| gthompson97 - 2/16/2018 15:42
It was supposed to be a replacement for the 199a but has become a completely different animal as it sits. It's not a ploy at all. All of our sugar beets get processed by a large sugar cooperative, and the DPAD was a pretty integral part of our system before. We received deductions that were passed through to us every single year, and some years they were substantial. Granted as it sits, this will be an even better deal for us, but I don't think it will play out that way. I hope they can get this thing fixed before the media uses it as another talking point against us farmers.
They took something that worked just fine and have completely turned it around into a mess.
199A was written to replace the 199. 199 (Domestic Production Activities Deduction) (DPAD) was set up as 9% pass through. It would appear that some Co-op's pushed the limits on the pass through? Hearing...Audits maybe coming?
I am told by sources that Senators Thune and Hoeven were pushed hard by the sugar beet industry to come up with something to replace 199. Thank Thune and Hoeven for the mess.
IMO....Weeks/Months from now.... this will turn out to have been a big distraction noting more. Keep your eye on the market....not the noise!
Edited by 1206 Boyz 2/16/2018 16:07
|
What if the Co-Op deduction is a scheme from the Co-Op lobbyist set to fail?
