Fart Tax

Help Support CattleToday:

iowafarmer

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
786
Reaction score
0
Location
Northwest, Iowa
Hope everyone is ready to start shelling out $87.50 per head of cattle they own per year. Dont you all know our cattle are causing global warming by farting. So they are going to tax us on our cattle. Poor people that have hogs are getting charged $20 per head. Some of the hog guys are lucky if they make $5 per head. Yes cant talk politics really but i want to know where that 87.50 is going,since they haven't said how that will stop something such as global warming, since it doesn't exist. Of course im not a politician and do not understand their way of thinking.
 

HerefordSire

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
5,212
Reaction score
0
Location
Arkansas
Look for the clause in the law. For example, if you and I own the same animal in the same tax year, who is responsible for the tax? Both of us? The animal is taxed twice? If only one of us have to pay the animal tax, look for the big December dump every year and then buy back in January. Before you know it, we will all be figuring the dump cycle out and the dumps will happen in November instead of December. Then possibly shorten to October when the weaning dump occurs. You can call this the double dutch dump and dance to it if you like.
 

Bez+

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 28, 2007
Messages
1,011
Reaction score
0
Location
Still trying to get back to even.
iowafarmer":33ic0bo9 said:
Hope everyone is ready to start shelling out $87.50 per head of cattle they own per year. Dont you all know our cattle are causing global warming by farting. So they are going to tax us on our cattle. Poor people that have hogs are getting charged $20 per head. Some of the hog guys are lucky if they make $5 per head. Yes cant talk politics really but i want to know where that 87.50 is going,since they haven't said how that will stop something such as global warming, since it doesn't exist. Of course im not a politician and do not understand their way of thinking.

That should increase imports and decrease farm / ranch ownership in North America

Surely you are joking - this cannot come to pass - unless you want to eat foreign beef, pork and lamb on a daily basis. A great way to help the competition.

Bez+
 

grannysoo

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2007
Messages
4,813
Reaction score
0
Location
The Briar Patch
Bez+":2ogjz91z said:
Surely you are joking - this cannot come to pass - unless you want to eat foreign beef, pork and lamb on a daily basis. A great way to help the competition.

Bez+

Actually, the politicians would love this. Import/export is the ideal situation to collect hidden taxes that are passed on to the consumer without their knowledge.

As with all things in DC - follow the money...
 

Alberta farmer

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
376
Reaction score
0
I sometimes wonder if the lunatics are running the asylum? Want to end livestock production...then slap that tax on! Will south American or Australian imports be taxed when they enter the country?
I assume if America was to bring in this tax the Canadian government would have to also? After all Canada is nothing more than a branch plant for the USA!
In western Canada, where most of our beef cattle are raised, we are in a real crisis. No pastures, no hay.
I suspect we will see a kill down this year that will put us into a position of being a net importer of beef. Our problems in the livestock sector have been going on for quite a few years. BSE, trade restrictions, increased and costly government regulation, rising input costs, packer concentration....all have taken their toll...but I think this drought after a very tough winter might just be the straw that breaks the back.
Time to quit.
 
OP
I

iowafarmer

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
786
Reaction score
0
Location
Northwest, Iowa
Bez+":25zjyp5v said:
iowafarmer":25zjyp5v said:
Hope everyone is ready to start shelling out $87.50 per head of cattle they own per year. Dont you all know our cattle are causing global warming by farting. So they are going to tax us on our cattle. Poor people that have hogs are getting charged $20 per head. Some of the hog guys are lucky if they make $5 per head. Yes cant talk politics really but i want to know where that 87.50 is going,since they haven't said how that will stop something such as global warming, since it doesn't exist. Of course im not a politician and do not understand their way of thinking.

That should increase imports and decrease farm / ranch ownership in North America

Surely you are joking - this cannot come to pass - unless you want to eat foreign beef, pork and lamb on a daily basis. A great way to help the competition.

Bez+

No it is not a joke. It is actually being talked about in legislation. Farmers and Ranchers are easy to pick on when we dont stand as one and we dont speak out against unfair laws.
 

