Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(SacBee)   California needed a new tax collection system to support marijuana growers who pay with bags full of cash   (sacbee.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, Money, Nevada, Corporate tax, Value added tax, Tax collector, Cannabis, Taxation, Tax collectors  
•       •       •

754 clicks; posted to Business » on 11 Apr 2019 at 9:05 AM (14 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



26 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2019-04-11 09:10:20 AM  
This is a great opportunity to pay with pennies to spite them.
 
2019-04-11 09:52:41 AM  

mrmopar5287: This is a great opportunity to pay with pennies to spite them.


This seems like a good time to point out that although they are "legal tender for all debts public and private", there is no requirement that payment must be accepted when using all pennies, etc. The debtor is well within their rights to say "no pennies" or "no bills over $20 accepted" and so on. So, using the 'pay with pennies' tactic most likely won't result in spite and will result in just a huge, unnecessary hassle for the payor.

The ironic thing is that this whole mess is being caused by banks (some of the most amoral businesses ever) refusing to do business with growers (primarily on "moral" grounds).
 
2019-04-11 09:55:51 AM  
What sort of bags do you want them to pay with?

\ as in, bags full of what?
 
2019-04-11 09:58:35 AM  
This article seems like an alert to the law enforcement agencies in the state that there is free money for the taking. Yeah, they have to split it with the Feds, but hey, free money.
 
2019-04-11 10:06:51 AM  
Dick Gozinya The ironic thing is that this whole mess is being caused by banks (some of the most amoral businesses ever) refusing to do business with growers (primarily on "moral" grounds).

Ha. Funny. Banks refusing business on moral grounds. Banks are refusing business because of fear of being accused of money laundering because pot is still illegal in a federal sense. Banks would love to get involved in weed money but there's a huge seizure risk right now.
 
2019-04-11 10:07:29 AM  

Dick Gozinya: The ironic thing is that this whole mess is being caused by banks (some of the most amoral businesses ever) refusing to do business with growers (primarily on "moral" grounds).


It's not on "moral" grounds.  It's on "pot is still illegal" grounds.

Pot is not actually legal anywhere in the country.  The Feds still consider it illegal everywhere, so it is.  The banks can get in trouble with the Feds by doing business with companies selling an illegal product.
 
2019-04-11 10:09:27 AM  

McGrits: This article seems like an alert to the law enforcement agencies in the state that there is free money for the taking. Yeah, they have to split it with the Feds, but hey, free money.


It's much harder for a law enforcement agency in California to randomly seize large amounts of cash than it is in, say, Texas.
 
2019-04-11 10:15:48 AM  

McGrits: This article seems like an alert to the law enforcement agencies in the state that there is free money for the taking. Yeah, they have to split it with the Feds, but hey, free money.


wat

For one thing, they're not disclosing where those payments happen. For another, it's totally state-legal (so any LEOs attempting to "intercept" a CannabiCo box of legal cash meant for the state's tax coffers may find themselves staring down a grand larceny charge. For a third thing, while the Feds are technically able to intercept these state-legal payments (thanks, Jeff Sessions!) - when they previously hadn't been - Cory Gardner has extracted a promise that such state-legal businesses are not the focus of Trump's War on Drugs.

// for whatever that promise is worth
 
2019-04-11 10:20:40 AM  

Dr Dreidel: McGrits: This article seems like an alert to the law enforcement agencies in the state that there is free money for the taking. Yeah, they have to split it with the Feds, but hey, free money.

wat

For one thing, they're not disclosing where those payments happen. For another, it's totally state-legal (so any LEOs attempting to "intercept" a CannabiCo box of legal cash meant for the state's tax coffers may find themselves staring down a grand larceny charge. For a third thing, while the Feds are technically able to intercept these state-legal payments (thanks, Jeff Sessions!) - when they previously hadn't been - Cory Gardner has extracted a promise that such state-legal businesses are not the focus of Trump's War on Drugs.

// for whatever that promise is worth


State legal payments do not get in the way of cops taking money. It s legal for me to go buy a used car with cash. However, if I get pulled over and the cash 'smells like drugs' I lose it and have to then go to court to get the money back.
 
2019-04-11 10:25:43 AM  

Dick Gozinya: This seems like a good time to point out that although they are "legal tender for all debts public and private", there is no requirement that payment must be accepted when using all pennies, etc. The debtor is well within their rights to say "no pennies" or "no bills over $20 accepted" and so on.


Specifying a form of payment is only acceptable if done in advance. A convenience store that won't take your $100 bill can let you leave without merchandise because no debt has yet been created.

If the tax man wants to say "no pennies" their only option is to cancel the debt. Otherwise, they have to accept payment with whatever legal tender you bring to them.
 
