Tax Compliance Regulations

Explore top LinkedIn content from expert professionals.

  • View profile for Amit Patel, CPA, CA

    CPA (USA) | CA (India) | 24+ Years Experience | Founder & CEO, Ennovate Group - Helping CPA Firms Scale Efficiently | International Tax Specialist | GILTI, Subpart F, Form 5471 & 8865 Expert

    22,665 followers

    🏛️ 𝐓𝐚𝐱 𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭 𝐑𝐮𝐥𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐧 𝟐𝟖𝟎𝐄 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐐𝐁𝐈 𝐃𝐞𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 On September 11, 2025, the U.S. Tax Court ruled in Ayla A. Savage, et al. v. Commissioner that wages disallowed under IRC Sec. 280E are not considered W-2 wages for the IRC Sec. 199A qualified business income (QBI) deduction. This ruling is a significant development. While taxpayers subject to Section 280E must already exclude most ordinary business expenses, including wages, when calculating their taxable income, this case goes a step further. It confirms that the nondeductible portion of those wages cannot be used to boost the QBI deduction. 𝐖𝐡𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬: 𝐅𝐨𝐫 𝐜𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐬 𝐛𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐬: Since IRC Sec. 280E prohibits deducting most ordinary business expenses (including wages) for businesses trafficking in federally controlled substances, these nondeductible wages cannot be counted toward the W-2 wage limit for the QBI deduction. As a result, most cannabis operators will see little or no benefit from the 199A deduction, as only deductible wages (such as those included in COGS) can be used in the calculation, resulting in increased their effective tax rate. 𝐅𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐚𝐱 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐟𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐬: This case provides clear guidance on the interplay between two complex tax codes, 280E and 199A. It's essential to factor this into tax planning and compliance for clients in the cannabis industry. Stay informed as the tax landscape for this industry continues to evolve! #TaxLaw #CannabisTax #IRC280E #QBI #TaxCourt #TaxCompliance #Section199A

  • View profile for David Hua

    CEO & Co-Founder of Meadow (YCW15), Y Combinator’s first startup company to operate in the cannabis space | Former Board Member of CCIA, CDA & NCIA Retail Committees

    13,276 followers

    The Cannabis Tax Trap is domestic pain that feels like a global trade war. Cannabis businesses aren’t just navigating a complex web of compliance—they’re also getting taxed into the ground. At both the state and local levels, operators are dealing with: • State and local sales taxes • Excise taxes compounded on state and local taxes • And worst of all, 280E federal tax code restrictions that prevent normal business deductions, meaning cannabis companies pay taxes on gross income—not net. In some municipalities, effective tax rates can hit 50% or more. Imagine running a business where you’re taxed like a luxury importer within your own country. Which brings us to the comparison: global tariffs. Tariffs are meant to protect local industries by making imported goods more expensive. But they also often stifle trade, increase costs for consumers, and hurt innovation. Sound familiar? The cannabis industry is essentially tariffed at home—facing a financial penalty structure more akin to international trade barriers than domestic small business policy. It’s a strange paradox: a locally grown product, heavily regulated, taxed like an import, and yet unable to access interstate commerce or banking. The result? • Stifled growth. • Strong illicit markets. • A chilling effect on investment and innovation. If we want a safe, equitable, and thriving legal cannabis industry, tax reform has to be part of the conversation. Otherwise, we’re just taxing it like a foreign threat rather than nurturing it like a domestic opportunity.

  • View profile for Naomi Granger, CPA, MBA

    Become one of the most sought after Cannabis accounting professionals | Cannabis accounting education, training and community

    21,032 followers

    Nevada cannabis businesses are paying 50-70% effective tax rates while their non-cannabis competitors pay just 21%. This broken tax system isn't just unfair—it's threatening the survival of legitimate businesses trying to operate in a state-legal market. After working with cannabis clients across Nevada, I've identified the critical accounting strategies that can mean the difference between thriving and closing your doors: • Proper cost allocation methodologies that maximize COGS • Strategic entity structuring to isolate non-plant-touching activities • Detailed documentation systems that withstand IRS scrutiny • Integration between Metrc, POS, and accounting systems The reality is that Section 280E isn't going away anytime soon, but with the right accounting approach, Nevada cannabis businesses can significantly reduce their tax burden while maintaining full compliance. I've just published a comprehensive guide to Nevada Cannabis Accounting that covers everything from tax structures and banking challenges to compliance requirements and industry-specific best practices. Check out the full article here: https://lnkd.in/gPYa33Vu ♻️ Repost: If you found this information valuable, please repost to help other cannabis business owners understand these critical tax implications! What accounting challenges are you facing in your cannabis business?

Explore categories