Law Commons^™

Taxing & Zapping Marijuana: Blockchain Compliance In The Trump Administration Part 5, Richard Thompson Ainsworth, Brendan Magauran

Faculty Scholarship

This is the fifth part of a five-part series dealing with the rescission by U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions of the Obama-era policy that discouraged federal prosecutors from bringing charges in all but the most serious marijuana cases.

This article focuses on the back-end leakage in the state’s obligation to control both the physical flows of legalized marijuana, as well as the related fiscal flows (the proceeds of legalized marijuana sales). These flows intersect dramatically in retail-level frauds.

There are very few new proposals on how to solve the physical flow problems with consumer re-sales into the black market. Traditional …

Taxing & Zapping Marijuana: Blockchain Compliance In The Trump Administration Part 1, Richard Thompson Ainsworth, Brendan Magauran

Faculty Scholarship

On January 4, 2018, the Trump Administration through Attorney General Sessions rescinded an Obama-era policy1 that discouraged federal prosecutors from bringing charges in all but the most serious marijuana cases under the federal Controlled Substances Act,2 as well as under the Bank Secrecy Act.3 Federal law is at odds with state law in the majority of states on the legalization and subsequent state taxation of marijuana.4 Twenty-eight states and the District of Columbia have at least partially legalized marijuana. Eight of these states have legalized both medicinal and recreational use.5 With limited exceptions, legalized sales of marijuana are taxed.

We …

Basic (Non-Technical) Requirements – Electronic Monitoring Agreement For Zappers, Phantomware, And Other Sales Suppression Devices Appendix A, Richard Thompson Ainsworth, Robert Chicoine

Faculty Scholarship

The State of Washington v. Wong, Wash. Super. Ct., No. 16-1-00179-0 is the State of Washington’s first judicially resolved case involving an automated sales suppression device. Months of negotiations led to a plea agreement and the State’s first electronic sales monitoring agreement (August 30, 2017). The taxpayer violated RCW 82.32.290 (4)(a) by knowingly possessing, and knowingly using a Zapper to suppress sales.

The penalties in this case were severe. Not only were all taxes, penalties, and interest lawfully due required to be paid, but as a Class C felony incarceration of up to 5 years, a $10,000 fine, or both …