2019-04-11 10:39:05 AM  

McGrits: State legal payments do not get in the way of cops taking money. It s legal for me to go buy a used car with cash. However, if I get pulled over and the cash 'smells like drugs' I lose it and have to then go to court to get the money back.


I guess? If a cop caught you on your way from the business to the tax office, and the courier had literally zero paperwork on them.

But (again, per TFA), they call the tax office in advance, presumably they have records of how they came to have $350k in cash in a box, and the tax office also has "security officers" watching for hinkiness.

Also, CA has laws that prevent the cops from straight seizing your cash. They still can (especially if it's more than $40k), but it's not as simple as "This money sure looks like it came from a cocaine cartel. YOINK!"
 
2019-04-11 10:42:54 AM  

wademh: What sort of bags do you want them to pay with?

\ as in, bags full of what?


Back in my day it was dimes.
 
2019-04-11 10:45:00 AM  

Dick Gozinya: mrmopar5287: This is a great opportunity to pay with pennies to spite them.

This seems like a good time to point out that although they are "legal tender for all debts public and private", there is no requirement that payment must be accepted when using all pennies, etc. The debtor is well within their rights to say "no pennies" or "no bills over $20 accepted" and so on. So, using the 'pay with pennies' tactic most likely won't result in spite and will result in just a huge, unnecessary hassle for the payor.

The ironic thing is that this whole mess is being caused by banks (some of the most amoral businesses ever) refusing to do business with growers (primarily on "moral" grounds).


But will do business with iron mongers ,for profit prisons ,and other morally questionable companies.
 
2019-04-11 10:59:34 AM  

mrmopar5287: If the tax man wants to say "no pennies" their only option is to cancel the debt. Otherwise, they have to accept payment with whatever legal tender you bring to them.


This is not true.
 
2019-04-11 11:32:14 AM  

Dick Gozinya: mrmopar5287: This is a great opportunity to pay with pennies to spite them.

This seems like a good time to point out that although they are "legal tender for all debts public and private", there is no requirement that payment must be accepted when using all pennies, etc. The debtor is well within their rights to say "no pennies" or "no bills over $20 accepted" and so on. So, using the 'pay with pennies' tactic most likely won't result in spite and will result in just a huge, unnecessary hassle for the payor.

The ironic thing is that this whole mess is being caused by banks (some of the most amoral businesses ever) refusing to do business with growers (primarily on "moral" grounds).


Banks don't object on moral grounds. They object on the grounds that the federal government makes it legally dubious for them to knowingly receive cash from federally illegal activity. And the total amount of cash isn't large enough for them to knowingly break the law like they do for the drug cartels. If the marijuana business was depositing tens of billions of dollars, the banks would find a way.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/201​1​/apr/03/us-bank-mexico-drug-gangs
 
2019-04-11 11:51:12 AM  

Geotpf: mrmopar5287: If the tax man wants to say "no pennies" their only option is to cancel the debt. Otherwise, they have to accept payment with whatever legal tender you bring to them.

This is not true.


It works in my state (Illinois). I've done it enough times for parking tickets that they've put me on the "do not ticket" list. Paying $1 a month also works well.
 
2019-04-11 12:08:39 PM  

mrmopar5287: Geotpf: mrmopar5287: If the tax man wants to say "no pennies" their only option is to cancel the debt. Otherwise, they have to accept payment with whatever legal tender you bring to them.

This is not true.

It works in my state (Illinois). I've done it enough times for parking tickets that they've put me on the "do not ticket" list. Paying $1 a month also works well.


http://content.time.com/time/specials​/​packages/article/0,28804,1913870_19138​68_1913865,00.html
 
2019-04-11 12:21:40 PM  

Geotpf: http://content.time.com/time/specials​/​packages/article/0,28804,1913870_19138​68_1913865,00.html


You just made my point: "While federal law states that coins are legal tender, it does not compel anyone to accept them. If a business doesn't want to take pennies - or a $100 bill, for that matter - it has a legal right to refuse them."

The ability to refuse pennies as payment only exists before a debt is created. If I want to buy a Hershey bar at a store they can refuse to accept my pennies as payment only to the point of making me leave the Hershey bar behind. Declined payment is fine when there is no debt.

If I've already consumed the Hershey bar and I have legal tender (pennies) to pay for it, the store is obligated to accept. If they decline it is only by canceling the debt.
 
2019-04-11 12:56:45 PM  

dsmith42: Dick Gozinya: mrmopar5287: This is a great opportunity to pay with pennies to spite them.

This seems like a good time to point out that although they are "legal tender for all debts public and private", there is no requirement that payment must be accepted when using all pennies, etc. The debtor is well within their rights to say "no pennies" or "no bills over $20 accepted" and so on. So, using the 'pay with pennies' tactic most likely won't result in spite and will result in just a huge, unnecessary hassle for the payor.

