Want A Medical Marihuana Business License From The State? Better Move To Michigan And Pay Your Taxes Now!

[t-pain]

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(0scj2uqqfavhhyx4biieezlq))/mileg.aspx?page=BillStatus&objectname=2016-HB-5984

 

Health; medical marihuana; applicant for marihuana facility license; make business entity ineligible if it has not paid property taxes for the preceding 2 years. Amends sec. 402 of 2016 PA 281 (MCL 333.27402).

 

because otherwise you will be ineligible, if this new legislation from callton passes.

[semicaregiver]

In reading the proposed amendment, it appears that Calton is trying to grandfather in existing dispensaries.  Seems to say that if you are a business looking for a license, you need to have been in business and paying property tax for the last two years.   I wonder how this works if you had a business, but were just a renter?  Perhaps rewarding certain dispensary owners for their support of him.....

 

(g) The applicant,  an individual, has been a resident of

 

this state for less than a continuous 2-year period immediately

 

preceding the date of filing the application OR, IF A BUSINESS

 

ENTITY, HAS NOT PAID PROPERTY TAXES TO THIS STATE IN BOTH OF THE 2

 

YEARS IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE DATE OF FILING THE APPLICATION. The

 

requirements in this subdivision do not apply after June 30, 2018.

[Restorium2]

In reading the proposed amendment, it appears that Calton is trying to grandfather in existing dispensaries.  Seems to say that if you are a business looking for a license, you need to have been in business and paying property tax for the last two years.   I wonder how this works if you had a business, but were just a renter?  Perhaps rewarding certain dispensary owners for their support of him.....

 

(g) The applicant,  an individual, has been a resident of

 

this state for less than a continuous 2-year period immediately

 

preceding the date of filing the application OR, IF A BUSINESS

 

ENTITY, HAS NOT PAID PROPERTY TAXES TO THIS STATE IN BOTH OF THE 2

 

YEARS IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE DATE OF FILING THE APPLICATION. The

 

requirements in this subdivision do not apply after June 30, 2018.

I don't read it that way. To me, it says if you WERE a business entity you better have paid your property taxes.... and if you are an individual you better have been a residents for at least two years. I could be wrong but that how it reads to me.

[semicaregiver]

Resto,

 

Consider two things.   The beginning of the paragraph identifies that only individual that are residents of Michigan for at least 2 years are eligible for a license and then the end of the paragraph indicates that this protection ends 6/18.   

 

If not having paid taxes was a criteria under this paragraph would it not have said that an individual would also have to not have any past due taxes?

 

The paragraph rather identifies two different types of entities that are eligible for a license, 1. an individual that is a resident for at least 2 years  and 2. a business that has been in Michigan for at least 2 years.  

 

Why they chose to qualify the business as being in Michigan for at least 2 years based on property tax records is curious.  Why not just say they must have filed State of Michigan business taxes for at least 2 years or say they must not be in arrears with the State on taxes, or held a Michigan business license for the last 2 years?   To me it seems they are trying to only allow existing businesses that own property in Michigan for at least 2 years to be eligible for a license.    The question to me is, say you and I decide to open a dispensary.  We are both residents of Michigan, but the business we would be incorporating is "new" and naturally has not paid property tax for the last two years.  We would be not be able to get a license according to this paragraph.   Sure sounds like a way to protect, i.e. grandfather, existing dispensaries without saying it.

[Restorium2]

I think it's the OR that makes the difference. To me that shows an individual can be a candidate. Doesn't have to have been a business entity. 

 

(g) The applicant,  an individual, has been a resident of

 

this state for less than a continuous 2-year period immediately

 

preceding the date of filing the application OR, IF A BUSINESS

 

ENTITY, NOT PAYING TAXES ...........  are not eligible 

 

Both parts are targeting individuals and businesses from other states it seems. Sounds good on the surface.

[semicaregiver]

I think it's the OR that makes the difference. To me that shows an individual can be a candidate. Doesn't have to have been a business entity. 

 

(g) The applicant,  an individual, has been a resident of

 

this state for less than a continuous 2-year period immediately

 

preceding the date of filing the application OR, IF A BUSINESS

 

ENTITY, NOT PAYING TAXES ...........  are not eligible 

 

Both parts are targeting individuals and businesses from other states it seems. Sounds good on the surface.

Agreed, on the surface.

 

The downside is the cost of opening one of the new regulated cannabusinesses.   Most people do not have the $ as individuals so they need to form a business entity to bring in partners.  This "new" business entity can not hold a license.   

[Restorium2]

Agreed, on the surface.

 

The downside is the cost of opening one of the new regulated cannabusinesses.   Most people do not have the $ as individuals so they need to form a business entity to bring in partners.  This "new" business entity can not hold a license.   

Agreed. Below the surface, they are taking bribes for more amendments that change everything. 

[Wild Bill]

Does anyone have a realistic figure as to what the initial investment would be to start a new business? Not for product and a building etc. but just the State mandated costs and fees.

[WET]

Does anyone have a realistic figure as to what the initial investment would be to start a new business? Not for product and a building etc. but just the State mandated costs and fees.

up to 5k local and 401(5) is left ambiguous. It's supposed to relate to the cost of investigating the application, but you know how much government paper and staples cost, right? Buckle up I'd think!