1982vett

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
9,512
Reaction score
312
Location
Central Texas
Alberta farmer":y1wi9zpx said:
I sometimes wonder if the lunatics are running the asylum? Want to end livestock production...then slap that tax on! Will south American or Australian imports be taxed when they enter the country?
I assume if America was to bring in this tax the Canadian government would have to also? After all Canada is nothing more than a branch plant for the USA!
In western Canada, where most of our beef cattle are raised, we are in a real crisis. No pastures, no hay.
I suspect we will see a kill down this year that will put us into a position of being a net importer of beef. Our problems in the livestock sector have been going on for quite a few years. BSE, trade restrictions, increased and costly government regulation, rising input costs, packer concentration....all have taken their toll...but I think this drought after a very tough winter might just be the straw that breaks the back.
Time to quit.
:nod:
And they can have it just like non-enforcement of immigration laws took (enticed me to quit) my paycheck job. ;-)
 

ddg1263

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
109
Reaction score
0
Well, it is going to be hard. Just sold a load a light weight calves for about 300 net each. If you take 87.50 that takes me down even further. Now let’s see how long people can make ends meet with those losses! BTW I saw Barney Frank on O’riley the other night and he said he wanted to take the money given to the rich farmers in the farm bill to those who need food stamps. I don't know about anyone else, but I am going to eat beef even if I can't sell it at a profit. I highly doubt that it will be feasible to raise beef at a profit in the states in the coming years. However, I have worked this past year at a loss. So every hour I put in working cattle and the land, I lost money. It just seems that if you work you can get paid at least mim wages, but that is not the case!
 

HerefordSire

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
5,212
Reaction score
0
Location
Arkansas
ddg1263":2n1de7hx said:
Well, it is going to be hard. Just sold a load a light weight calves for about 300 net each. If you take 87.50 that takes me down even further. Now let’s see how long people can make ends meet with those losses! BTW I saw Barney Frank on O’riley the other night and he said he wanted to take the money given to the rich farmers in the farm bill to those who need food stamps. I don't know about anyone else, but I am going to eat beef even if I can't sell it at a profit. I highly doubt that it will be feasible to raise beef at a profit in the states in the coming years. However, I have worked this past year at a loss. So every hour I put in working cattle and the land, I lost money. It just seems that if you work you can get paid at least mim wages, but that is not the case!

It is likely to get worse before it gets better as long as people like Frank keep getting voted for even though he was and is chairman of the house finance committee which was behind the mortgage bubble.
 

grannysoo

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2007
Messages
4,813
Reaction score
0
Location
The Briar Patch
HerefordSire":3e2ry02t said:
It is likely to get worse before it gets better as long as people like Frank keep getting voted for even though he was and is chairman of the house finance committee which was behind the mortgage bubble.

Without being political, I just wonder HOW Barney Frank keeps getting elected????????
 

HerefordSire

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
5,212
Reaction score
0
Location
Arkansas
grannysoo":1cyux7yl said:
HerefordSire":1cyux7yl said:
It is likely to get worse before it gets better as long as people like Frank keep getting voted for even though he was and is chairman of the house finance committee which was behind the mortgage bubble.

Without being political, I just wonder HOW Barney Frank keeps getting elected????????

Maybe because he doesn't know how to say no to all his constituents and contributors? It takes strength to say no to someone when you want their vote or money.
 

Tod Dague

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 4, 2004
Messages
1,517
Reaction score
0
Location
Central Tx
iowafarmer":x82531s9 said:
Bez+":x82531s9 said:
iowafarmer":x82531s9 said:
Hope everyone is ready to start shelling out $87.50 per head of cattle they own per year. Dont you all know our cattle are causing global warming by farting. So they are going to tax us on our cattle. Poor people that have hogs are getting charged $20 per head. Some of the hog guys are lucky if they make $5 per head. Yes cant talk politics really but i want to know where that 87.50 is going,since they haven't said how that will stop something such as global warming, since it doesn't exist. Of course im not a politician and do not understand their way of thinking.

