California State Assembly Approves Bill Pausing Tax Hike on Legal Cannabis Retailers
California State Assembly Approves Bill Pausing Tax Hike on Legal Cannabis Retailers originally appeared on L.A. Mag.
The California State Assembly unanimously voted on Monday to halt a slated 25% tax increase on the cannabis industry from going into effect on July 1.In a 74-0 vote, the Assembly approved AB564 by Asm. Matt Haney (D-San Francisco). The bill would prevent the retail excise tax from increasing to 19% from its current 15%."If we continue to pile on more taxes and fees onto our struggling small cannabis businesses, California's cannabis culture is under serious threat of extinction," Haney said in a statement.According to SFGATE, taxable cannabis sales in California amounted to $1.088 billion in 2025's first quarter, the lowest in five years. The figure also represents an 11% drop compared to the same quarter in 2024, marking the largest decline in legal cannabis sales in state history.Retailers are responsible for paying the tax regardless of consumer sales. Haney attributes the steady growth of cannabis sales in other states, such as Colorado and Michigan, to lower taxes and fewer barriers for businesses and consumers.
"If we want to support our cannabis industry that drives millions of visitors to California every year, adding more costs makes absolutely no sense," said Haney."Nearly a decade after Californians overwhelmingly approved cannabis legalization, the industry is struggling under the crushing weight of a 15% excise tax,' said Caren Woodson, president of the California Cannabis Industry Association. 'Any increase, particularly a 25% increase, would not only be bad public policy, but devastating to operators already on the brink.'In 2016, voters passed Proposition 64 to legalize the possession, cultivation and sale of cannabis for recreational use with an initial retail excise tax of 15%.A 2022 law eliminated California's cultivation tax, making the excise tax adjustable to generate equivalent revenue. The new bill would eliminate the law's requirement to adjust the excise tax rate.AB564 will go to the State Senate for consideration.
This story was originally reported by L.A. Mag on Jun 4, 2025, where it first appeared.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
14 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
California will do anything to protect immigrants — except build them housing
Over the past several weeks, hundreds of thousands of Californians have taken to the streets to protest the Trump administration's increasingly authoritarian efforts to deport the state's undocumented population. There's a moral imperative behind these protests; the vast majority of the people being targeted by federal agents are law-abiding workers with no criminal records. There's a practical one, too: This state cannot function without its migrant workers, particularly our agricultural sector. It isn't just that undocumented workers will accept lower wages than their American counterparts. Farming is hard, skilled labor. Absent changes to federal immigration policy that would allow and incentivize more migrants to come here legally, California doesn't have the trained workforce it needs to feed itself and the nation. (We accounted for 41% of the country's vegetable sales in 2022.) And so, Californians and our politicians have rightly gone to battle with President Donald Trump. Yet as supportive as this editorial board is of these efforts, we'd be remiss if we didn't call something out: This state needs to become as passionate about housing our essential workers as it is about fighting Immigration and Customs Enforcement. It's been just over two and a half years since the deadly shootings in Half Moon Bay put the Dickensian living conditions of California's farmworkers — the vast majority of whom are undocumented — on the national radar. For decades, California had allowed its migrant workers to live in overcrowded, mold-filled housing with bacteria-ridden drinking water. That's if it housed them at all. What's changed? Not nearly enough, according to San Mateo County Supervisor Ray Mueller, whose district includes the site of the 2023 massacre. Building housing on farmland in his district has proven to be a logistical challenge amid drainage issues, sewage concerns and access to drinkable water. Yet trying to build worker housing off-site hits an even more intractable roadblock. 'The coastal community is, by a large majority, supportive of farmworkers,' he said. 'The opposition you run into is around density.' San Mateo County is hardly unique in this regard. In Marin County, for instance, an effort to build housing for the workers, many undocumented, being displaced by the closure of ranches in the Point Reyes National Seashore has been met with a lawsuit by NIMBY groups. This is, of course, unacceptable. And yet, state and local rules still too often empower obstructionism. Mueller said the arduous progress San Mateo County has made in building farmworker housing was mostly achieved using emergency powers that streamlined the usual permitting processes. 'The state was wonderful in getting our project moving,' Mueller said. 'We just need to do that at scale across the state.' We're nowhere close. In 2024, California lawmakers passed a measure to exempt farmworker housing up to 150 units from review under the California Environmental Quality Act. However, this streamlining applied to only two counties: Santa Clara and Santa Cruz. A bill in the state Legislature, AB457 from Assembly Member Esmerelda Soria, D-Merced, would expand those streamlining measures to Fresno, Madera and Merced counties. Over 40% of the state's land is used for agriculture. We're never going to get anywhere with a drip-drop of county-by-county CEQA carve-outs. Assembly Member Damon Connolly, D-San Rafael, told the editorial board he'd be supportive of an effort to expand CEQA streamlining to his district and perhaps even statewide. But even that wouldn't be enough, Mueller said. For many Bay Area farming communities, the California Coastal Commission has its own separate and arduous permitting process. Without streamlining bills to cover this and CEQA, little progress will be made. And now an even greater challenge comes from the Trump administration. Farmworker-specific housing makes easy pickings for federal raids. Mueller says he fears his efforts to build new farmworker housing may have inadvertently 'put a target on the back' of the people he's spent years trying to help. This fear isn't theoretical. Gov. Gavin Newsom's office recently issued a press release saying that federal deportation authorities requested and received the addresses and immigration status of Medi-Cal recipients after the state expanded health insurance benefits to low-income undocumented workers. Tailored government efforts for the undocumented risk creating a paper trail that puts them in danger. 'It is clear that we must reassess our programs to ensure we are doing all we can to protect the personal information of our community,' incoming state Senate President Pro Tem Monique Limón, D-Santa Barbara, told the editorial board. We don't have the answer to this quandary on the health care front. But California can do something for migrant workers as it relates to housing — something Limón and too many other California politicians have been reluctant to do. Make it easier to build. AB457 is an admission from legislators that CEQA creates onerous and unnecessary impediments to development. Yet housing streamlining bills such as SB79 from San Francisco state Sen. Scott Wiener, which would exempt developments near transit from CEQA review, provided they comply with local affordable housing mandates and other criteria, are receiving immense political pushback. Undocumented renters in California have virtually the same rights as everyone else in the private rental market under the Immigrant Tenant Protection Act. And landlords are prohibited from disclosing, or typically even asking about, immigration status. But without an adequate housing supply, those protections go to waste. Can most undocumented workers afford to buy a shiny new condo? Almost certainly not. But they could potentially move into older units that open up when other renters decide to buy. And they certainly could benefit from the development of new mother-in-law units — such as those that might have been built had cities like San Diego not just rolled back their accessory dwelling unit laws in the face of community opposition. If California is willing to fight the federal government to keep its undocumented residents here, it should also be willing to fight to ensure they don't live in squalor.
