Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Committee reviews AB76 amendments to Nevada cannabis regulation, including hemp study and tax review
Loading...
Summary
The Assembly Ways and Means Committee heard testimony on Assembly Bill 76, a Cannabis Compliance Board proposal of operational changes including administrative hearing updates, label and packaging definitions, vending machine language, studies on hemp-derived intoxicating products, and a study on wholesale versus retail cannabis taxation.
The Assembly Committee on Ways and Means on May 12, 2025 heard Assembly Bill 76, a measure from the Nevada Cannabis Compliance Board that makes operational changes to agency procedures and adds several directed studies.
The bill’s sponsor said the measure is primarily a “run the agency” update that would revise administrative hearing procedures, clarify ID‑scanning requirements at cannabis sales facilities, define synthetic cannabinoids, reestablish statutory language banning cannabis vending machines, and revise package-size limits to align with possession limits and industry practice. The presentation also adds two studies: one on regulation and potential taxation of hemp‑derived intoxicating THC products and beverages, and one to study elimination of the wholesale cannabis excise tax paired with an increase in the retail cannabis tax rate.
James Hunt, Executive Director of the Nevada Cannabis Compliance Board, told the committee the amendments are intended to “streamline operations of the agency” and to align statute with existing regulations on labeling and packaging. Hunt also said the board would conduct the proposed studies via advisory‑commission subcommittees and return results to interim committees. He told members he was “confident” the board could carry out the studies using existing resources and the advisory commission without an additional fiscal impact to the CCB’s budget.
Industry representatives testified in support. Esmeralda Vasquez, Strategies 360, said she was speaking on behalf of Cure Cannabis Solutions and CPCM Holding and stated they supported the bill. Lake Martin, executive director of the Nevada Cannabis Association, also testified in support.
Committee members asked about fiscal impacts and whether outside consultants would be required for the studies. Hunt said the agency expects to leverage in‑house staff and interagency resources and, if necessary, to pull in subject experts without creating a fiscal impact to the board’s budget. He referenced past pro bono assistance used for the rescheduling/descheduling report as an example of how outside expertise could be obtained.
The bill discussion referenced other legislation: Hunt said elements of the hemp study overlapped with language in past bills such as SB356, and that the wholesale/retail tax study concept had appeared in AB307. The committee received the CCB presentation and closed the hearing on AB76 without recorded committee amendments or a formal vote at today’s meeting.
What’s next: The bill remains in committee for fiscal review and possible amendment; the CCB said it would coordinate the proposed studies through its cannabis advisory commission and report back to interim committees.
