, just for kicks, we look yours truly up on the cpaverify.org site and we get:

Realizing that we have probably bored each of you to tears, please hang on just a bit longer, there truly is a method to the madness. As an aside, in addition to the pain and torture of submitting the requisite documentation, paying the initial fees, there is an annual cost of > $6,000/year to maintaining all of our professional licenses, CPE reporting, PCAOB registration and being active members for > 30 years in:

Technology Credentials

Now that we have beat professional accountant credentials to death, let’s try technology credentials…but skip over Xero and Intuit ProAdvisor credentials for the time being. Let’s try a few examples of what we view as truly meaningful technology credentials that typically have multiple certifications by examination credential requirements for professionals and four to five digit annual membership fees such several that our firm has such as:

Microsoft – Azure Platform, Office 365, Google Cloud – Suite, Chrome, and Android, AWS Advanced Consulting, Salesforce Consulting, Dropbox Business, Box.com and Fishbowl Inventory. The selected partner programs represent platforms and ecosystems NOT single applications or technologies which is a very significant difference.

Verification and Validation

We spent a substantial amount of time yammering about our own credentials…for what is perhaps the eighth or ninth time..so what? Well, the so what is that it is easy enough to seek out the proper website, publicly available and VERIFY the credentials for yourselves [the professional and the technology credentials. As an example how about the Microsoft Partner credential…well you can check out this letter.

The letter couldn’t be clearer in verifying that aBIZinaBOX is a member of the Microsoft Partner Network [MPN# 4713037], and is current with and has earned Silver Competencies in Small and Middle Market Cloud Solutions [Office 365 suite and related products], and Cloud Platform [Azure]. Our locations with certified personnel include New York, Chicago, and Oakland. The certification has specific verifiable requirements which have been met, and the certification is good through October 31, 2018.

There you have an example of the verifiable independent documentation to support the listing of a credential in our profile.

What Is The Big Deal – Isn’t Everyone Transparent and Truthful With Credentials?

The simple answer is NO and this where a little experiment becomes very interesting. Let’s illustrate with a real-world example, by considering the locations where aBIZinaBOX has offices – California, Illinois and New York. Let’s look for a Xero Partner who asserts that they are professional accountants in the specific locations.

[Note: We didn’t actually perform each of the initial searches manually..we love automation too much, so be built a tool utilizing our good friend, Google Cloud Machine Learning to automate the process which we ran for all fifty states under the Xero Find an Advisor, and then ran the results against cpaverify.com, the state board of accountancy searches for all fifty states [where available], and the member directories for the listed technologies we identified [where available].

As a check, we replicated the machine learning tests under Azure Machine Learning Studio just for kicks.

It is absolutely critical to keep in mind that when you read the following section of this article that you keep at the front of your mind that we conducted this as an experiment and illustration. We did NOT independently verify the validity of licenses, credentials or partner program memberships by manual human verification process, with would always be a required step to ascertain the accurate, current and legal status of a particular individual or entity’s status with respect to the specified attribute.

What The Xero “Find An Advisor” Gave Us

Let’s start with those three right at:

Xero Find An Advisor

We are going to post the results of the three searches and one selected Xero partner for the purposes of our illustration.

The search for Illinois returned 20 listings under accountants.

Xero Find An Advisor

The Xero Partner we selected is The Digital CPA whom the listing states “Serves Illinois area”

Xero Find An Advisor

The California search returned 92 listings under accountants

The Xero Partner we selected is HPCCPA.com and Bruce Phillips, CPA

Xero Find An Advisor

HPC’s website lists an office in San Francisco

Xero Find An Advisor

The New York search returned 46 accountants

Xero Find An Advisor

The list included Emmerman, Boyle and Associates, LLC

Xero Find An Advisor

Emmerman Boyle lists themselves as affiliates of AICPA

Finally, we have a special mention for Xero Partner Carr, Riggs & Ingram, LLC which “Serves Texas area”

Xero Find An Advisor

Well there you have a reasonably broad sample of the advisor’s that were identified by the Xero “Find An Advisor” tool turned up. Suffice it to say, the tool is poorly designed not only for use by prospective clients, but its sloppy design reflects a lack of careful consideration of the potential implications for Xero Partners that have professional credentials and licensing issues to consider. Our machine learning experiment highlighted examples that range from what might be construed as innocent oversight to outright negligent, perhaps grossly negligent, or even intentional misconduct and violation of both professional standards and regulation by state Boards of Accountancy. Let’s dig a bit further