New York Post
a day ago
- New York Post
What will it take for Gavin Newsom to focus on his day job?
President Donald Trump rightly took the ruling upholding his National Guard deployment to Los Angeles as a 'BIG WIN,' but it can be a winner for Californians, too — if it inspires their governor to focus on the job they elected him to. Gov. Gavin Newsom vows to litigate on, but if necessary the Supreme Court will slap him down, too. What will get him to quit his near-nonstop posturing to set himself up for a 2028 presidential run, and get his nose to the gubernatorial grindstone? It's bad enough that he sided with LA Mayor Karen Bass in obstructing ICE efforts to deport child predators, murderers and other worst-of-the-worst 'asylum seekers' — posturing that all but invited the riots that Trump deployed the Guard to shut down. Worse that this rush to the left came after Newsom's fake to the right with a series of podcasts where he pretended sympathy to centrist criticisms of the far-left agenda. That follows his haplessness during the Los Angeles fires — a disaster Trump credibly tied to Newsom's green obsessions. Other Gavin grotesquerie included rushing to meet the president on Trump's LA visit bare weeks after prepping for all-out legal #resistance to the new prez. California is plagued with soaring homelessness, elevated crime rates and brutally high costs of living: Even its welcome to illegal immigrants hasn't prevented a historic switch from growth to decline. That is: On Newsom's watch, Cali is for the first time ever losing seats in the House of Representatives because so many residents are fleeing to less-toxic jurisdictions. The Golden State is a natural near-paradise, but Newsom & co. are destroying it. That governor is still devoting his time and energy to a years-off national run is damning proof that he doesn't care a whit for the people of California.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Port of LA Ordered by Federal Judge to Clean Up Contaminated Wastewater
The Port of Los Angeles will comply with an order from a U.S. District Court judge to remediate environmental impacts stemming from the discharge of hazardous waste that has allegedly caused widespread contamination in the L.A. Harbor. The ruling stems from a lawsuit filed by Environment California against the City of Los Angeles, which alleged that the country's busiest port violated the federal Clean Water Act by letting untreated wastewater containing toxic copper and fecal bacteria pollute the harbor within San Pedro Bay since 2019. More from Sourcing Journal US Companies Take Trump Tariff Suit to Supreme Court Port of LA Imports Dip 9% in May After Tariff Shock Nebraska AG Sues Temu Over Alleged Consumer Protection Violations Filed last July, the suit said that more than 2,000 illegal discharges had taken place within the course of the previous five years, stemming from stormwater and contaminated groundwater that collects within a 53-acre area of the Port. Now, the Port will be required to ameliorate the issue by changing its management of stormwater and groundwater. The court's ruling states that the city will have to treat the water to remove toxic pollutants by redirecting it to the Terminal Island Water Reclamation Plant. Specific performance metrics must be achieved or the Port will face monetary penalties. Also under the settlement, the Port will be required to shell out $1.3 million to the Rose Foundation for Communities and the Environment for use in restoration projects tied to the L.A. Harbor and San Pedro Bay, with most of the money earmarked for a project designed to remove waste. The Port is mandated to pay a $130,00 civil penalty to the U.S. Treasury as well. 'Californians count on having a clean, vibrant coastline, but that's not compatible with contaminated effluent that can lap up on our world-renowned shores,' said Laura Deehan, Environment California's state director. 'This settlement is a great step toward a cleaner, safer San Pedro Bay, and it demonstrates the vital role that citizen lawsuits play in the enforcement of our federal environmental laws.' According to Deehan, the settlement has a 'double benefit' for the L.A. Harbor, namely that it will end the Port's discharge violations and also provide funding to remove waste. The National Environmental Law Center's staff attorney, Lewis DeHope, said the settlement 'promises to finally put an end to the Port's long-standing violations that have plagued the harbor for years,' adding that, 'Bacteria and copper are out; effective treatment is in.'
