Christmas Tree tax

[GhostTX]

...so....we tax something to encourage people to buy it...

Wouldn't you want to tax artificial trees if you wanted live trees to sell more?

One of Christmas' most recognizable symbols apparently needs a PR campaign -- and a new tax to pay for it.

The Obama administration has imposed a 15-cent tax on Christmas trees in order to pay for a new board tasked with promoting the Christmas tree industry.

The new fee and board were announced in the Federal Register on Tuesday, to be effective Wednesday. According to the Agriculture Department announcement, the government will impose a 15-cent-per-tree charge on "producers and importers" of fresh Christmas trees, provided they sell or import more than 500 trees a year.

The change quickly drew opposition from Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., who vowed to fight what he described as a "Grinch" move by the administration. "It is shocking that President Obama tried to sneak through this new tax on Christmas trees," Scalise said in a statement Wednesday.

The program and fee, though, were supported by some in the Christmas tree industry. The money is not meant to pay down the debt or fund any other program. The Agriculture Department-imposed tax is designed to go back into the new Christmas Tree Promotion Board.

The board, proposed earlier this year, is the culmination of a years-long effort by the fresh Christmas tree industry to promote itself, according to the background provided in the Federal Register. The industry has faced increasing competition from producers of artificial trees, but efforts to collect voluntary contributions for a fresh-tree marketing campaign have repeatedly run out of funding. So the government stepped in to mandate a fee to support the promotion board.

Heritage Foundation Vice President David Addington, who first reported on the rule on his blog Tuesday evening, said there are two problems with the new fee. First, he said it's likely the 15 percent fee will be passed on to consumers. Second, he said it's inappropriate for the government to be putting its "thumb on the scale," helping out the fresh-tree sellers and not the artificial-tree sellers.

"If it's one thing I think the free market could handle, it's letting people decide what kind of tree they want to buy for Christmas," Addington told FoxNews.com.

But Agriculture Department spokesman Michael T. Jarvis defended the program, saying it's along the lines of over 20 other promotional programs supported by the department, such as the "got milk" campaign.

"It's worked great for beef, pork, chicken, eggs," he added.

Jarvis also insisted the fee does not count as a tax, since the industry is effectively "assessing themselves."

"This one's not a tax," he said.

The industry itself further rejected the claim that the fee would be passed onto consumers. The National Christmas Tree Association said in a statement that the program "is not expected to have any impact on the final price consumers pay for their Christmas tree."

The group said most growers who weighed in on the proposal were in favor of it.

According to the Federal Register, the new board is supposed to launch a "program of promotion, research, evaluation, and information designed to strengthen the Christmas tree industry's position in the marketplace."

As part of that job, the board has been charged with improving the image of both Christmas trees and the industry itself. After three years, an industry-wide referendum will be held to determine whether to renew the program.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011...#ixzz1dEoFSwMS

[helosailor]

My thoughts on this, and every other similar piece of feces that comes out of D.C. can be best summed up as follows...

[slow06]

Shouldn't be a board to begin with. Morans...

[SMEGMA STENCH]

Is anyone surprised? Having no understanding of money/value at all, lefties think its perfectly reasonable to make something more expensive in order to make more people want to buy it.

[Jimbo]

I keep thinking that shit like this just can't be real, as if our government were one heck of a practical joker and just always forgets to deliver the punch line.

[Durantula]

You lot believe everything you read, don't you?

http://www.politifact.com/oregon/statements/2011/nov/09/blog-posting/republicans-bloggers-needle-obama-creating-new-tax/

Republicans, bloggers needle Obama for creating new tax on Christmas trees - true?
Mostly False
Share this story:

In Oregon, fresh cut Christmas trees are as cherished as hazelnuts and Hood strawberries: We grow a lot of them, so we own them. So it was with some astonishment that PolitiFact Oregon heard that President Barack Obama was trying to make it more expensive for people to buy holiday trees.

"Is President Obama 'the Grinch who taxed Christmas' trees?" queried a headline on the Los Angeles Times website. A Republican congressman from Louisiana issued a press release, slamming the Democratic president for trying to "sneak through this new tax on Christmas trees." By the end of Nov. 9, 2011, the conservative Heritage Foundation had logged more than 2,000 comments on its blog post, "Obama Couldn’t Wait: His New Christmas Tree Tax."

Locally, we spotted a Multnomah County GOP retweet of the Republican National Committee: "Obama admin creates new tax on Christmas tree farms, fees get passed onto the consumer."

What in the name of Rudolph and Frosty and the Polar Express was going on?

Oregon is the No. 1 grower of Christmas firs and pine, harvesting more than 7 million trees. (That’s twice the haul of No. 2 North Carolina.) Was the president seriously imposing a new "tax" that might make our holidays a little less ho-ho-ho?

