Christmas Tree Tax

[Stoney]

DISCLAIMER:  IF YOU CAN'T PARTICIPATE IN THIS DISCUSSION WITHOUT VIOLATING SKUZZY'S RULES, DON'T POST...

Absolutely dumbfounded by this.  15 cents per tree to pay for promoting the sale of real Christmas trees.  Unreal.

[Jayhawk]

Just to be clear, it is $0.15 per tree, not a 15% tax as fox news reported in one of it's stories.  

it's likely the 15 percent fee will be passed on to consumers

Per the story, it sounds like the Christmas tree industry are okay with this tax, it should only benefit them in the end. It's not a war on Christmas.

Oh, and this will not last.  IN

[Masherbrum]

We get our trees from our corner lot, who are from the Upper Peninsula.   We will be there in three weeks buying one.

[Dichotomy]

I don't buy trees (allergies) and I tossed my artificial one last year.  Now that Squids grown I don't see the point in decorating for Christmas.  15 cents on however much a tree costs doesn't seem like much to me. 

[Maverick]

Our tree is pre-decorated and lives in a 20" tall box when not in use. No room in our RV for a bigger tree and just the two of us here anyhow. We won't be paying no steenking tree tax.
 

[PFactorDave]

A quick Google says that there are about 25 million live Christmas trees sold in the US each year.  Rounding up, that's about 4million dollars.  Subtract the cost of collecting the tax and the bureaucracy involved... 

Then consider how much a meaningful nationwide advertising campaign would cost...  Millions upon millions of dollars...

This has boondoggle written all over it.

I would be really curious to see whose pockets are getting lined by this.

[Reschke]

What a bunch of horse hockey! Yet again I am dumbfounded and glad that I am growing old and cynical all at once.

[Delirium]

15 cents per tree to pay for promoting the sale of real Christmas trees. 

If 15 cents is that big of a deal, don't buy a tree. I've heard a lot of complaints about excessive taxes, but complaining about a 15 cent flat tax on an item that isn't even necessary?

I don't see the big deal, I might be upset if it was $0.15 per inch of tree. Either way a 15 cent tax isn't worth the effort to get approved and definitely isn't worth the effort to fight.

[PFactorDave]

If 15 cents is that big of a deal, don't buy a tree. I've heard a lot of complaints about excessive taxes, but complaining about a 1 cent flat tax on an item that isn't even necesary?

I don't see the big deal

When talking about the amount of the tax and it's burden on the tax payer, I totally agree with you Del.

But when I look at the virtually meaningless amount of money it will raise for the cause of promoting the sale of more Christmas trees, I have to wonder what the point of the tax is?  It starts to smell a little.

I mean, if the point is to promote the sale of trees and protect an industry, why not a more meaningful amount?

[Jayhawk]

A quick Google says that there are about 25 million live Christmas trees sold in the US each year.  Rounding up, that's about 4million dollars.  Subtract the cost of collecting the tax and the bureaucracy involved... 

Then consider how much a meaningful nationwide advertising campaign would cost...  Millions upon millions of dollars...

This has boondoggle written all over it.

I would be really curious to see whose pockets are getting lined by this.

It's expected to raise 2 million a year for advertising for real trees.

Also, they consider it a fee, not a big deal but it's being politically sold as a "tax."

[Maverick]

Promoting the use and sale of christmas trees is a cost of doing business, not the government. This has scam all over it from the government involvement in a purely private enterprise (promotion) to the idea that an administration bent on a "green" perspective would promote cutting down trees, even farmed trees.
 

[Jayhawk]

Promoting the use and sale of christmas trees is a cost of doing business, not the government. This has scam all over it from the government involvement in a purely private enterprise (promotion) to the idea that an administration bent on a "green" perspective would promote cutting down trees, even farmed trees.
 

There aren't many people who consider themselves "green" who are completely against cutting down a tree.  That's simplistic and unrealistic.

[Stoney]

Ok, apparently this is in the same vein as the "Pork, the other white meat" and "Beef, its what's for dinner" campaigns.  I didn't realize those, like "the incredible edible egg" type campaigns were federally subsidized, but apparently they are.  So, ultimately, this is about whether or not the govt. should be involved at all in these types of things, and not just about Christmas trees.

[Shuffler]

Ok, apparently this is in the same vein as the "Pork, the other white meat" and "Beef, its what's for dinner" campaigns.  I didn't realize those, like "the incredible edible egg" type campaigns were federally subsidized, but apparently they are.  So, ultimately, this is about whether or not the govt. should be involved at all in these types of things, and not just about Christmas trees.

UHOH.... the turn has been made......... I hear foot steps..... sounds like Skuzzy

[canacka]

Separation of church and state.  Why tax something you shouldn't have a part in no matter how small the tax is?