That should increase imports and decrease farm / ranch ownership in North America

Surely you are joking - this cannot come to pass - unless you want to eat foreign beef, pork and lamb on a daily basis. A great way to help the competition.

Bez+

No it is not a joke. It is actually being talked about in legislation. Farmers and Ranchers are easy to pick on when we dont stand as one and we dont speak out against unfair laws.
It was removed from the bill last I heard.
 

Oldtimer

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 19, 2004
Messages
3,918
Reaction score
13
Location
Northeast Montana
Tod Dague":q66ww7il said:
It was removed from the bill last I heard.

Yep Agriculture was exempted under the energy and clean air bill passed by the House....So was coal for 10 years giving them the time to move toward the clean coal technology.....


Farming Groups Welcome Clean Energy Bill



TheCattleSite News Desk

June 29, 2009



US - The House of Representatives has approved legislation that will allow farmers, ranchers and forest owners to fully participate in a market-based carbon offset programme, earning income for activities they undertake to address global climate change.



A press release from the US House of Representatives Committee on Agriculture says that the bill's agriculture provisions negotiated by Chairman Peterson had the support of many agriculture, conservation and forestry organizations, including the American Farmland Trust, National Farmers Union, American Farm Bureau Federation, National Corn Growers Association, National Association of Wheat Growers, National Milk Producers Federation, American Corn Growers Association, American Forest Foundation, American Soybean Association, Dairy Farmers of America, Growth Energy, Minnesota Corn Growers Association, Minnesota Farmers Union, Minnesota Farm Bureau Federation, National Association of Conservation Districts, National Biodiesel Board, National Cattlemen's Beef Association, National Cotton Council, National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, National Farmers Union, National Pork Producers Council, Renewable Fuels Association, United Egg Producers, Western Peanut Growers Association, and Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation.



House Agriculture Committee Chairman, Collin C. Peterson, (MN) worked with the authors of the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (H.R. 2454) to include several important programs that recognise and reward the agriculture and forestry sector for conservation activities and clean energy production.



Under the legislation passed by the House, the agriculture and forestry sectors are clearly exempt from the bill's greenhouse gas emission reduction requirements, which means that farmers, ranchers and forestland owners will not be subject to the greenhouse gas emissions cap.



The bill establishes an agricultural and forestry offset program at the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) that will work with farmers, ranchers and forestland owners to design and implement plans that reduce or avoid greenhouse gas emissions and sequester carbon on their operations. Farmers, ranchers and forestland owners will earn offsets for these actions, and they can sell the credits to utilities, refiners or other firms subject to limitations on greenhouse gas emissions.



"The offset programme run by USDA creates a new market opportunity for farmers, ranchers and forestland owners who can play an important role in efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the United States," Chairman Peterson said. "Farmers, ranchers and forestland owners have been participating in conservation and carbon sequestration programs for many years, working to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, increase energy efficiency, and support a thriving renewable energy industry. This legislation recognizes those efforts and encourages these important activities."



The bill also boosts the renewable fuels industry by eliminating regulatory requirements that unfairly restrict US renewable energy production. It prevents the Environmental Protection Agency from holding US biofuels producers responsible for deforestation or other land use changes in other countries, and it expands the availability of biomass for energy production by improving the definition of what qualifies as renewable biomass. It also includes a programme that will help fund the installation of blender pumps, making clean-burning renewable fuels available to more Americans.



"This bill promotes home-grown, clean burning renewable fuels, which is one of the best things we can do for the economy and the environment," Mr Peterson said.



NFU commends the bill

National Farmers Union President, Roger Johnson, commended the US House of Representatives for passing the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 by a vote of 219-212.



"This legislation recognises the unique role America's family farmers and ranchers can play when it comes to combating global climate change. The agricultural offset programme, overseen by USDA, will help mitigate the increased input costs of a cap and trade programme, while the early actors provision recognizes those producers who have already adopted environmentally friendly practices.



