Has marijuana tax revenue fallen below the mark in many states?

If you want to make the headlines, talk about cannabis.

At least that is what Glenn Youngkin found out when he made the following comment;

“Don’t rely on the proceeds of legalized marijuana to make a difference. It didn’t work in Colorado, it didn’t work in California, it didn’t work in Oregon. That was a false advertisement. “

The politician running for governor of Virginia is very open to cannabis and has made it an important part of his campaign.

Perhaps Youngkin didn’t get the memo that even Republicans like weed these days.

Nonetheless, this was the hill he chose to die on and I will provide him with the ammunition for it.

According to Youngkin, “every state has had dismal results,” but in fact that is simply not true. It is always interesting to me that politicians claim these things without checking themselves.

It’s not that EVERYONE has access to the internet.

However, I digress.

Youngkin claims he has no problem with “cannabis” per se, but rather the economic promise.

How have cannabis states evolved?

When it comes to California, Youngkin is not entirely wrong.

California had a very slow adoption due to its enormously high taxes on cannabis, estimated at 40% at one point.

This resulted in around $ 3.1 billion in 2019, of which around $ 8.7 billion went to the black market. It is safe to say that California is not achieving its goals.

However, they have made changes and are even providing funding to pharmacies and suppliers to get into the new model.

As a result, the income has increased slightly. Once they can fix the tax problem, it should correct itself pretty quickly.

That said, $ 3.7 billion is a sizable sum compared to the “zero” you get if you don’t legalize cannabis.

Virtually every other rule of law has seen a surge in cannabis tax revenue in recent years, and although the performance of cannabis sales has been slightly acclaimed by activists in some cases, it is still a significant source of state tax revenue.

In addition, it is important to recognize that the states he was referring to were the first states to be legalized. Their cannabis models were not “the best” and are constantly being developed.

States that are currently legalizing have a faster ROI when it comes to government revenue.

Why Money Isn’t the Way!

I wrote about this in a previous article that detailed why “money” shouldn’t be the main motivator for legalizing cannabis.

Freedom of choice and expression should be at the forefront of the conversation, but both activists and opponents of cannabis reform tend to return to money.

There are far more pressing reasons why cannabis should be legal;

These are just a few things that came to mind on the spur of the moment. While tax revenues can help rebuild roads, fund school education programs, and the like, they should never be the focus of legalization.

If you’re looking for a more detailed dirty word on why money is NOT the way … then click here!

Why are people still fighting against the cannabis legalization movement?

Unless you have lived under a rock, we are seeing a great revolution in medicine, personal responsibility and freedom, the way we do business, etc.

When it comes to cannabis, it almost goes without saying that it will “eventually” become federally legal. The vast majority of Americans support its legality.

But just like there were “horse unions” who fought the car and how there were “beeper companies” who tried to convince you that a mobile device is just not as good as a number that tells you for someone to try to call you – there are antiquated people in society who believe cannabis is bad.

Youngkin may not have a “public problem” with cannabis, but the fact that he chose it as the linchpin in his campaign means that he actually thinks cannabis is bad.

That’s perfectly fine if he were a private individual, but he’s trying to be the governor of Virginia, and with that power he could stifle any attempts to legalize and expand consumer access.

Does Youngkin have a chance to win?

Ultimately, voters will decide whether Youngkin has what it takes to represent the “blue” state.

However, ideologically he disagrees with the majority of the state’s population – according to some sources, he actually has a chance of victory.

I’m not going into the details of why, but he does pretty much the same thing as Trump did with the “outsider” card, and since people are fed up with the establishment, it throws him a number of points.

But what about the money?

As a final point, Youngkin may be disappointed with the projections of state revenue from cannabis, but I want to point out to him that the opposite would mean that the state does not generate revenue from cannabis.

In fact, the fact that there is no legal cannabis on the books means an expense as enforcement costs would be incurred.

As a businessman, one might imagine that this economic logic is obvious to the man, but since he is also a Republican, he is certainly arguing from an ideological perspective.

Of course, he could just say all of this to make headlines. Nowadays (everything) + cannabis = headlines!

While cannabis money in terms of tax revenue has been slowly increasing since legalization began, we also have to keep in mind that the market is only more or less 10 years old.

What would cannabis be worth in another 10 years? How about 20?

MARIJUANA TAX REVENUE, READ MORE …

THE CONGRESS PROPOSES A 25% FEDERAL TAX ON MARIJUANA?!?

OR..

SHOULD WEED TAX REVENUE APPLY TO CITIES THAT BANNED MARIJUANA?