NORML suggests 280E compromise

“NORML supports regulatory controls that seek to limit youth exposure to adult-use cannabis-related advertising and marketing as well as efforts to not incentivize advertising cannabis products through the tax code.”

“Efforts” links back here.  I’ll work to restore some language.

Here’s an earlier statement that I can’t seem to paste, and can furnish only as a downloadable statement.  It points out that advertising  is a red flag for prohibitionists, and that maintaining non-deductibility of advertising costs can work against “well funded corporate controlled marijuana companies, which can afford extensive advertising.”  It was taken down because it was topical — “because the 280E bill is not currently pending.”    https://twitter.com/search?q=%40norml%20%40oglesbypat%20280E&src=recent_search_click

NORML early statement image only

The webpage also lost a link to this article showing some of the upside of 280E. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2015/12/18/how-bob-dole-got-america-addicted-to-marijuana-taxes/#disqus_thread

19 thoughts on “NORML suggests 280E compromise”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s