  • The Digital CPA/Jay Kimmelman CPA is listed as “Serving the Illinois area”. However, neither the Digital CPA as a firm, not Jay Kimmelman is registered with the Illinois Dept. of Professional Regulation either as a licensed firm nor under a Practice Permit. This is probably an inadvertent situation, wherein provided that no attest work is being performed by either there shouldn’t be a problem here.
  • HPCCPA.COM/Bruce Phillips, CPA is listed as “Serving the California area” and has a listing for having an office in California. Neither HPCCPA or Bruce Phillips is listed as being either licensed by or holding a Practice Permit from the California Board of Accountancy. [For background on the California Accountancy Act see What Services Can A Non-CPA Provide In California?Exempt from CA Accountancy Act? – Close But No Cigar Is Alive and Well, and an old favorite Oracles of the Niche. Suffice it to state that they might be wise to retain competent professional regulation and tax counsel to deal with what appears to be a potential hornets’ nest.
  • Emmerman, Boyle and Associates, LLC [“EBA”]/David Emmerman, Partner is listed as a “full-service accounting and tax preparation firm” which is perhaps two thirds true. Bookkeeping yes, accounting no..at least one of their principals is an Enrolled Agent and may not issue or be associated with financial statements. EBA is NOT registered with the NYS Education Department as a CPA firm. They appear to have moved away from prior language on their website with respect to scope of services, which previously appeared on their website at http://www.emmerman.com/auditing.php [see left side]
Xero Find An Advisor
  • Carr, Riggs & Ingram, LLC is listed on the Xero Find An Advisor as “Serving the Texas area”. Their website lists no less than thirteen offices in the State of Texas. A search of cpaverify.com list them in Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina. A search of the Texas State Board of Accountancy doesn’t turn up any listings which is a stunner, particularly since they are listed as a PCAOB registrant.

Finally, something in the back of our brain keeps asking for the reference to the post we wrote on requirements for use of the CPA credential by “inactive” CPA’s in California, so [see CPA Inactive Means What It Says- California Licensure Isn’t Required For The Provision To Apply

What It All Means

We are having a very difficult time seeking to ascertain what all of this means for the Xero Partner Program in the Americas. [For background on our commentaries on the topic, see Xero Partner Program – Commentary], and it isn’t that I haven’t had heated confrontation on the topic in the past [see Tortious Interference in ISV-Partner Break Ups]. The results of that exchange were a complete re-write of the Xero America’s Partner Agreement, and a long and fruitful running dialogue with Russ Fujioka, the President of Xero Americas, whom I hold in the highest esteem.

The events of recent weeks [discussed at Are You My Xero Partner Manager?] have us greatly concerned about the future. We are particularly concerned by the selection of Trish Laveck, a six month Xero employee as our replacement for Joel Lacayo, the recently fired Regional Sales Director. Ms. Laveck appears to have continuing equity interest in Safe Money Consulting, an alternative investment money management firm that is directly competitive with our practice and represents an unacceptable conflict of interest with our business. Our understanding is that this selection is piss poor decision made by Ben Richmond, CA – U.S Vice President- Partner Sales at Xero.

We are particularly frustrated, as it appears that the selection was made in complete disregard of the substance of a recent conversation which I had with Gregory Johnson – Senior Vice President, Business Growth, Xero Americas.

We trust that this rather long article articulates a number of concerns, as well as potential solutions that could be deployed to perform some “clean up”. When we spoke to Mr. Johnson, we expressed a willingness to engage in a productive fashion. Mr. Richmond seems to have embarked on a different path.

[As a final aside, article of this type have a tendency to make people defensive and rather than face up to and address the underlying issue they seek to dig up mud and toss it back. So let’s help them out, I have a long history as an ardent support of the 2A, and on occasion, it kicks up some sparks such as http://evanstonnow.com/story/public-safety/bill-smith/2014-07-03/64470/gun-rights-activist-faces-felony-charges. Sorry to disappoint all of those types, the issue was settled and has absolutely NOTHING to do with my professional activities. Yes, it was properly reported and dealt with.

aBIZinaBOX Creates #FakeNews

Ok….everyone is talking about #fakenews…so we just had to try it.

Cannabis Trump #fakenews
Fake_news?

The first example, is the photo below #fakenews? We doubt it…with everything that is happening in Washington D.C. if I was Trump I would want to be stoned too. 

Actually, something stronger might be a better solution…maybe he could overdose on a combination of Dulcolax and Rogaine…the results would certainly be amusing. So if we agree that the photo above is NOT #FakeNews how about this one. The test here is much more complicated and subtle. Well….this one can’t possibly be correct because unlike everything else that #trump has done, smoking cannabis is probably LEGAL in Washington D.C…

Cannabis Trump #fakenews
Cannabis Trump #fakenews

Election Day was a watershed moment for marijuana legalization.

Recreational marijuana is now legal in seven states — Maine has yet to be called — as well as Washington D.C. 24 states have varying forms of medical marijuana laws on the books.

President-elect Donald Trump will have to reckon with this issue when he takes office on January 20. Trump has flip-flopped somewhat on this issue throughout his public life. Recently, Trump has supported state’s rights to choose how to legislate medical marijuana but has not expressly called for legalization. 

“In terms of marijuana and legalization, I think that should be a state issue, state-by-state,” Trump told The Washington Post. “… Marijuana is such a big thing. I think medical should happen — right? Don’t we agree? I think so. And then I really believe we should leave it up to the states.”

He has also expressed support for medical marijuana, telling Bill O’Reilly in February that he’s, “in favor of medical marijuana 100%.” “I know people that have serious problems and they did that they really — it really does help them,” Trump said. 

Now that we have the #FakeNews out of the way….back to the point…aBIZinaBOX’s Cannabis Practice Group is growing…and we want to be your “go to” advisor for cannabis in California. Let’s start a conversation. 

Cannabis Trump #fakenews
aBIZinaBOX Cannabis Practice

[contact-form-7 404 "Not Found"]