But I thought there was a war on Christmas... damnit someone needs to update the talking points!

Sorry, tea partiers. Nobody is listening anymore.

Funny, a google of the 'rule' they all post- 7 CFR 1214.52 doesn't give you anything except wingnut blogs. And CFR 1214 is for Kiwifruit research.

It couldn't be that our friends on the right got themselves all in a lather over a lie, could it?

I did actually find a non-blog source which wasn't just full of wharrbhal. Basically it was an industry lead effort and that "Of the 565 comments submitted to the Agriculture Department, 398 supported the proposal, 147 were opposed and the remainder fell into other categories."

Dinki: Funny, a google of the 'rule' they all post- 7 CFR 1214.52 doesn't give you anything except wingnut blogs. And CFR 1214 is for Kiwifruit research.

I've found it (new window). It seems legit, but of course TFA doesn't actually address or refute the reasoning actually used in the rule. And the rule isn't new--it was authorized in 1996 by Congress ('Commodity Promotion, Research, and Information Act of 1996'). Those who import or produce less that 500 trees annually would be exempt from the fee.

A national research and promotion program for Christmas trees would help the industry to address the many market problems it currently faces. According to the Task Force, two main factors currently affecting Christmas tree sales, both in the domestic market and abroad, are increased competition and changing consumer habits. According to additional data supplied by the Task Force, the market share of fresh Christmas trees in the U.S. from 1965 to 2008 has declined by 6 percent. In comparison, the market share of artificial trees has increased 655 percent from 1965 to 2008. According to the proponent data, sales of fresh cut Christmas trees decreased by 15 million trees from 37 million trees sold in 1991 down to 22 million trees sold in 2002. The industry saw an increase in sales in 2003 through 2007 when the industry conducted a voluntary marketing campaign which was lead by a small group of producers and retailers. This voluntary marketing campaign saw sales rebound by 9 million trees--from 22 million trees sold in 2002 to 31 million trees sold in 2007. Even with the strong sales response to the marketing efforts, the voluntary marketing program suffered from a lack of funding. The Christmas tree industry has tried three different times to conduct promotional programs based on voluntary contributions. Each time, after about three years, the revenue declined to a point where the programs were ineffective. The decline in revenue is attributable to the voluntary nature of these programs. Therefore, the proponents have determined that they need a mechanism that would be sustainable over time. They believe that a national Christmas tree research and promotion program would accomplish this goal.

One can agree or disagree with the reasoning, but it ought to receive a fair hearing. Not that our friends at the Heritage Foundation have much precedent in that area, but it should be noted nonetheless.

m3000: Basically it was an industry lead effort and that "Of the 565 comments submitted to the Agriculture Department, 398 supported the proposal, 147 were opposed and the remainder fell into other categories."

So, the producers of Christmas trees are banding together to fund an advertising program. They opted to have the Govt do it for them, and instead of making it voluntary, so only a few pay for something everyone benefits from, they decided to make a mandatory tax on larger producers.

I suppose it sucks if you grow Christmas trees and don't want to pay the tax you are benefiting from.

This is truly a sad day for America.

why?
why?????

seriously
can we cut part of government? period.

/sigh

Hey, it's a flat sales tax that's the same for everyone, rich and poor. You'd think that most Republicans would be falling over themselves to endorse it.

A Dark Evil Omen: Barleycorn Half-elven Somnambulist Oogaboogabama

This is the first one of these that has made me laugh hard in a long time, probably because I love the phrase "Ooga booga" too much. But the Half-elven was a very nice touch.

I, for one, am outraged. OUTRAGED!!!!!! Wait, no, I'm not.

This sounds totally legit and not at all made up. It is for sure definitely another outrage brought to you by history's greatest monster for reals.

Another 400 dollars I have to spend on taxes this year. Disgusting. I hope you enjoy your Christmas egg nog in hell, Taxbongo.

Apparently this began in 2008 at the behest of the Christmas tree industry, when Bushiat was still running the country into the ground. Source. (new window).

Somacandra: I've found it (new window)...

From the document you linked:

"The 1996 Act provides the authority for agricultural industries to develop programs for research and promotion. These programs are initiated by members of the industry. USDA provides oversight of these programs and their activities. However, industry Boards that manage these programs develop their own budgets and marketing plans and conduct strategic planning for the programs. Although these programs are mandatory in nature, they do not preclude individuals from promoting their own commodity."

Here is another Ag Dept. document related to Christmas tree promotion (new window).

Lorelle: Apparently this began in 2008 at the behest of the Christmas tree industry, when Bushiat was still running the country into the ground

Not that I'm disagreeing with your larger point, but I really don't see what President Bush had to do with a declining Christmas tree industry. I'm missing the middle term of that equation, I guess.

Looks like my dad will be exempt.

Lorelle: Apparently this began in 2008 at the behest of the Christmas tree industry, when Bushiat was still running the country into the ground. Source. (new window).

Somacandra: I've found it (new window)...

From the document you linked:

"The 1996 Act provides the authority for agricultural industries to develop programs for research and promotion. These programs are initiated by members of the industry. USDA provides oversight of these programs and their activities. However, industry Boards that manage these programs develop their own budgets and marketing plans and conduct strategic planning for the programs. Although these programs are mandatory in nature, they do not preclude individuals from promoting their own commodity."

Here is another Ag Dept. document related to Christmas tree promotion (new window).

Oh, and thanks for that, because I know he'll rail against Obama if he isn't already aware of the tax.

//Family farm is now Christmas trees. I like to joke I've planted so many trees I've got carbon offsets for life.

Stupid is stupid no matter whose idea it was, and Heritage does only half the job by noting the tax's existence without fully exploring its history.