DOCSLIB.ORG

Farm Bill Workshop & GOVERNMENT Affairs Meeting

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Farm Bill Workshop & GOVERNMENT Affairs Meeting NATIONAL COUNCIL OF FARMER COOPERATIVES 2 0 WASHINGTON 1 7 CONFERENCE JUNE 26-28, 2017 HYATT REGENCY WASHINGTON, DC Farm Bill Workshop & GOVERNMENT aFFAIRS mEETING Farm Bill Workshop: Agenda NCFC Washington Conference Farm Bill Workshop Hyatt Regency Hotel Washington, DC June 26, 2017 AGENDA Columbia A/B Room 7:30 AM Registration Open & Breakfast Served 8:00 AM Welcome & Introductions 8:05 AM Balancing Priorities Against a Challenging Baseline Guest Speaker: Jonathan Coppess Clinical Assistant Professor University of Illinois 8:50 AM Crop Insurance & Risk Management Guest Speaker: Tara Smith Torrey & Associates 9:20 AM Priorities for Commodities, Specialty Crops & Livestock Guest Panelist: Sam Willett National Corn Growers Association Reece Langley National Cotton Council Ben Mosely USA Rice Federation John Hollay National Milk Producers Federation Robert Guenther United Fresh Produce Association Bill Davis National Pork Producers Association Representing the Business Interests of Agriculture 10:45 AM Break 11:00 AM Nutrition – Not a slush fund! Guest Speaker: Julian Baer Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition & Forestry U.S. Senate 11:30 AM Conservation, Energy & Research – Areas for Refocus Guest Panelists: Jason Weller Land O’Lakes, Inc. Former Chief, Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Bobby Frederick National Grain & Feed Association Josh Maxwell Committee on Agriculture U.S. House of Representatives John Goldberg Science Based Strategies 12:30 PM Lunch 1:00 PM Trade, Rural Development & Credit – Opportunities for Market Access Program Expansion and Infrastructure Investment Guest Panelists: Steve Mercer U.S. Wheat Associates Melissa Kessler U.S. Grains Council Todd Van Hoose Farm Credit Council 1:45 PM Break 2:00 PM Reflecting on Farmer Co-op Farm Bill Priorities 3:00 PM Workshop Concludes (NCFC Government Affairs Committee Business Meeting to follow at 3:30 PM) Farm Bill Workshop: Background Materials Farm Bill Primer Information Compiled for NCFC by National Journal The farm bill was created after the devastating impacts of the dust bowl and has expanded ever since Evolution of jurisdiction of the farm bill Timeline 1933 1960s 1973 1985 1990 1996 2002 2008 Economic Great Society The first New Organic Research The farm bill Horticulture depression and reforms draw omnibus bill conservation agriculture is programs are includes and local dust bowl attention to that included programs are included for new bioenergy food systems prompt the first food issues and reauthorization added to the the first time additions to programs become a farm bill create and tailor for food stamps farm bill the farm bill part of the commodity bill subsidies What is covered in the latest farm bill? The twelve titles (sections) of the 2014 farm bill Commodity programs – Provides farm Research, extension and related matters – 1 payments when prices or revenues decline for 7 Offers a wide range of agricultural research major commodity crops. and extension programs. Conservation – Encourages environmental Forestry – Supports forestry management 2 stewardship and improved management 8 programs run by USDA’s Forest Service. practices. Trade – Provides support for agricultural Energy – Encourages development of farm and 3 export programs and international food 9 community renewable energy systems through assistance. grants and loan guarantees. Nutrition – Provides nutrition assistance for Horticulture – Supports specialty crops 4 low-income households. 10 through a range of initiatives including market promotion and public research. Credit – Offers direct gov’t loans to farmers Crop insurance – Enhances the permanently 5 and ranchers and guarantees loans from 11 authorized federal crop insurance program. commercial lenders. Rural development – Supports rural business Miscellaneous – Covers other types of 6 and community development programs in 12 programs including livestock and poultry collaboration with local and state programs. production. 1 Negotiations over the 2018 farm bill are expected to be complicated and lengthy Preparing for the 2018 farm bill The most contentious issues to be Key Agricultural Committee members discussed for the 2018 farm bill House Chairman: K. Michael Conway (R-TX) 1. Demands to reduce SNAP spending Ranking member: Collin Peterson (D-MN) Vice-chairman: Glenn Thompson (R-PA) 2. Low commodity prices across the board 3. Cotton and dairy program fixes are expensive Senate Chairman: Pat Roberts (R-KS) Ranking member: Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) Analysis • Ranking member of the House Agricultural Committee, Collin Peterson, has said if the problems in the farm economy reach crisis proportions in 2017, Congress’s only option may be to enact a new farm bill a year ahead of schedule • Farm-state lawmakers are holding out hope that the current (2014) farm bill can carry producers through a period of low commodity prices, weak global demand, and soaring production of grains and other commodities; there is also a hope