Replies to post #272512 on Blum Holdings Inc (BLMH)

[IndustryParticipant]

Of note though as well is I see in link itself it's 2015, and as mentioned, the evolution of how such is approached literally is (still) changing every day, through many "pushing the envelope" per se, audits, decisions, and continuing such..so, there is always something new (favorable, or not)...

It's actually quite surprising how many new operators do not seek out well versed and established firms, and merely remain with their current professionals . (I'd say 1 of 3 new clients and projects we pick up less than 2-3 years old we end up providing referrals to cannabis specific firms. (Who then end up completely redoing everything...)

Our preferred source (CPA) actually worked in industry (dispo's as well as cultivation management) working his way through school, and spends quite a bit of time walking through facilities (which all should but rarely do), and most things planned out with him involved in the process before implemented. (Which again, all should, but few do)....

[TheCreepyCracker]

Now that was educational. Thanks.

[Magnum7419]

NOTE 3 – CONCENTRATIONS OF BUSINESS AND CREDIT RISK



California Licensed Vendors Requirement



The Company sources cannabis products for retail, cultivation and production from various vendors. However, as a result of the new regulations in the State of California, the Company’s California retail, cultivation and production operations must use vendors licensed by the State effective January 1, 2018. As a result, the Company will be dependent upon the licensed vendors in California to supply products as of that date. If the Company is unable to enter into a relationship with sufficient members of properly licensed vendors, the Company's sales may be impacted. During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017, we did not have any concentration of vendors for inventory purchases. However, this may change depending on the number of vendors who receive appropriate licenses to operate in the State of California

[Magnum7419]

Is this the part where 280 E impacts TRTC ?

"The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “Tax Act”) was enacted on December 22, 2017, and permanently reduces the U.S. federal corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%, effective January 1, 2018. Staff Accounting Bulletin (“SAB”) No. 118 (“SAB No. 118”) allows a company to record a provisional amount when it does not have the necessary information available, prepared, or analyzed in reasonable detail to complete its accounting for the change in the tax law during the measurement period. As of September 30, 2018, the Company has not completed its accounting for the tax effects of the enactment of the Tax Act; however, the Company has made a reasonable estimate of the effects on its existing deferred tax balances. The Company recognized a provisional tax benefit of $3.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2017 associated with the items it could reasonably estimate. As of December 31, 2017, a full valuation allowance was recorded against all net deferred tax assets, as these assets are more likely than not to be unrealized.



For the nine months ended September 30, 2018, there have not been any adjustments made to these estimates. The Company is still analyzing the Tax Act and refining its calculations, which could potentially impact the measurement of its tax balances. The Company expects to complete its analysis within the measurement period in accordance with SAB No. 118.



For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017, the Company had subsidiaries that produced and sold cannabis or cannabis pure concentrates, subjecting the Company to the limits of Internal Revenue Code (“IRC”) Section 280E. Pursuant to IRC Section 280E, the Company is allowed only to deduct expenses directly related to sales of product. The State of California does not conform to IRC Section 280E and, accordingly the Company is allowed to deduct all operating expenses on its California income tax returns. As the Company files consolidated federal income tax returns, the taxable income generated from its subsidiaries subject to IRC Section 280E has been offset by losses generated by operations not subject to IRC Section 280E. During 2017, Company amended income tax returns of our subsidiary Black Oak for the periods prior to acquisition, which resulted in a net tax refund in 2017.



Permanent tax differences include ordinary and necessary business expenses deemed by the Company as non-allowable deductions under IRC Section 280E; non-deductible expenses for interest, derivatives and warrant expense related to debt financings and non-deductible losses related to various acquisitions.



As of September 30, 2018 and December 31, 2017, the Company had net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $40,106,668 and $26,333,000, respectively, which, if unused, will expire beginning in the year 2034. These tax attributes are subject to an annual limitation from equity shifts, which constitute a change of ownership as defined under IRC Section 382, which will limit their utilization. The Company has assessed the effect of these limitations and does not believe these losses to be substantially limited. The Company also has deferred tax liabilities from the excess carrying amounts of the basis of depreciable assets for financial reporting purposes.



Management assesses the available positive and negative evidence to estimate if sufficient future taxable income will be generated to use the existing deferred tax assets. A significant piece of objective negative evidence evaluated was the cumulative losses incurred in 2017 and through the nine months period ended September 30, 2018. Such objective evidence limits the ability to consider other subjective evidence, such as our projections for future growth. On the basis of this evaluation, as of September 30, 2018, a valuation allowance of $11,538,274 has been recorded against all net deferred tax assets as these assets are more likely than not to be unrealized. The amount of the deferred tax asset considered realizable, however, could be adjusted if estimates of future taxable income during the carryforward period are reduced or increased or if objective negative evidence in the form of cumulative losses is no longer present and additional weight may be given to subjective evidence such as our projections for growth.



The Company files income tax returns in the U.S. federal jurisdiction and various state and local jurisdictions. All tax years from 2014 to 2017 are subject to examination."



https://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&article=78650050

[Kflawn]

That article is what I just said exactly like my lawyer and accountant told me.