News 
Market Data 
Discover
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
American Trade Association for Cannabis and HEMP (ATACH)
https://www.marijuanamoment.net/schumer-pledges-to-bring-committee-passed-marijuana-banking-bill-to-floor-very-soon-as-gop-senators-vow-to-kill-it/
TRADE DATA
DATE TIMESTAMP PRICE VOLUME
09/27/2023 13:43:29
0.049
89,964
09/27/2023 13:43:10
0.0491
2,111
09/27/2023 13:43:07
0.0491
10,000
09/27/2023 13:42:44
0.05
11,100
09/27/2023 13:42:36
0.049
4,081
09/27/2023 13:42:22
0.049
30,036
Wolfy’s Paint By Numbers
SHORT INTEREST
DATE SHORT INTEREST % CHANGE AVG. DAILY SHARE VOL SPLIT NEW ISSUE
09/15/2023 38,960 60.43 1,240,922 No No
08/31/2023 24,284 128.53 445,320 No No
08/15/2023 10,626 -59.30 338,362 No No
THE WQLF SAYS ; YOU DON’T SAY Have Mercy Have CVSI Partners Have Faith WQLFMAN Ahooooooo
Dr. Joong J Fang Said ; Why Waste My Time. Capiche! Lollipops 🍭 🍭
Wolfman Jack Said; YQU’RE The Reason I’m Sneezin YQU Understand Have Mercy Ahooooooo
Well, there goes some good input, instead of talking about CVSI failures, you know, falling sales, SG&A, losses even with that government welfare check, etc. Easier to talk about other things that have no effect on this one like that Senate bill being voted on WED. I do get it, there is nothing good going on here. But wishing the bill goes nowhere isn’t going to get it done either. I mean the Senate committee doesn’t really care about what fluffy and the puppies say, they are going to vote and likely pass the bill, but CVSI gets nothing out of it. No this seems to be more like stuck in Loserville where investment money goes to die. Yes, the real wolfman jack, had a bit part in a movie 50 years ago, a disc jockey by trade but dies about 28 years ago, don’t think too many under the age of 50 knows who he was. I guess they call that dying out. But CVSI is still going, heck they just awarded themselves 34 million shares to management plus 4 percent y/y for the next 10 years. {read dilution} so we know between that 69 percent SG&A and those 34 million shares per the next 10 years that management has been taken care of. As long as management is happy, everybody is happy, right! Living rent free!!!
WQLF SAYS; Thank YQU for another page out of your Diarya YQU Understand. The WQLF and the WQLFPACK are Wishing that the Bill goes Nowhere Man YQU Understand. Have Mercy Have Partners Have Faith WQLF Ahooooooo
Wolfman Jack Says; Have Brains Have Mercy YQU Understand Ahooooooo
More GREAT NEWS FOR CV SCIENCES
https://mailchi.mp/d16049be1661/us-hemp-roundtable-promotes-legislative-agenda-on-capitol-hill?e=1163a68b22
Regarding the SAFE banking bill that will be voted on WED. I think this will likely pass and then be forwarded to a later date on the Senate floor for a vote, then the House vote of course.
THIS WILL NOT PROVIDE ANYTHING FOR THIS COMPANY HOWEVER.
The SAFE act is for Marijuana companies which is selling an illegal FED product and has to do so on cash only transactions. Also, banks are reluctant to do business with those type of companies.
CBD companies don’t have those restrictions, they are selling a legal product, can work with any bank already and credit cards are widely used. It will provide nothing for CBD companies as they already have all that.
The big problem with this company is they just can’t sell enough of their product, no banking can help that. They have 69 percent of the money taken in goes to SG&A. Then the cost of the product they make is added and instant losses. Now they, as stated raised the price of those products they sell, but all that did was create less sales, apparently people aren’t willing to pay 1.20 for a 1-dollar product when they can just go elsewhere and get the same thing cheaper, who knew!
But SAFE banking, no, no help there, no the only thing that will help is to SELL MORE PRODUCT, not less and less every qt as they have been. IMO
WQLF SAYS; Back To The Future The WQLFPACK had fun with Pinocchio YQU Now Understand YQU Understand. Have Mercy Have Partners Have Faith WQLF Ahooooooo
WQKIMON SAID; But I’m not sure what Benefits I’m referring too,to, 2 two. Lollipops 🍭
However, again none of that will help CBD companies as they are already legal and again enjoy all those financial benefits already.
Lollipops 🍭
OH, the farm bill is going to change or revise bank regulations and easing limitations for hemp companies. Sure, sure.
And again, what revised bank regulations and easing limitations are you talking about? What revisions EXACTLY.