that the markets will turn around on their own • Other key negotiators of the current bill are skeptical about the prospects of getting the bill ready early even if that was deemed necessary because of the extra year it took to pass the last farm bill when it was time to update it in 2013 1 Nutrition programs account for more than three-fourths of farm bill spending Costs of programs under the farm bill for FY 2014-2023 In billions of dollars ■ Food stamps and nutrition ■ Crop insurance ■ Conservation ■ Commodity programs ■ Everything else Analysis • The biggest part of the farm bill is a 10-year funding allocation for food stamps and nutrition • At $756 billion, the 2014 farm bill reduced spending by $8 billion over 10 years • The 2014 bill took away direct payments, which would provide funds to the farmer regardless of how much they planted • The farm bill authorizes either mandatory or discretionary programs, but mandatory programs tend to dominate the debate surrounding the farm bill Outlays under the 2014 farm bill are projected to decrease for nutrition spending, but crop insurance will increase Actual and projected outlays for the 2014 farm bill In billions of dollars ■ Food stamps and nutrition ■ Crop insurance ■ Conservation ■ Commodities and disasters Projected Outlays under the 2014 farm bill are projected to decrease for nutrition spending, but crop insurance will increase Funding and share of total bill for the nutrition title In billions of dollars ■ Nutrition ■ Rest of the farm bill Share of the farm bill Funding amounts 2008 farm bill 2014 farm bill Outlays under the 2014 farm bill are projected to decrease for nutrition spending, but crop insurance will increase Funding for farm bill titles, without nutrition In billions of dollars ■ 2008 farm bill ■ 2014 farm bill Farm bill – Legislative Forecast Timeline of key recent federal actions on the farm bill 2014 Farm bill passes two years late: Provisions included an $8 billion cut to SNAP and a loosening of th restrictions on growing industrial hemp Potential actions in 115 Congress Witnesses at the initial farm bill hearings have July 2016 Hearing on fraud and errors in SNAP: The House Financial Services Committee passed the • Financial CHOICE Act by a vote of 30 to 26 supported the current insurance and conservation frameworks, but have suggested Nov. 2016 Hearing on innovation in SNAP: The House Committee on Agriculture held a hearing to evaluate some technical changes the innovative strategies retailers are utilizing to improve access to nutritious food and on how they can integrate these systems into SNAP •If cotton and dairy receive support prior to the farm bill, it would bode well for permanent Feb. 15, 2017 Hearing on “Setting the Stage for the Next Farm Bill”: The House Committee on Agriculture updates in the 2018 Farm Bill held a hearing on the state of the American farm economy with testimony by the USDA chief •The process of renegotiating NAFTA was kick- economist and academics from major agriculture research institutions started by bipartisan uproar against Canadian Feb. 16, 2017 Hearing on the “Pros and Cons of Restricting SNAP Purchases”: The House Committee on dairy pricing Agriculture heard about limiting SNAP benefits with testimony by researchers from AEI, Brookings •Trump’s tax proposal eliminates the estate tax and the Food Marketing Institute •With Secretary Perdue now in office, ag will Feb. 23, 2017 First Senate field hearing on the farm bill in Kansas: Senate Ag Committee Chairman Pat have a stronger voice in debates and media Roberts led a hearing with producers and agribusiness representatives at Kansas State •Insurance subsidies and SNAP benefits may Feb.-April Hearings on “The Next Farm Bill”: House Committee on Agriculture subcommittee hearings on: come under fire from budget hawks in the 2017 conservation policy; rural development and energy programs; specialty crops; livestock and dairy; Freedom Caucus commodity markets; SNAP; and the Farm Credit System •17 posts in USDA that require Senate approval remain unfilled Mar. 16, 2017 President Trump’s budget requests for FY2018: If enacted, the USDA would lose funding for some research and certain programs would be completely eliminated •President Trump’s budget request for FY2018 would cut the USDA’s research grants by $25 April 25, 2017 Sonny Perdue sworn in as secretary of agriculture: He immediately attends a roundtable with million and would eliminate the McGovern- the president and a group of farmers to discuss ag issues, including the Farm
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Economics During the Lincoln Administration