[bobandtorey]

It will be the product of politics. Yup 

[trichcycler]

"Hello, here is my personal information, my growing experience, my past taxes and assets list including proof of my growing experience(puff puff?).

May I please now violate federal law and grow 499 plants, while you observe me on 24/7 cams, and permit you access to my property unannounced as well?

When will I actually know just how much money I can earn per pound supplied? Will pricing be worked from the store back, or from the grower forward? Will it matter that I do not know anyone in politics? what if local police, judges, child protective services, employers, unions, physicians, etc  dont believe in medical marijuana and refuse to treat patients, growers, suppliers in accordance with state law, as they have been doing since 2008?" Will the same group that addressed them of these issues then be responsible for addressing them once again now? What will they take away that is different this time?"

 

whatever, no way, no how, not for me.

 

i apologize to those supply center customers too,

for they wont be able to sample some of the finest

medical cannabis available in the state.

Edited October 23, 2016 by trichcycler

[mishigami bear]

I think it is absurd to even license grows of 500 plants or 1500 plants. Such a large operation HAS to utilize pesticides to prevent devastating loss to the entire crop.

 

There is no way that a grower/employee could monitor that many plants closely enough to catch signs of mold, disease, bugs, etc.

[bennybuttstinker]

running a 1500-

 

would be easy as pie.

 

small hothouse really.

[bobandtorey]

EAST LANSING -- City officials are considering ordinance changes that would allow commercial medical marijuana facilities.

East Lansing City Council could consider a draft ordinance in December and set the subject for a public hearing sometime in January, Mayor Mark Meadows said. The possible ordinance change was discussed Tuesday during a discussion-only meeting of the East Lansing City Council.

The new ordinance could regulate larger operations, such as growers planting up to 500, 1,000 or 1,500 plants; processors who sell marijuana or marijuana-infused products to a “provisioning center;” people who transport marijuana between facilities; provisioning centers that sell marijuana to patients or caregivers; and safety compliance hubs that test marijuana from other facilities.

“We felt that we should get ahead of the curve on it and get something on the books,” Meadows said. “Whether we actually utilize it or not is still to be determined.

 

The possibility of a new local ordinance comes after the September approval of a state law clarifying licensing and regulations for commercial medical marijuana facilities.

The Medical Marijuana Facilities Act brings some clarity to the production, transportation and sale of medical marijuana, which was left largely open-ended in the state’s 2008 medical marijuana act.

Although East Lansing has no dispensaries within the city, it does have an ordinance regulating them, according to Thomas Yeadon, a lawyer for East Lansing. The Medical Marijuana Facilities Act opens the door to clearer licensing procedures and regulations related to growers, transporters, and sellers.

“Cities and other municipalities are allowed to enact an ordinance which would accept any of these, none of these, or any combination of these,” Yeadon said.

The city could charge a licensing fee of up to $5,000 per facility per year.

Additionally, the new law places a 3% excise tax on sales from the facilities. About 25% of that tax goes to the municipality in which the medical marijuana facility is located, and 35% to the county where the facility is located.

The city also would have to designate where those facilities could be located within East Lansing.

“We’re looking at specific areas of the city to have it operational in,” Meadows said. “I think that’s going to be subject to a lot of public discussion.”

While the Medical Marijuana Facilities Act goes into effect Dec. 20, people are unable to apply for licenses until Dec. 15, 2017. The delay in licensing gives the city time to consider its options, Yeadon said.

“This was just a preliminary look at what the city might want to consider in terms of allowing these facilities in the city,” Yeadon said.

East Lansing is not the only city mulling regulations for commercial medical marijuana establishments.

Lansing city officials have worked to create an ordinance that would regulate the city's 70-plus commercial medical marijuana facilities. The city placed a moratorium on new commercial facilities on May 21.

In October, East Lansing also changed its city ordinance to decriminalize the use and possession of small amounts of marijuana. The change brought the city ordinance in line with a charter amendment passed by voters in May 2015.

The ordinance change allows possession of up to one ounce of marijuana by people 21 and older on private property.

Yeadon said any city ordinance changes related to medical marijuana facilities would apply to facilities for medical use only, not recreational use.

 

http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/story/news/local/2016/11/17/east-lansing-eyes-new-rules-medical-marijuana-facilities/93976686/

[bobandtorey]

http://www.fox47news.com/news/local-news/city-council-to-review-proposed-medical-marijuana-ordinance

[blackhorse]

Thanks Bob for the info.

[CedarSpringsCG]

WTF?  OK, but what about that the state doesn't require any business property tax if you have less than $80,000 in personal property?

 

From the MI website:If commercial or industrial personal property owned or under control of a business within a city or township is worth a total of $80,000 or less, the personal property is 100% exempt beginning in 2014.

 

While most businesses need more than $80K worth of equipment, it would be pretty hard to get 80K in a dispensary.  A few $200 scales, a couple counters at a couple hundred a piece, etc.  And you are penalized if you do go over $80k, by having to pay taxes on it...

 

that amendment makes no sense.