Forever Utah......

[idestroyedthetoilet]

You don't think the 11 million exemption is enough for "dirt poor" farmers? Farms with that value are living high on the hog right now. Thanks bought and paid for legislature.

Family farms should be exempt due to the obvious monopoly reasons, but they should be required to pay back taxes if they sell to developers or non-ag interests. This is already law in UT but not enforced. Farmers here pay little in property tax compared to market value. If you want to keep a farm in the family then that route is the best incentive and best disincentive for developers.

 

[One Brow]

A family farm literally has to be sold to pay the estate taxes.

How many family farms have been subject to this in the last 10 years? 50 years?

If the farm is deeply in debt, the estate should be so small as to not trigger a tax. If the farm has little debt, it seems you should be able to borrow against the farm rather than sell it.

 

[babe]

How many family farms have been subject to this in the last 10 years? 50 years?

If the farm is deeply in debt, the estate should be so small as to not trigger a tax. If the farm has little debt, it seems you should be able to borrow against the farm rather than sell it.

I don't have the stats.

However, farming especially "smaller" operations are pretty much a low return on the asset held. An 11M farm is not all that big, and it's really hard work for the 100G or so earnings which are taxed as income each year. Most doctors do better. Their practice might be worth a few million, but they earn two or three times the taxable income.

IDTT above has a good point, however. Land held for future lucrative sale near a booming Western metropolis is something else. Holding the "farm" until you can subdivide it and sell it off for develop should trigger a tax. The 1000 acre farm when sold for development will net fifty million dollars...... no kidding we ought to tax that like income from the stock market.


My opinion is people I know. A family near me has had a cattle operation since the 1880s. It is huge, and they employ Mexican illegals brought in by the gangs, and pay pretty scant wages. With fifty such employees, who mostly go home for the winters, and only a token effort to get the proper visas for farm workers, I think E-verify would immediately present a better life for their people. Closing the border to illegals would deny cash flow to the gangs, and it would trigger some of our legal residents, blacks included, getting better pay for their labor. It would stanch the human trafficking as well. So however compassionate you may be, a little serious though would indicate we handle this situation better.

Re-directing asylum seekers to local consulates near their home, or application centers, would deny the gangs a lot of their income, and it would be less exploitable for false asylum claims....

The operation I refer to in its fourth generation also is principle income for five American families who have not sold out their interests, yet.... but we do hear rumors..... I think it is one the 150M dollar scale at least.

For every outfit like that, there are ten operations in the 15M class with one family owning it and worrying what to do next.

 

[idestroyedthetoilet]

I don't have the stats.

However, farming especially "smaller" operations are pretty much a low return on the asset held. An 11M farm is not all that big, and it's really hard work for the 100G or so earnings which are taxed as income each year. Most doctors do better. Their practice might be worth a few million, but they earn two or three times the taxable income.

IDTT above has a good point, however. Land held for future lucrative sale near a booming Western metropolis is something else. Holding the "farm" until you can subdivide it and sell it off for develop should trigger a tax. The 1000 acre farm when sold for development will net fifty million dollars...... no kidding we ought to tax that like income from the stock market.

@JustTheTip hasn't been shy about his income or farm size. His income is **** and his family farm is a robust 1600 acres IIRC. Add in the combines and tractors and work trucks and everything else and he's be getting less than today's almost zero deposit coupon on the investment.

We talked with a kid outside of Bryce Canyon. His dad had five million worth of cattle. You think a 14 year old driving a tractor over a paved road is living a 5 million dollar life? Nope.

 

[RandyForRubio]

How many family farms have been subject to this in the last 10 years? 50 years?

If the farm is deeply in debt, the estate should be so small as to not trigger a tax. If the farm has little debt, it seems you should be able to borrow against the farm rather than sell it.

Couple things.

1) Most farms are family farms. Been a while since I’ve checked, but I think it’s around 97-98% are family farms.

2) Most small farms have to sell. Land is worth a lot, and it’s hard to make a decent living with a small farm these days. They either sell to development (most common) or to larger farms.

3) I would love to buy more land, but with the way crop prices are I usually afford to pay ~$5,000/acre max, and that’s stretching it. Development can easily pay double that, and usually more. It doesn’t pencil out, even if you borrow against the land. It’s a losing effort over time.

 

[RandyForRubio]

@JustTheTip hasn't been shy about his income or farm size. His income is **** and his family farm is a robust 1600 acres IIRC. Add in the combines and tractors and work trucks and everything else and he's be getting less than today's almost zero deposit coupon on the investment.

We talked with a kid outside of Bryce Canyon. His dad had five million worth of cattle. You think a 14 year old driving a tractor over a paved road is living a 5 million dollar life? Nope.

I should clarify.

My income was crappy, it’s much better now (recent development). As a farm, especially a “small” one, we do very well. Partially because we’re sort of a niche crop, partially because we’re the best at what we do. We are in very many ways, the exception to the typical farmer.

We don’t take out operating expense loans, but we will take out loans to pay off tractors/buildings. But still, even though I’ll be paying a discounted rate for my farm, I’ll still spend the majority of my working years paying it off. I’m lucky because my dad had a large life insurance policy to help me pay for it if he does die unexpectedly, and because of the estate tax exemption laws. Still not easy though, and my land will always be worth more than what I make.