    4-15 Economics 1 of 4 A Living Resource Guide to Lincoln's Life and Legacy ECONOMICS DURING THE LINCOLN ADMINISTRATION War Debt . Increased by about $2 million per day by 1862 . Secretary of the Treasury Chase originally sought to finance the war exclusively by borrowing money. The high costs forced him to include taxes in that plan as well. Loans covered about 65% of the war debt. With the help of Jay Cooke, a Philadelphia banker, Chase developed a war bond system that raised $3 billion and saw a quarter of middle class Northerners buying war bonds, setting the precedent that would be followed especially in World War II to finance the war. Morrill Tariff Act (1861) . Proposed by Senator Justin S. Morrill of Vermont to block imported goods . Supported by manufacturers, labor, and some commercial farmers . Brought in about $75 million per year (without the Confederate states, this was little more than had been brought in the 1850s) Revenue Act of 1861 . Restored certain excise tax . Levied a 3% tax on personal incomes higher than $800 per year . Income tax first collected in 1862 . First income tax in U. S. history The Legal Tender Act (1862) . Issued $150 million in treasury notes that came to be called greenbacks . Required that these greenbacks be accepted as legal tender for all debts, public and private (except for interest payments on federal bonds and customs duties) . Investors could buy bonds with greenbacks but acquire gold as interest United States Note (Greenback). EarthLink.net. 18 July 2008 <http://home.earthlink.net/~icepick119/page11.html> Revenue Act of 1862 Office of Curriculum & Instruction/Indiana Department of Education 09/08 This document may be duplicated and distributed as needed.
    [Show full text]
  • RESTORING the LOST ANTI-INJUNCTION ACT Kristin E
    COPYRIGHT © 2017 VIRGINIA LAW REVIEW ASSOCIATION RESTORING THE LOST ANTI-INJUNCTION ACT Kristin E. Hickman* & Gerald Kerska† Should Treasury regulations and IRS guidance documents be eligible for pre-enforcement judicial review? The D.C. Circuit’s 2015 decision in Florida Bankers Ass’n v. U.S. Department of the Treasury puts its interpretation of the Anti-Injunction Act at odds with both general administrative law norms in favor of pre-enforcement review of final agency action and also the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the nearly identical Tax Injunction Act. A 2017 federal district court decision in Chamber of Commerce v. IRS, appealable to the Fifth Circuit, interprets the Anti-Injunction Act differently and could lead to a circuit split regarding pre-enforcement judicial review of Treasury regulations and IRS guidance documents. Other cases interpreting the Anti-Injunction Act more generally are fragmented and inconsistent. In an effort to gain greater understanding of the Anti-Injunction Act and its role in tax administration, this Article looks back to the Anti- Injunction Act’s origin in 1867 as part of Civil War–era revenue legislation and the evolution of both tax administrative practices and Anti-Injunction Act jurisprudence since that time. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1684 I. A JURISPRUDENTIAL MESS, AND WHY IT MATTERS ...................... 1688 A. Exploring the Doctrinal Tensions.......................................... 1690 1. Confused Anti-Injunction Act Jurisprudence .................. 1691 2. The Administrative Procedure Act’s Presumption of Reviewability ................................................................... 1704 3. The Tax Injunction Act .................................................... 1707 B. Why the Conflict Matters ....................................................... 1712 * Distinguished McKnight University Professor and Harlan Albert Rogers Professor in Law, University of Minnesota Law School.
    [Show full text]
  • Entity Classification: the One Hundred-Year Debate
    Catholic University Law Review Volume 44 Issue 2 Winter 1995 Article 3 1995 Entity Classification: The One Hundred-Year Debate Patrick E. Hobbs Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.edu/lawreview Recommended Citation Patrick E. Hobbs, Entity Classification: The One Hundred-Year Debate, 44 Cath. U. L. Rev. 437 (1995). Available at: https://scholarship.law.edu/lawreview/vol44/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by CUA Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Catholic University Law Review by an authorized editor of CUA Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ENTITY CLASSIFICATION: THE ONE HUNDRED-YEAR DEBATE Patrick E. Hobbs* I. Introduction ................................................. 437 II. Evolution of the Tax Definition of the Term "Corporation".. 441 A. The Revenue Act of 1894 ............................... 441 B. The Corporate Excise Tax of 1909 ....................... 452 C. After the Sixteenth Amendment: A Case of Floating Commas and Misplaced Modifiers ....................... 459 D. Developing a Corporate Composite ..................... 468 III. The Failure of the Resemblance Test ........................ 481 A. The Professional Corporation ............................ 481 B. The Limited Partnership ................................. 491 C. The Limited Liability Company .......................... 510 IV . Conclusion .................................................. 518 I. INTRODUCTION One hundred years ago, in the Revenue Act of 1894,1 Congress en- acted our Nation's first peacetime income tax.2 Although the Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional within a year of its enactment,3 at least * Associate Professor of Law, Seton Hall University School of Law. B.S., 1982, Se- ton Hall University; J.D., 1985, University of North Carolina; LL.M., 1988, New York Uni- versity.