As it happens, a national fresh tree group had sought the 15-cent tree assessment to better promote its products. It’s a "checkoff program"much like the ones already in place for beef ("it’s what’s for dinner")and pork ("the other white meat").

The Agriculture Department approved the idea. The Internet exploded. By the end of the day, the White House had decided to re-assess.

Betty Malone, an Oregon tree farmer who heads up the Christmas Tree Promotion Now campaign, said she was stunned anyone would describe the tree fee as something dreamed up by the president.

"It’s absurd. We’ve been working on this for three-and-a-half years. The industry has talked about this for 20 years," Malone said. "This started long before Obama" was in the White House.

To be fair, not everyone in the industry embraces the idea, although the National Christmas Tree Association reports the majority of responses to the proposed program were positive.

Would the fee be passed on to consumers? That’s unclear, said Bryan Ostlund, executive director of the Pacific Northwest Christmas Tree Association. "It doesn’t get automatically passed along, but somebody along the line has to cover it."

Finally, there’s the question of whether the 15-cent assessment is actually a "tax." The federal government monitors the agricultural marketing board that administers the money, but the revenue doesn’t go to government. Rick Dungey, spokesman for the national tree association, insists it is not a tax. (He also says consumers should not see a difference in tree prices.)

In Oregon, at least, revenue has to go into the general treasury in order to be considered a tax. If the government doesn’t touch the money, even though government mandates it, the assessment is neither a tax nor a fee.

But we digress. We’re talking about the federal government. Let’s turn to federal sources, with the help of national PolitiFact.

"It certainly doesn't smell or quack like a tax," said Robert Litan, the vice president for Research and Policy at the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation and a former associate director of the Office of Management and Budget under President Bill Clinton.

On the other hand, Dan Mitchell, an economist with the Cato Institute, says "a coercive levy is a tax."

We also checked with Stephen Bell, communications director for U.S. Rep. Steve Scalise, the Louisiana congressman who vowed to block Obama’s sneaky tree tax, and Sean Spicer, an RNC spokesman. It didn’t matter to either of them that industry had sought the assessment or that industry was denying it’s a tax.

"It doesn’t matter who asked for it," said Bell. "It’s at the sole discretion of the Obama administration to impose a tax, and they decided to impose this 15-cent tree tax."

This is a tax, added Spicer, because "it’s not voluntary. It’s not a contribution to a cause."

So, where does that leave us? Sources appear split on whether this truly is a tax and whether the cost would be passed along to consumers. As for the claim that Obama created this new tax, that suggests that he came up with the program -- when it’s clear the idea preceded his presidency and originated with the industry.

Those are pretty big facts to ignore. So we rate the claim Mostly False: The statement contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression.

[jnobles06]

You lot believe everything you read, don't you?

http://www.politifact.com/oregon/sta...ating-new-tax/

ok so obama didn't create it; big deal. who cares who created it. the question still remains, why in the hell do we need a government committee to do this? why didn't the christmas tree industry just jack the price up $.15 and use normal advertising like every other business?

this shit is getting ridiculous.

[LANTIRN]

That's it. I give up.

[Jimbo]

You lot believe everything you read, don't you?

http://www.politifact.com/oregon/sta...ating-new-tax/

So, that article says there is a nationwide tree tax, approved by the ag dept., to support a "tree promotion" campaign. What exactly are we "lot" incorrectly believing?
It seems that article is geared more towards a "don't blame Obama" spin, which I don't see any of the posters who replied in this thread doing.

[stevo]

So, that article says there is a nationwide tree tax, approved by the ag dept., to support a "tree promotion" campaign. What exactly are we "lot" incorrectly believing?
It seems that article is geared more towards a "don't blame Obama" spin, which I don't see any of the posters who replied in this thread doing.

He posted that because his liberal websites told him to go forth and defend his messiah.

Stevo

[GhostTX]

ok so obama didn't create it; big deal. who cares who created it. the question still remains, why in the hell do we need a government committee to do this? why didn't the christmas tree industry just jack the price up $.15 and use normal advertising like every other business?

this shit is getting ridiculous.

So, that article says there is a nationwide tree tax, approved by the ag dept., to support a "tree promotion" campaign. What exactly are we "lot" incorrectly believing?
It seems that article is geared more towards a "don't blame Obama" spin, which I don't see any of the posters who replied in this thread doing.

Exactly! Who's blaming Obama? I'm all about the "why" government involvement and why add a tax a something to promote it? And let's not forget the whole aspect of government involvement with a religious holiday.

[jnobles06]

Exactly! Who's blaming Obama? I'm all about the "why" government involvement and why add a tax a something to promote it? And let's not forget the whole aspect of government involvement with a religious holiday.

hmm good point. I didn't even think about the religious aspect.

[Forever_frost]

And under what power do they promote one industry over another?

[YALE]

And under what power do they promote one industry over another?

The Commerce Clause.

[Forever_frost]

Show me where it says that