 

[One Brow]

Couple things.

1) Most farms are family farms. Been a while since I’ve checked, but I think it’s around 97-98% are family farms.

2) Most small farms have to sell. Land is worth a lot, and it’s hard to make a decent living with a small farm these days. They either sell to development (most common) or to larger farms.

3) I would love to buy more land, but with the way crop prices are I usually afford to pay ~$5,000/acre max, and that’s stretching it. Development can easily pay double that, and usually more. It doesn’t pencil out, even if you borrow against the land. It’s a losing effort over time.

I acknowledge all that. With all those difficulties, how many family farms in the last 50 years have been sold as a result of estate taxes? I have heard the number was very small. How many of your neighbors has this happened to?

 

[RandyForRubio]

I acknowledge all that. With all those difficulties, how many family farms in the last 50 years have been sold as a result of estate taxes? I have heard the number was very small. How many of your neighbors has this happened to?

Your definition is too narrow.

They normally get sold before that point because even farmers can see how it’ll work out in a finance sheet, bub.

Farmer Bob: Well dadgum son, this is what it’s gonna cost to buy the farm.

Bob’s son: Golly gee Dad, I can’t afford that and make a living!

Farmer Bob: Well then we better look at all our options, but we’ll probably have to sell the farm son.


In general, that’s how it goes. Most common thing I see in estate deals is that the land is divided between siblings, including those not involved in the farming operation (dumb, dumb, dumb). Said siblings not involved don’t want to pay property tax on land that they’re not getting a ton of rent money from, especially when they can sell it to developers for at least 3x the price of what farm land goes for. Those siblings then tell their other sibling who is farming that he can buy the remaining land, but only if he can pay developer price. Obviously he can’t do that, and now his land is at best, half the size it was, but it could be 1/3, 1/4, 1/5, etc of what it was. He can’t make a living, so now he’s selling his land too.

How common is this? I’ve seen a lot of it over the years. Do I have stats? No. But I know the industry, I know the people, and I know what’s happening.

 

[One Brow]

How common is this? I’ve seen a lot of it over the years. Do I have stats? No. But I know the industry, I know the people, and I know what’s happening.

I don't now how that problem could be fixed. However, I was asking because family farms were used as rhetorical justification for rolling back estate taxes, and I was seeing if that argument had any reality in your eyes.

 

[RandyForRubio]

I don't now how that problem could be fixed. However, I was asking because family farms were used as rhetorical justification for rolling back estate taxes, and I was seeing if that argument had any reality in your eyes.

I’m opposed to getting rid of estate taxes. Most farmers wouldn’t agree with me though.

Raising the limits is good. Getting rid of it completely is bad. Maybe exceptions for agriculture? I don’t really know.

 

[idestroyedthetoilet]

Your definition is too narrow.

They normally get sold before that point because even farmers can see how it’ll work out in a finance sheet, bub.

Farmer Bob: Well dadgum son, this is what it’s gonna cost to buy the farm.

Bob’s son: Golly gee Dad, I can’t afford that and make a living!

Farmer Bob: Well then we better look at all our options, but we’ll probably have to sell the farm son.


In general, that’s how it goes. Most common thing I see in estate deals is that the land is divided between siblings, including those not involved in the farming operation (dumb, dumb, dumb). Said siblings not involved don’t want to pay property tax on land that they’re not getting a ton of rent money from, especially when they can sell it to developers for at least 3x the price of what farm land goes for. Those siblings then tell their other sibling who is farming that he can buy the remaining land, but only if he can pay developer price. Obviously he can’t do that, and now his land is at best, half the size it was, but it could be 1/3, 1/4, 1/5, etc of what it was. He can’t make a living, so now he’s selling his land too.

How common is this? I’ve seen a lot of it over the years. Do I have stats? No. But I know the industry, I know the people, and I know what’s happening.

I've seen this plenty of times. I worked in an orchard, summers 13 & 14 years old. That guy was the orneriest old cuss I've ever worked for, but my brother and I respected the hell out of an very elderly man, and his wife, doing everything they could to make a living off what was probably $5,000,000 worth of land covered in apples, peaches, and pears. Their kids sold it when they died.

 

[babe]

I don't now how that problem could be fixed. However, I was asking because family farms were used as rhetorical justification for rolling back estate taxes, and I was seeing if that argument had any reality in your eyes.

Estate taxes are a violation of the principle of equal justice under the law. They are discriminatory, possibly racist, if you care to do the figures on just who pays them. Everyone should pay their taxes just once.

yah, we could discuss graduated income taxes, property taxes, sales taxes, almost any tax yet invented. A head tax would probably work out pretty inhumanely on the homeless, and it wouldn't pay to lock'em all up.

Estate taxes discourage people from trying to build up a viable family economic base. And that is exactly the worst thing we can possibly do.

Check out my gal Sonny Johnson and her studies on black history. The Republican Party ran out the blacks in adopting progressive agendas in the 1890s. Great stuff on the black Wall Street in Tulsa, and Atlanta.

https://www.nps.gov/nr/travel/atlanta/aub.htm

https://www.ebony.com/black-history/black-wall-street-a-legacy-of-success-798

http://www.sfltimes.com/business/black-wall-street-survivors-remember