Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Area farmers worry about added tax bracket

March 20, 2013

ST. PAUL — A group of Fairmont-area farmers spent the day at the State Capitol on Tuesday, addressing agricultural issues with lawmakers in honor of National Ag Day....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(14)

Thinking

Mar-20-13 7:14 AM

If you have depreciated the tractor and used it as tax write off, then you should have to pay taxes on it. I feel farmers have enough places to hide their income that at some point they should have to pay. I so don’t feel bad for the huge farmers now a day. The family farmer is no longer a part of Martin County. Take a look at how much the government pays them to do what they do, that alone will put most of them in the top tax bracket, with out any other income

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

FranklinBen

Mar-20-13 7:22 AM

Surprise - farmers complaining (too wet, too dry, taxes, etc). Most farmers are corporations to address tax issues and shelter this income from "high" taxes. The fact is that nobody wants to pay taxes, including farmers. We (rich,poor,young,old,rep/dem) want all the benefits and want someone else to pay for them. Next week another group or class of workers/corporations will be in the news complaining about taxes and wages. Fairmont needs rich farmers (and most are)to stimulate the economy. Just take a look at the new trucks on the Ford lot. Everyone of those is a write-off for a farmer.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

blue5011

Mar-20-13 9:57 AM

I would whine too, if I was making a half million dollars a year...

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

blue5011

Mar-20-13 9:59 AM

"Just take a look at the new trucks on the Ford lot. Everyone of those is a write-off for a farmer."

Please don't leave those dreaded small businesses out of the conversation. Many of those folks, and their wives, are driving pickups too.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

dbrace24

Mar-20-13 10:23 AM

Coming from a 5th generation farm family, I've seen both ends of the spectrum. Sure, farming is good now, but I don't see any of you helping out when corn was $1 a bushel in the late 90's and early 2000's, and farmers were struggling. The reason that the family farm is no longer is because no one could afford to keep going then. You tell me which farmer makes a half a million dollars a year because I would love to be part of that operation! NET income is a completely different thing than gross income, and you don't even have to know anything about farming to know that. One farm may bring in a half a million dollars, but I guarantee you that the majority of what is made is put back into that farm. The cost of inputs has increased right along with everything else. Seed corn went from $90 per bag to $300. When the commodity prices bottom out, do you expect those prices to drop too? Ag is self-sustaining,we dont rely on bailouts. Let me ask you, what would you do without agriculture

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

FranklinBen

Mar-20-13 1:48 PM

dbrace24 - rich farmers are a good thing! Most people in Fmt would consider a family income of over 100k as living pretty darn good!So when they see farmers complaining about paying extra taxes above $250k (and that is after the accountant has done his magic)we don't feel your pain. By the way, a farm subsidy is a form of bailout.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

blue5011

Mar-20-13 2:52 PM

Let me see: A thousand acre small family farmer. 500 acres of corn times 200 bu/ acre, times $7 equals $700,000. Plus 500 acres of soybeans times 60 bu/ acre, times $14 equals $420,000. $700,000 plus $420,000 equals $1,120,000. If the net from this operation is not a half million, then Mr Farmer is not doing something right.

Check out "ewg dot com" (Environmental Working Group) for figures about farm subsidies. You will find Robert Edward "Ted" Turner III (of CNN fame) leading the way as a large "private" benefactor in subsidies. From wiki: Through Turner Enterprises, he owns 15 ranches in Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and South Dakota. Totaling 1,910,585 acres (7,731.86 km2), his US land-holdings make Turner one of the largest individual landowners in North America (by acreage).

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

dbrace24

Mar-20-13 5:47 PM

ok blue5011 - take your 500 acres of corn for $750,000 for the year. Now take into account the fact that ON AVERAGE, the input cost for 1 acre of corn is about $600 and that's just for fertilizer, seed, chemicals, etc, multiply the $650 times your 500 acres and that alone is $325,000 in expenses. Now factor in your equipment payments, the fuel for that equipment, time, wages, insurance, etc and that takes away even more. Now say that $7 corn is now $5 (which it was this time last year) and that's $500,000 minus $325,000 for just planting the crop, not to mention the other expenses, and your not left with much. Now say the price is $3.76 (which is was just 3 years ago in Jan 2010) and that's $376,000 minus $325,000 plus insurance etc and tell me which family can live off of that? Don't hate on farming because of 2-3 good years. The bottom could drop out at any time then where will you be without ag? As I said, yes, farming IS good now, but it hasn't always been.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

dbrace24

Mar-20-13 5:48 PM

And FranklinBen - the accountant "doing his magic" isn't hiding income - its deducting expenses as you would in any other business. You tell me what business doesn't deduct depreciation for their building, equipment and land.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

dbrace24

Mar-20-13 5:55 PM

And Blue5011-I agree with you on the subsidies to Ted Turner - he gives family farming a bad name. Commercial farming and family farming are two different things in my opinion, and commercial farming for sure can handle this tax. Its the family farm that depends on the farm income for their only income that I worry about. But then again, if prices drop, farmers won't be making that $250,000 income anyways. Most family farms don't make that kind of money in this area. We might handle that kind of money, and then some, but we sure don't get to keep it all.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

FranklinBen

Mar-20-13 6:58 PM

dbrace - I said we want RICH farmers - it helps the economy around here. Just don't complain if you have to pay more because you are rich ($250k is RICH). There are very good accountants in Fmt that know how to "legally" manipulate the Many loopholes. I know farmers that deduct everything that you can imagine and are still making too much that they HAVE to buy stuff. If you're not, you should get a different accountant. Give thanks to God that you have been blessed and gladly pay a little more to help less fortunate.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

blue5011

Mar-20-13 10:04 PM

"Don't hate on farming because of 2-3 good years"

No hate here, I am the son of a farmer, and have a brother who farms. I would rather see the government out of the business of who gets to win and who gets to lose. That applies to ALL businesses, occupations, and agencies.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

dbrace24

Mar-20-13 11:05 PM

Let me clear this up...I never disagreed with the proposed taxes. I actually think it is a good idea. If you're making that kind of money, yes you should have to pay higher taxes. What I was disagreeing with is the comments from earlier about farmers making half a million and buying new trucks. You're right. Income is income. And taxing the rich is the right thing to do. If you make more you should pay more

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JoeFairmont

Mar-27-13 8:08 AM

Farmers love taxes until they have to pay them.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 14 of 14 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web