EXCLUSIVE: Cannabis Rescheduling Is Not Cure-All For Industry Problems: Experts Explain How Tax Tactics Could Hurt Marijuana Businesses In Long Run
Rescheduling is “not a Panacea to all the problems of the industry” and would not make the issue of oversaturation and lack of investor capital go away, Frank Segall, co-chair of cannabis practice at Blank Rome, told the crowd gathered at the Benzinga Cannabis Capital Conference in Chicago on Tuesday. He was part of the panel, “Consolidation Trends in the Wake of Cannabis Rescheduling: Identifying Winners and Losers.”
While it would impact positively the balance sheets of many operators by eradicating restrictions of Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code and attracting some capital, the shift of cannabis to Schedule III would not result in big players like Wells Fargo crossing over to the marijuana industry, Segall said.
“Legalization is what they’re mandating for them to cross over,” he added.
Segall, alongside three other experts, joined the panel moderated by Scott Greiper, founder and president at Viridian Capital Advisors, to discuss broader market consolidation trends following cannabis’s shift to Schedule III.
Alongside Segall, Pablo Zuanic, managing partner at Zuanic & Associates LLC; Barbara Webb, tax partner at MGO and Laura Bianchi, co-founder of Bianchi & Brandt discussed which types of companies are positioned to thrive and which are not, as well as how investors can identify solid bets in the new regulatory landscape while avoiding …