Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupport
Contact Us
Search
Close

Supreme Court Declines to Hear Challenge to IRS Enforcement of Cannabis Tax Rules

By Robert Romashko & Steve Levine on June 24, 2021
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

On June 21, 2021, the U. S. Supreme Court declined to hear Eric D. Speidell, et al., Petitioners v. United States, which sought to overturn the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals’ 2020 opinion on Speidell v. United States. In that case, the Tenth Circuit rejected the argument of several Colorado medical marijuana dispensaries that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) does not have authority to investigate whether a taxpayer is dealing in controlled substances. Because the Supreme Court declined to hear the case, the Tenth Circuit ruling stands, and taxpayers can reasonably expect courts across the country to reach similar results as the Tenth Circuit did. Marijuana-related businesses can expect the IRS to continue aggressively enforcing Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code.

Section 280E limits most deductions of expenses for business dealing in federally-defined controlled substances. The petitioners in Speidell argued that determining whether something constitutes a controlled substance is a quasi-criminal function and outside the IRS’s examination authority. The Tenth Circuit rejected this argument, holding that investigations related to Section 280E were within the IRS’s authority. In May, the Biden administration opposed the petitioners’ request for Supreme Court review, signaling the IRS’s intent to continue aggressively enforcing Section 280E.

What this means to you

While the Speidell petition was viewed as unlikely to succeed by most commentators, the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the case means that judicial relief from Section 280E is unlikely to come any time soon. Any change in tax law related to marijuana businesses will likely have to be legislative.

Contact us

Marijuana businesses that have questions about Section 280E or a pending IRS investigation should contact their tax advisors or members of Husch Blackwell’s Cannabis or Tax teams.

Photo of Robert Romashko Robert Romashko

Robert deeply understands the world of federal and state taxes, and helps clients with state and local franchise, income, sales, use and property tax issues, as well as dealing with multistate voluntary disclosures for taxes owed.

Read more about Robert RomashkoEmailRobert's Twitter Profile
Photo of Steve Levine Steve Levine

Steve is head of the firm’s Food Systems industry unit, Steve leads more than 45 professionals from numerous practice areas focused on the various food and agriculture industries. He excels in bringing creative, cost-effective solutions to the various challenges that our clients face.…

Steve is head of the firm’s Food Systems industry unit, Steve leads more than 45 professionals from numerous practice areas focused on the various food and agriculture industries. He excels in bringing creative, cost-effective solutions to the various challenges that our clients face.

Since 2009, Steve’s major focus has been on the burgeoning cannabis industry, where he guides clients through the tangle of shifting regulations governing the sale and use of cannabis in both the marijuana and industrial hemp sectors across the nation.

Read more about Steve LevineEmailSteve's Linkedin Profile
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Cannabis
  • Blog:
    Cannabis Law Now
  • Organization:
    Husch Blackwell LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo