Estate Tax Reform
Permanent repeal of the estate tax has been a priority of the Ag Council. Since the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 passed into law on June 7, 2001, the estate tax has been on a temporary phase-out schedule, which will end in full repeal in 2010. Unfortunately, a ‘sunset clause’ that helped get the legislation passed initially, means that the estate tax will return to its pre-2001 rates—55 percent and only a $1 million dollar exemption in 2011. Unfortunately, due to budgeting constraints, full repeal of the estate tax is not likely to occur during this congressional session.
Congressmen Mike Thompson (D-Calif.) and John Salazar (D-Colo.) introduced the Family Farm Preservation Act, H.R. 3524 on July 31, 2009, which will defer estate taxes from farm and ranch assets as long as the property remains as a family agricultural operation.
A broad coalition of groups has committed support to this legislation, including Ag Council and its national affiliate, the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives (NCFC). Ag Council has been playing an active role in initiating and supporting estate tax reform efforts and will continue to lobby for the passage of this legislation. A tax package is expected to pass through Congress in November.
Prop 65 Amendments Proposed
The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) is the lead agency for implementation of Proposition 65, which requires that businesses provide “clear and reasonable” warnings for certain exposures to listed chemicals. OEHHA has been working with a stakeholder workgroup to develop possible amendments to the existing warning regulations. These amendments include provisions that will determine the level of responsibility between food retailers and manufacturers in providing warnings to consumers for food products exposure.
Draft regulatory amendments were released and Ag Council submitted comments expressing concerns. Currently, the “safe harbor” language allows for naturally-occurring chemicals to be present in food. The draft proposal, however, requires every Prop 65-listed chemical in a food to be identified by name and Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) registry number. This aspect alone renders the “safe harbor” meaningless as virtually every food has trace amounts of one or more of the listed chemicals because they are either naturally-occurring or a result of processing.
The amendments also have the potential to place undue burden on food manufacturers to inform consumers and could expose processors and retailers to litigation. Ag Council is striving for a more balanced approach to providing information to consumers. For more information, visit www.oehha.ca.gov.
Ag Council will continue to monitor this issue and provide updates to its members.
|