The ironic thing is that this whole mess is being caused by banks (some of the most amoral businesses ever) refusing to do business with growers (primarily on "moral" grounds).

Banks don't object on moral grounds. They object on the grounds that the federal government makes it legally dubious for them to knowingly receive cash from federally illegal activity. And the total amount of cash isn't large enough for them to knowingly break the law like they do for the drug cartels. If the marijuana business was depositing tens of billions of dollars, the banks would find a way.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011​/apr/03/us-bank-mexico-drug-gangs


Correct. The federal government could break their back pretty easily. That's nice FDIC insurance you have there...

No bank is turning down legal money for moral reasons. Absurd.
 
2019-04-11 01:23:45 PM  

Geotpf: Dick Gozinya: The ironic thing is that this whole mess is being caused by banks (some of the most amoral businesses ever) refusing to do business with growers (primarily on "moral" grounds).

It's not on "moral" grounds.  It's on "pot is still illegal" grounds.

Pot is not actually legal anywhere in the country.  The Feds still consider it illegal everywhere, so it is.  The banks can get in trouble with the Feds by doing business with companies selling an illegal product.


So the other drug dealers the banks do business with for the other illegal drugs, how do you explain that?
 
2019-04-11 01:28:29 PM  

Dick Gozinya: mrmopar5287: This is a great opportunity to pay with pennies to spite them.

This seems like a good time to point out that although they are "legal tender for all debts public and private", there is no requirement that payment must be accepted when using all pennies, etc. The debtor is well within their rights to say "no pennies" or "no bills over $20 accepted" and so on. So, using the 'pay with pennies' tactic most likely won't result in spite and will result in just a huge, unnecessary hassle for the payor.

The ironic thing is that this whole mess is being caused by banks (some of the most amoral businesses ever) refusing to do business with growers (primarily on "moral" grounds).


Citation needed lol.
 
2019-04-11 01:39:01 PM  

Dick Gozinya: mrmopar5287: This is a great opportunity to pay with pennies to spite them.

This seems like a good time to point out that although they are "legal tender for all debts public and private", there is no requirement that payment must be accepted when using all pennies, etc. The debtor is well within their rights to say "no pennies" or "no bills over $20 accepted" and so on. So, using the 'pay with pennies' tactic most likely won't result in spite and will result in just a huge, unnecessary hassle for the payor.

The ironic thing is that this whole mess is being caused by banks (some of the most amoral businesses ever) refusing to do business with growers (primarily on "moral" grounds).


Nope. They're reluctant because the federal government is over in the corner watching and growling any time a bank might consider doing business with certain industries. Among them have been: check cashing establishments, porn, marijuana, guns. The threat is never explicit, but more like, "That's a sketchy bunch of folks over there. You wouldn't want to do business with those types, would you?" The banks get the "It'd be a shame if ..." message. And it's not just since Trump, either; it's been going on a while.
 
2019-04-11 03:25:31 PM  

Geotpf: Dick Gozinya: The ironic thing is that this whole mess is being caused by banks (some of the most amoral businesses ever) refusing to do business with growers (primarily on "moral" grounds).

It's not on "moral" grounds.  It's on "pot is still illegal" grounds.

Pot is not actually legal anywhere in the country.  The Feds still consider it illegal everywhere, so it is.  The banks can get in trouble with the Feds by doing business with companies selling an illegal product.


What the Feds would like to do is irrelevant, because Congress has made it illegal for the Feds to spend any money to go after those who are following the laws of their state.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2019-04-11 03:37:01 PM  
BullBearMS

Recreational use is not protected from federal prosecution. Only medical use strictly in compliance with state law on medical marijuana is protected.
 
2019-04-11 03:47:15 PM  

ZAZ: BullBearMS

Recreational use is not protected from federal prosecution. Only medical use strictly in compliance with state law on medical marijuana is protected.


Congress has made it pretty clear that they are willing to write similar exemptions to prevent prosecutions for recreational use into the budget if they have to.

After which the corporate investments into the legal pot market really ramped up.

The Obama administration already tried to prosecute in states where it was legal (despite Congress forbidding the use of Federal funds to do so) and was shut down by the Federal courts.
 
2019-04-12 12:31:28 PM  

Dick Gozinya: mrmopar5287: This is a great opportunity to pay with pennies to spite them.

This seems like a good time to point out that although they are "legal tender for all debts public and private", there is no requirement that payment must be accepted when using all pennies, etc. The debtor is well within their rights to say "no pennies" or "no bills over $20 accepted" and so on. So, using the 'pay with pennies' tactic most likely won't result in spite and will result in just a huge, unnecessary hassle for the payor.

The ironic thing is that this whole mess is being caused by banks (some of the most amoral businesses ever) refusing to do business with growers (primarily on "moral" grounds).


More like "Federally regulated" grounds.
 
Displayed 26 of 26 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter




In Other Media
Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report