"Failing to pass climate change legislation is not an option. The EPA is poised to act, with the agency's proposed endangerment finding paving the way for a regulatory approach to addressing greenhouse gases. If this were to occur, the positive provisions within climate change legislation would be lost.



"I commend the House leadership for their tireless efforts to include agriculture as part of the climate change solution. Agriculture Committee Chairman Peterson, Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Hoyer and Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman were instrumental to the passage of the bill.



"While not perfect, the House-passed bill is a step in the right direction. I look forward to working with the Senate as they begin considering climate change legislation,"
concluded Mr Johnson.



thecattlesite.com

A couple more articles about the Ag amendment...

6/25/2009 12:47:00 PM


NCGA Commends Chairman Peterson For Amendment To Climate Change Bill




(WASHINGTON) June 25, 2009 -- The National Corn Growers Association today commended House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson for his efforts on behalf of the nation’s corn growers throughout the negotiations on pending climate change legislation, H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act.



“We appreciate the dedication Chairman Peterson has shown to U.S. corn growers and the agriculture industry during this legislative process,” NCGA President Bob Dickey said. “He has been a true champion for our industry during negotiations and his amendment to the climate change legislation will make several steps in the right direction.”



Chairman Peterson will offer an amendment this week that represents the agreement reached by the House Agriculture Committee and the House Energy and Commerce Committee. One of the key elements is the role the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) will play in a cap and trade system. The Peterson amendment will create a workable agricultural offsets market under the jurisdiction of the USDA and will explicitly exempt agriculture from a greenhouse gas emissions cap while also creating opportunities for producers to be a part of the solution for addressing climate change. NCGA also appreciates Chairman Peterson's efforts to block the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from including international land use change when calculating carbon emissions from corn-based ethanol.



Dickey said that NCGA is pleased with the agreement that was reached in the Peterson amendment. Recent negotiations on H.R. 2454 have produced tremendous progress from the original version of the legislation. However, NCGA will continue to work to address items not included in the final language that are of great importance to our industry. Specifically, the association will continue to advocate for producers who have been engaged in no-till and conservation tillage practices since earlier than 2001 to ensure they will not be unfairly penalized by being disqualified from an offsets market when continued carbon sequestration is achievable on their land. NCGA urges members of Congress to consider the implications of policies that create incentives for farmers to release previously stored carbon into the atmosphere in order to benefit from a cap and trade market.



“Along with Chairman Peterson, NCGA greatly values the work Speaker Nancy Pelosi has done on this legislation and thanks her for her commitment to America’s corn growers throughout the negotiations in the House of Representatives,” Dickey said. “We again praise Congressman Zack Space for his amendments during the initial markup of the legislation, which helped improve the bill in the House Energy and Commerce Committee.”



“NCGA supports adoption of the Peterson amendment during House floor consideration, but due to the complexity of the bill, recent changes to the legislation and the short period of time to analyze the legislation, NCGA will remain neutral on the overall bill until we can fully analyze the impact on our growers, “Dickey said. “We look forward to working with the U.S. Senate to continue improvements on this important piece of legislation.”


Addition to climate bill: Cash for no-till farming



By PHILIP BRASHER

Des Moines Register - Iowa

June 26, 2009



Washington, D.C. - Some growers could get payments just to keep farming the way they already are, under changes being made to a House climate bill.



Farm groups won provisions in the legislation that are intended to make it easier for farmers to qualify for a new carbon offset program that would be established by the bill.



Farmers who already conserve carbon in the soil by not plowing it could qualify for the new credits to keep them from breaking up the land and releasing the carbon into the air.



About 1.2 million of the 25 million acres of Iowa land planted to corn and soybeans each year are continually farmed without tillage, the Iowa Farm Bureau Federation said.



The money that farmers would get would come from utilities, refiners and other companies willing to make such payments in lieu of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The bill would impose caps on emissions but allow polluters to meet them through buying credits rather than changing their operations.



