Comments on: Taxing Authority to MN Farmers: Kill All the Trees

By: Wayne Phillips

Wayne Phillips — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 14:11:21 +0000

God Bless Government, and whoever works for them, including the lobbyist. Our lives are made richer by their action (or inaction) across this great country. Ever wonder what made the Founding Fathers want change? The early Americans had a great government who told them how to live and taxed them to insure they understood. Good thing our forebearers had the good sense to create change, and followed through with it.
Maybe Minnesota government doesn’t understand farming.

By: Kelly

Kelly — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 17:34:29 +0000

Thanks for your comment and for the link!
I have no doubt that the legislature was trying to fix exactly the problem that you mention – I just think they went about it the wrong way.
And while I tend to be sympathetic to many causes, unions aren’t traditionally one of them… I did, however, read the annual report from the Minnesota Farmers Union (which I suspect does not represent many of those who own country estates), the full report from the MN legislature and the official statements from the Department of Revenue/Taxation in MN (all of these are available online if you’re interested). I’ve also read several articles and snippets of the infamous memos – dating back to August 2008. Most of my sources indicate that this legislation might have been tweaked for the right reasons – but that the implementation is sketchy. Even Revenue states that the land must be for “actual agricultural production” – which would mean that any working farm with nonproductive acreage would face a higher tax bill.

I can think of better ways to accomplish this goal (examining the ratio of productive to nonproductive lands, for example) – I can’t understand why MN legislators are unable to.

By: Wade

Wade — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 16:16:18 +0000

With all due respect, taxgirl, you are falling for the “Chicken Little” propaganda of the farming lobby on this issue. Legitimate farmers will NOT be taxed at non-agricultural rates merely due to the presence of a few rows of trees at the end of a field for a windscreen. The purpose of tweaking Minnesota’s Green Acres law was to collect appropriate tax revenues from owners of country estates or hunting land, both of whom primarily use land for recreational purposes, along with so-called “farmers” on the suburban fringe who have basically become land speculators.

The following Minneapolis Star Tribune article (which is ironically intended to be sympathetic toward those impacted by the changes) provides a perfect example of exactly the type of abuse the legislative changes were designed to thwart:
http://www.startribune.com/local/north/36709579.html?elr=KArksUUUU

Quoting from the first two paragraphs of the article (emphasis mine):
Larry and Wanda Thoreson once grew alfalfa on their 135 acres just northeast of Zimmerman. Then Larry decided to plant trees, lots of trees, figuring the land would be more appealing to developers that way.

“We’re on fixed incomes now and we looked at this land as our retirement, our nest egg,” said Larry Thoreson, 67. “We had some trees coming up that we were really happy with.”

FYI, Zimmerman is a semi-rural community about 40 miles north of Minneapolis, and there were tons of crappy tract homes being constructed around the area until the real estate market correction of the last few years. As one who was born and raised in a similar community west of Minneapolis (my parents still reside there), I am all for these legislative changes. The tales of abuse under the prior Green Acres provisions were legendary, to the point where the law was a joke. Putting a couple horses out to graze in a pasture or even planting small plots of hay does not constitute “farming.”