The 2023 Farm Bill debate continues to evolve in our nation’s capital amidst a lot of political challenges. The farm bill is a massive comprehensive piece of legislation covering everything from farm programs, conservation, rural development, forestry, trade promotion, nutrition, and even ag research and education. Generally, the farm bill comes before Congress every 5 years, with the current (2018) farm bill set to expire on September 30, 2023.
I believe they recently postponed till next year or at the end of this year. Will need congress to pass whatever they come up with. Very little in the farm bill to do with hemp, yes, it’s in there but who know what they will push thru.
But what ever they work out in the farm bill they still need to get the FDA to sign off on their own issue with cbd. But in regards to cbd the FDA has referred this back to the congress for proper classification. ““We have not found adequate evidence to determine how much CBD can be consumed, and for how long, before causing harm,” FDA principal deputy commissioner Janet Woodcock said in a statement. after careful review, the FDA has concluded that a new regulatory pathway for CBD is needed that balances individuals’ desire for access to CBD products with the regulatory oversight needed to manage risks.” The agency said that it would work with Congress to develop a new cross-agency regulatory framework for the substance”
FDA also has been assigned by the HHS to study the effects of sch 1 to sch 3 on MJ. The DEA is also doing their own study, unknown time frame there. Will need congress to be involved as well.
The bottom line is congress is going to be very busy trying to get all of this passed, and there is no way of knowing what will be passed and what will be left off the plate.
Also LOL, with the government likely going to shut down at the end of the week, might just delay a few things.
WQLF SAYS; The WQLF and the WQLFPACK agree. The highlight in Red is in reference to Banking issues and the emphasis was in order to educate the Misinformed WQKE GRINGO YQU Understand. Have Mercy Have Partners Have Faith WQLF Ahooooooo
WQLF SAID;
Revising bank regulations and easing limitations for hemp companies.
However, again none of that will help CBD companies as they are already legal and again enjoy all those financial benefits already.
WQLF SAYS;
“ Some key areas for improvement brought up by panelists included:
Addressing the FDA’s stance on CBD products.
Raising the allowable THC threshold in hemp products from 0.3% to 1%.
Revising bank regulations and easing limitations for hemp companies.
Removing the cumbersome Drug Enforcement Administration’s lab testing requirement for hemp.
Providing a USDA stamp of approval for hemp that is shipped between different jurisdictions in the U.S.”
https://kndlabs.com/blogs/news/how-the-2023-farm-bill-may-impact-the-cbd-hemp-industry
Lollipops 🍭
Well, you should know, the misinformation is yours. First a little untangling of your outdated and false post. The House bill of 2017/19/21 which failed is not the same as the 2023SAFER act of 23 which is going thru the Senate committee for review, why you would take pieces of failed bills from the House and blend them into the Senate version is beyond me, unless of course you don’t know the difference between the House and Senate.
A stream lined outlook of the 2023 SAFER bill. On SEPT 27 the Senate committee will vote on this bill, 9:30am, I think it will pass. From there it goes at some point to a full floor vote in the Senate. Currently they have 42 votes more or less locked in, they need 60 to pass. At this point let’s say they work it out and it passes. It then needs to go to the House for their vote. Providing the House accepts it as is, makes no changes{unlikely} and passes it would then go to the President to sign. If the House does some changes, it goes back to the Senate to work on and repass.
Since we don’t know what changes could occur it is hard to project a time line. Perhaps very late in the year. One of the things that I need more clarity on is whenever it does pass is the updated FDIC wording. “The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) will now have 365 instead of 180 days to create guidance for financial institutions, and will have to conduct a biennial report to understand barriers to accessing deposit accounts. Banking regulators will also be required to create guidance for deposit account access within two years of the bill’s enactment’ I really would like to know what can happen while the FDIC works out the guidance.
Anyway, I said streamlines so, but Wolfy if you could kindly point out the two red areas you mentioned “They include protections for hemp businesses” what are those? And “The bill also provides protections for hemp and hemp-derived cannabidiol (CBD) related businesses.” And again, what are they. I have no idea what you’re talking about in this bill.
Below is a quick summary of what is going on with next week’s vote.
Secure And Fair Enforcement Regulation Banking Act or the SAFER Banking Act of 2023.
The text for the SAFE Banking Act that aims to transform banking for the cannabis industry has been amended.
The SAFE Act aims to prevent banking regulators from penalizing banks for providing services to cannabis businesses, prevent proceeds from cannabis-related businesses from being subject to money laundering laws and enable loans and financial services to cannabis businesses.
Key amendments as reported on by the publication include changes to wording that initially prevented regulators from taking action that would discourage banks from working with cannabis-related businesses to instead state that these regulators must have a “valid reason” for preventing such relationships.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) will now have 365 instead of 180 days to create guidance for financial institutions, and will have to conduct a biennial report to understand barriers to accessing deposit accounts. Banking regulators will also be required to create guidance for deposit account access within two years of the bill’s enactment.
