Please explain

[Bambistew]

How does Marvel taking rangeland out of production gernerate more money for the schools?

If he pays more for the lease thats a no brainer for that protion, but what about the income tax, property tax, sales tax ect that is generated by the ranchers and the people on down the line?

Does Marvel plan to make up for the difference? What are the maintenace costs associated with Mavel buying out the property in comparison to the rancher grazing of the land?

It just doesn't seam like his plan makes him the "hero" for the school children!

How about some examples that are not associated with Marvels web page of "propaganda"

 

[Muledeer4me]

"If he pays more for the lease thats a no brainer for that protion, but what about the income tax, property tax, sales tax ect that is generated by the ranchers and the people on down the line?"

Great question and one that has been asked many time's.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Ranchers don't pay sales tax on their ranching purchases, nor do they property taxes on the leases.

The Supreme Court has ruled time and time again, that the Land Board can not look at anything other than the Payments on the Lease and the cost of the Lease.

It is "widely believed" (at least by me), that the Grazing leases don't pay the cost of administering them.

 

[ELKCHSR]

Sell the land to contractors, that way the max can be charged for each parcel. Especially if they start putting taxable structures and wells on it...

 

[JoseCuervo]

ElkCheese,

Do you have a clue what you are talking about??? The Land Board can't "sell the land to contractors", by law.

 

[ELKCHSR]

Just bringing up a point...
Don't read more into it than is posted dork....

 

[JoseCuervo]

What is your point? That the Land Board should break the law? I think they did, and Marvel took them to court and won.... another brilliant idea on your part...

 

[Bambistew]

Originally posted by ElkGunner:
Ranchers don't pay sales tax on their ranching purchases, nor do they property taxes on the leases.

But if they don't have as many cows to run that means less money for them to spend on other things. What ranching purchases are exempt from sales tax? The farmers here aren't exempt from most things...

I understand that since they don't own the public land then they don't pay the property tax on it, but say a ranch has land-locked BLM that they use for grazing... doesn't that make their land more valuable because they can run more animals thus making their property tax higher? Don't the ranchers have to pay property tax on equipment such as tractors and such to put up hay to feed the animals?

I remember reading somewhere that ranchers in eastern MT had to take into account the BLM that was "part" of their ranch when negotiating the sale or something. I think Nemont posted something about it, do you remember?

I just seems to me that there is more to just buying out a lease than the money that gets paid for it.

 

[ELKCHSR]

If the tax payers are so concerned about losing money (which they as a whole just don't seem to be bothered), laws can be changed to fit circumstances... Sell the land to create a larger amount of taxes collected from it if that is the real intent. No one has to break laws, and I see public ground traded and sold all of the time, must be some laws that make this plausable

 

[JoseCuervo]

Bambi,

The court ruled that the Land Board COULD not consider all the "collateral" benefits of Welfare Ranching. Only the Lease transaction between the bidder and the State. The Ranchers were arguing about the "benefits" they bring to the local community, yaddda yadda yaddddda... The Court sadi no.

In Idaho, equipment used in production is exempt from sales tax. Most guys have two accounts at the local farm store. One for household purchases, and one for farm purchases. The theory is that the goods produced will ultimately end up being "Sales Taxed", and once is good enough for the tax man. (The Grocery store does not pay tax on their purchases, either.)

Nobody is saying that they can't run as many cattle because they don't have leases. Remember, they all claim the leases are just as expensive as private pasture, as they have to provide fencing, riders, and other "costs". So if you beleive that argument FROM the ranchers, then there is no impact on the number of cattle they can run. The ONLY way there could be an impact is if they are getting "below market" feed, which then means we are subsidizng them, thus the "Welfare" label...

The ranchers do have to pay Personal property tax on their equipment (tractors, plows, disks, etc..) but they generally hide the new stuff from the Tax Man, and claim they farm 3000 acres with a Farmall "H" and a John Deere "B"...

I can't address how the County Tax Assessor values Deeded property with adjoining leases. I can't imagine they can bump the value of the Deeded property by the value of the Lease. On a FS Lease (and we were discussing State Leases), the Lease may be 200 miles away, doubtful that the rancher would remind the Assessor about the Lease.

I think Nemont brought up the issue of Estate taxes having to be paid on ranches with Leased land, and the IRS wanting to be paid for the inheritance tax. I then suggested that Al Capone was caught on IRS Tax issues, and that did not make his revenue legal, it just meant he had to pay taxes....

The biggest problem with the Leases, at least the state leases, is that I don't think they pay for the cost of administering themselves. Thus the School Kids are PAYING the ranchers.

ElkCheese,
You are clueless, aren't you?

 

[pawclaws]

Aren't the state budgets in Idaho comprised of "fenced" funding pockets likeother states? Do school support funds and Lease Administration funds come from the same distribution category or line item?

 

[ELKCHSR]

ElkCheese,
You are clueless, aren't you?

You want respect here????

I wonder how you ever think you can get it...
You can say any thing you want, what I said was meant as tounge in cheek, but I would suppose your funnies are supposed to be meant as such and every one elses are meant to be taken as gospel....

 

[1_pointer]

but say a ranch has land-locked BLM that they use for grazing... doesn't that make their land more valuable because they can run more animals thus making their property tax higher?

In a way yes, in that loans can be taken out on grazing leases and these are used as value when selling a property, as a grazing lease must be tied to a base property. However, one still have to pay to graze even land locked BLM land and other stipulations in the agreement may even allow for BLM to control the grazing on the fed and private lands.

 

[Nemont]

I think Nemont brought up the issue of Estate taxes having to be paid on ranches with Leased land, and the IRS wanting to be paid for the inheritance tax. I then suggested that Al Capone was caught on IRS Tax issues, and that did not make his revenue legal, it just meant he had to pay taxes....

I have been checking on the estate tax and the Al Capone reference. Big Al went to the Big house for income tax evasion with the IRS arguing that even ill gotten gains are not exempt from the tax man.

The estate tax on the other hand is a tax on the accumulated assets, with standard deductions, owned by you on the date of your death. It is not anything close to the same thing. If you are required to pay an estate tax based upon 50% of the value of grazing lease doesn't that then infer there is at least something approaching ownership. If I lease a house for 35 years half the value is not included in my estate by then why should grazing leases. As EG has stated they are not a right. Seems a little odd.

Nemont

[ 06-04-2004, 10:01: Message edited by: Nemont ]

 

[Ithaca 37]

Here's lotsa background info on Marvel and the Land Board:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=jon+marvel+idaho+state+land+board&btnG=Search

 

[Nemont]

Another point about the taxable value of ranching land is that the value of the lease is included in the value to the ranch. Also many places do not have their lease a couple of hundred miles away. In our case all the blm leases border the private deeded land.

When a ranch sells the lease sells with it, in most cases, the value of the lease is in effect tacked on to the purchase price. There is a definite tax revenue consquences from the property tax side of the tax code. Due to the increased value of ranch land higher taxes levied against them. Without the lease the ranches decrease in value and taxes would be reduced to reflect it.

Same goes for State owned school trust lands.

Nemont