Gotta be a joke.. And shouldn't it be a Holiday Tree Tax if the government is involved ? http://blog.heritage.org/2011/11/08/obama-couldnt-wait-his-new-christmas-tree-tax/

What's the issue with this?

I didn't think the government was allowed to promote Christmas..

This seems to me a pretty easy one to figure out. It's likely a program that the industry lobbied for because they're losing more and more buyers every year to artificial trees. The deal was that this tax would pay for that Dept. of Agriculture marketing program. What's 15-cents per tree if you think you can recapture at least a portion of that market and sell even more trees? That's how this looks to me, anyway.

I didn't think the government was allowed to promote Christmas..

 

Don't jump around on me. Is your issue with the "tax" or because it's dealing with Christmas trees?

This seems to me a pretty easy one to figure out. It's likely a program that the industry lobbied for because they're losing more and more buyers every year to artificial trees. The deal was that this tax would pay for that Dept. of Agriculture marketing program. What's 15-cents per tree if you think you can recapture at least a portion of that market and sell even more trees? That's how this looks to me, anyway.

 

You are correct.

 

Live tree sales are down about 6M over about the last 5 years. This "tax" pays for the marketing of live trees and has the support of the members of the live tree association (whatever that is officially called).

 

Much ado about nothing.

Don't jump around on me. Is your issue with the "tax" or because it's dealing with Christmas trees?

 

It's usually whatever can deflect from actually providing a solid position to debate the initial issue. :lol:

Don't jump around on me. Is your issue with the "tax" or because it's dealing with Christmas trees?

Because it's dealing with Christmas trees.

One can argue that this is about promoting a product for sale, even if it is for Christmas.

My view is why the Christmas tree producers don't do the promoting theirselves. If there is an association for Christmas tree

growers, why invite the government to do something they can do for theirselves?

If they cannot do this for theirselves, they need to be out of business anyway.

Because it's dealing with Christmas trees.

 

And?

One can argue that this is about promoting a product for sale, even if it is for Christmas.

My view is why the Christmas tree producers don't do the promoting theirselves. If there is an association for Christmas tree

growers, why invite the government to do something they can do for theirselves?

If they cannot do this for theirselves, they need to be out of business anyway.

 

The only legit debate I see here is the need for govt involvement. The fact that it's for a Christmas tree is irrelevant.

If I have to pay 15 cents extra for my tree this year to help boost a program to benefit tree farmers in the United States, so be it. As a matter of fact, where can I pay $5 or $10 into that fund?

If I have to pay 15 cents extra for my tree this year to help boost a program to benefit tree farmers in the United States, so be it. As a matter of fact, where can I pay $5 or $10 into that fund?

 

I agree

It's laughable that so much is being made of the fact that the tree sellers will pass this tax on to the consumers.

If I have to pay 15 cents extra for my tree this year to help boost a program to benefit tree farmers in the United States, so be it. As a matter of fact, where can I pay $5 or $10 into that fund?

 

Amen! And that's exactly why I buy my produce from farmers markets or, at the minimum, I buy KentuckyProud products whenever possible at the supermarket. I also buy milk and eggs produced in Kentucky.