Environmentalists have long fought against providing credits for existing farm practices, arguing that they would do nothing to reduce future greenhouse gas emissions, which is the bill's goal. Don Carr, a spokesman for the Environmental Working Group, said Congress was opening "a huge loophole to allow farmers to do what they are already doing while letting polluters off the hook."



But without the provision, no-till farmers would have an incentive to break up their land temporarily and then resume their conservation practices later to qualify for the carbon credits, said Dave Miller, who follows climate policy for the Iowa Farm Bureau.



The size of the payments would vary according to the farming practice and the value of the credits. At a rate of $15 a ton, payments for no-till farming in Iowa could be about $9 an acre, Miller said.



The credit provision is contained in an amendment worked out between House Democratic leaders and House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson, D-Minn. The amendment also would put the Agriculture Department, rather than the Environmental Protection Agency, in charge of the offset program.



Other provisions would at least temporarily ease emissions standards for biofuels. Biodiesel producers would be exempted from the standards entirely for the first billion gallons of annual production, the amount mandated under existing law.

The email I got from the Ag Committee:

News from the House Agriculture Committee

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Friday, June 26, 2009

Media Contact:
April Slayton (202) 225-6872
Scott Kuschmider (202) 225-1496



House Passes Clean Energy Legislation with Significant Benefits for Agriculture

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, the U.S. House of Representatives approved legislation that will allow farmers, ranchers and forestland
owners to fully participate in a market-based carbon offset program, earning income for activities they undertake to address global
climate change.

The bill's agriculture provisions negotiated by Chairman Peterson had the support of many agriculture, conservation, and forestry
organizations, including the American Farmland Trust, National Farmers Union, American Farm Bureau Federation, National Corn Growers
Association, National Association of Wheat Growers, National Milk Producers Federation, American Corn Growers Association, American
Forest Foundation, American Soybean Association, Dairy Farmers of America, Growth Energy, Minnesota Corn Growers Association,
Minnesota Farmers Union, Minnesota Farm Bureau Federation, National Association of Conservation Districts, National Biodiesel Board,
National Cattlemen's Beef Association, National Cotton Council, National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, National Farmers Union,
National Pork Producers Council, Renewable Fuels Association, United Egg Producers, Western Peanut Growers Association, and
Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation.


House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin C. Peterson (MN) worked with the authors of the American Clean Energy and Security Act
of 2009 (H.R. 2454) to include several important programs that recognize and reward the agriculture and forestry sector for
conservation activities and clean energy production.

Under the legislation passed by the House, the agriculture and forestry sectors are clearly exempt from the bill's greenhouse gas
emission reduction requirements, which means that farmers, ranchers and forestland owners will not be subject to the greenhouse gas
emissions cap.

The bill establishes an agricultural and forestry offset program at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) that will work with
farmers, ranchers and forestland owners to design and implement plans that reduce or avoid greenhouse gas emissions and sequester
carbon on their operations. Farmers, ranchers and forestland owners will earn offsets for these actions, and they can sell the
credits to utilities, refiners, or other firms subject to limitations on greenhouse gas emissions.

"The offset program run by USDA creates a new market opportunity for farmers, ranchers and forestland owners who can play an
important role in efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the United States," Chairman Peterson said. "Farmers, ranchers, and
forestland owners have been participating in conservation and carbon sequestration programs for many years, working to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions, increase energy efficiency, and support a thriving renewable energy industry. This legislation recognizes
those efforts and encourages these important activities."

The bill also boosts the renewable fuels industry by eliminating regulatory requirements that unfairly restrict U.S. renewable
energy production. It prevents the Environmental Protection Agency from holding U.S. biofuels producers responsible for
deforestation or other land use changes in other countries, and it expands the availability of biomass for energy production by
improving the definition of what qualifies as renewable biomass. It also includes a program that will help fund the installation of
blender pumps, making clean-burning renewable fuels available to more Americans.

"This bill promotes homegrown, clean burning renewable fuels, which is one of the best things we can do for the economy and the
environment," Peterson said.
 

Latest posts

Top