The text has also been amended to prevent the denial of “covered” mortgages to those using proceeds from legal cannabis businesses, as opposed to “federally-backed” mortgages as the bill initially read.
Federal regulators will now also be required to submit a report on access to banking in tribal communities.
“It is not clear how next week’s markup will unfold procedurally, in terms of whether members will vote on the new bill that will presumably be formally filed in the coming days or if they will instead move to amend the previously introduced measure with the substitute text.”
The bill is scheduled for mark up on 27 September, 2023, when the bill will be debated with all amendments considered.
“Under the bill, a federal banking regulator may not penalize a depository institution for providing banking services to a state-sanctioned marijuana business. For example, regulators may not terminate or limit the deposit or share insurance of a depository institution solely because the institution provides financial services to a state-sanctioned marijuana business. The bill also prohibits a federal banking regulator from requesting or ordering a depository institution to terminate a customer account unless (1) the regulator has determined that the depository institution is engaging in an unsafe or unsound practice or is violating a law or regulation, and (2) that determination is not based primarily on reputation risk.” The pending markup in the Senate Banking Committee comes more than four months after the body’s members welcomed six witnesses to testify on the SAFE Banking Act in early May. During that hearing, majority member Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., expressed concern over language in Section 10 of the bill: “Requirements for Deposit Account Termination Requests and Orders.”
Specifically, Reed said this section makes it more difficult for federal regulators to raise the alarm about bad actors who pose significant risks to banks without “tipping off” these actors before enforcement measures. From Reed’s perspective, as he said during the May 2023 hearing, Section 10 is too broad beyond the scope of the cannabis industry, “so it could allow permit schemes or all sorts of other interesting activity to go on without an effective response by the regulator.”
The specific language of this section was added to a previous version of the SAFE Banking Act in 2019 (then as Section 13) in an effort to appease Republicans who had concerns over how the legislation would impact lending to borrowers connected to other industries, such as gun manufacturing.
Despite 11 of 23 members on the Senate Banking Committee signed on as co-sponsors for the SAFE Banking Act of 2023—including eight Democrats and three Republicans—differing viewpoints on Section 10 have largely played a role in the delay for the pending markup. But now with indications that a full committee markup could come as soon as next week, the wrangle over Section 10 no longer appears to be a deal-breaker on moving forward.
Should the Senate Banking Committee advance the SAFE Banking Act, it would be a landmark victory for the legislation, which failed to make headway in the Senate under former Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and then under current Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., last Congress. Notably, Schumer showed a lack of interest in the incremental reform effort throughout 2021 and most of 2022 as he sponsored a broader legalization bill, the Cannabis Administration and Opportunity Act.
The million-dollar question is: If the committee recommends the bill to the Senate for a full vote, will the SAFE Banking Act have enough support to pass as standalone legislation without a filibuster?
As Cannabis Business Times Associate Editor Tony Lange wrote in July, "Federal cannabis banking reform now has public support from nine Republicans in the Senate, enough to avoid a possible filibuster on the floor of the chamber should Democrats come together. This GOP threshold for support comes with Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, adding her name as a co-sponsor July 13 to the Secure and Fair Enforcement (SAFE) Banking Act. Collins also co-sponsored the 2021 SAFE Banking Act."
According to a Sept. 14 article on NBCNews.com, "Both Republicans and Democrats on the committee support the bill and expressed confidence that it would have enough support to pass the Senate when it comes up for a full vote, a step Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., vowed to take as soon as this fall."
But now that the SAFE Banking Act is on the cusp of advancement in the Senate, the House is no longer under Democratic control, like it was when SAFE Banking passed seven times between 2019 and 2022. In 2023, U.S. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., largely controls the reins in the lower chamber this Congress. The Secure and Fair Enforcement (SAFE) Banking Act of 2023 (S. 1323/H.R. 2891) will be moving forward in the U.S. Senate, according to the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. The committee confirmed Sept. 19 that the SAFE Banking Act is scheduled for in-person markup Sept. 27.
UPDATE: Since that confirmation on the date, the committee has calendared an executive session to consider a revised version of the legislation at 9:30 a.m. Sept. 27.
The scheduled review will be the first Senate action on the bill, which has passed seven times in the U.S. House since 2019, most recently in July 2022 as an amendment to the fiscal year 2023 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The latest version of the bill was introduced April 26 in Congress by a group of bipartisan House and Senate lawmakers, including Sens. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore. and Steve Daines, R-Mont., and Reps. Dave Joyce, R-Ohio, and Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore. The bill currently has 42 co-sponsors in the Senate and 72 co-sponsors in the House.
According to a U.S. Senate document, "A markup is a meeting of the committee to debate and consider amendments to a measure under consideration. The markup determines whether the measure pending before a committee will be recommended to the full Senate, and whether it should be amended in any substantive way."
