Veselka McElarney of the Office of Economic and Demographic Research presented the sales‑tax analysis for Senate Bill 552, a bill that amends qualifying conditions for medical marijuana certifications and makes related statutory changes.

Nut graf: The bill adds qualifying conditions for medical marijuana certifications (including a condition related to prior opioid use as recorded in the transcript) and makes changes in Chapter 381.986; however, medical marijuana for medical use is already exempt from sales tax under the language in Chapter 212 that references the medical‑marijuana definition. Analysts therefore concluded that even if the bill expands the universe of legal medical‑marijuana purchasers, the sales‑tax result is 0 because qualifying medical marijuana purchases are already exempt.

McElarney noted that some indirect substitution effects could exist in theory (for example, consumers shifting spending from a taxable product to medical marijuana), but that the direct sales‑tax effect is neutral because the product defined as medical marijuana is already exempt. The conference discussed edge cases, such as people currently purchasing marijuana illegally who might shift to the legal market (which would be exempt) or consumers substituting taxable over‑the‑counter remedies with exempt medical marijuana; the group concluded these effects are indirect and not part of a direct sales‑tax calculation for medical marijuana as defined in the statutes.

Conference members agreed that the sales‑tax component should be posted as a 0 to 0 impact and directed staff to post the analysis; the transcript records the conference consensus to publish the 0 impact note and to return another item later to address a separate fee exemption in the bill.

Ending: EDR will post the sales‑tax analysis showing a 0 impact and will return to the conference separately to analyze the fee‑exemption component of the bill.