[madinmadtown]

Historically, a tax on a product has reduced the demand for a product. For example, glass was not widely used in homes until the tax on glass was reduced in England. I will concede that proposed tree tax is minimal. However, it seems possible the compliance and paperwork that the tree industry will have to provide to comply with the new tax will exceed the revenue brought in from the tax. Next year the tax will probably increase and there will be a new regulations attached to the purchase of trees. Money from the government always has strings attached....and the government rarely gets the bad end of the deal.

[Reese Hamm]

But this wasn't a tax imposed on individual Christmas trees at the point of sale or otherwise. The Christmas tree growers saw their business slipping away to artificial tree market. They got together and agreed to contribute to a fund that the Ag Dept would use to promote live trees. Farmers who grew or imported less than 500 trees were exempt; those growing or importing 500 or more trees would contribute 15 cents per tree to the fund. It was a program they spent over three years working on and now, just when their selling season is switching into high gear, that advertising they hoped to capitalize on is on hold.

We want businesses to grow and here you have an industry trying to do that and they get slapped in the face because a few people just read an "Obama's Taxing Christmas" headline and went off half-cocked and didn't bother to find out the details.

I'm not in the business but I grew up in an area with several farms. They are solid Christian conservatives and they are heartsick that three years of effort is now down the drain because someone slapped Obama's name and "tax" on something that don't have a thing to do with either.