    [Show full text]
  • Tax Transparency and the Marketplace: a Pathway to State Sustainability
    110474 001-130 int NB_43_corr_Ok-Proofs_PG 1_2015-01-09_11:24:08_K Tax Transparency and the Marketplace: A Pathway to State Sustainability Montano Cabezas* This article advances the argument that market to society. It then investigates how more diffuse participants, increasingly concerned about the measurements based on externality assessment 2014 CanLIIDocs 108 sustainability of the social benefits and oppor- could be used to “score” a company’s contribu- tunities derived from the state, are interested tion to society, and how such scoring could affect in how companies contribute to society via both the markets and tax policy. The article con- taxation. The article advocates that companies cludes by reiterating aspirations for tax transpar- should disclose their tax returns for each juris- ency, and by advocating for a new state-business diction in which they operate, in order to give tax paradigm in order to ensure the continued market participants a tool to better understand a viability of the state as a provider of social goods. company’s comprehensive economic contribution L’auteur avance que les acteurs économiques, façon dont la diffusion de mesures tenant de plus en plus préoccupés par la durabilité des compte des externalités peut aider les entreprises opportunités et des avantages sociaux fournis par à évaluer leur contribution sociétale ainsi que l’État, s’intéressent à la façon dont les entreprises l’impact d’une telle diffusion sur les marchés contribuent financièrement à la société grâce et sur la politique fiscale. L’auteur conclut en à l’impôt. L’auteur suggère que les entreprises réitérant ses aspirations pour des politiques devraient divulguer leurs déclarations de fiscales transparentes et en plaidant en faveur revenus dans chacune des juridictions où d’un nouveau paradigme fiscal entre l’État et elles opèrent afin de permettre aux acteurs les entreprises qui vise à assurer la viabilité de économiques de comprendre leur contribution l’État en tant que fournisseur de services sociaux.
    [Show full text]
  • Accounts Committee, 70. 186 Adams. Abigail, 56 Adams, Frank, 196
    Index Accounts Committee, 70. 186 Appropriations. Committee on (House) Adams. Abigail, 56 appointment to the, 321 Adams, Frank, 196 chairman also on Rules, 2 I I,2 13 Adams, Henry, 4 I, 174 chairman on Democratic steering Adams, John, 41,47, 248 committee, 277, 359 Chairmen Stevens, Garfield, and Adams, John Quincy, 90, 95, 106, 110- Randall, 170, 185, 190, 210 111 created, 144, 167. 168, 169, 172. 177, Advertisements, fS3, I95 184, 220 Agriculture. See also Sugar. duties on estimates government expenditures, 170 Jeffersonians identified with, 3 1, 86 exclusive assignment to the, 2 16, 32 1 prices, 229. 232, 261, 266, 303 importance of the, 358 tariffs favoring, 232, 261 within the Joint Budget Committee, 274 Agriculture Department, 303 loses some jurisdiction, 2 10 Aid to Families with Dependent Children members on Budget, 353 (AFDC). 344-345 members on Joint Study Committee on Aldrich, Nelson W., 228, 232. 241, 245, Budget Control, 352 247 privileged in reporting bills, 185 Allen, Leo. 3 I3 staff of the. 322-323 Allison, William B., 24 I Appropriations, Committee on (Senate), 274, 352 Altmeyer, Arthur J., 291-292 American Medical Association (AMA), Archer, William, 378, 381 Army, Ci.S. Spe also War Department 310, 343, 345 appropriation bills amended, 136-137, American Newspaper Publishers 137, 139-140 Association, 256 appropriation increases, 127, 253 American Party, 134 Civil War appropriations, 160, 167 American Political Science Association, Continental Army supplies, I7 273 individual appropriation bills for the. American System, 108 102 Ames, Fisher, 35. 45 mobilization of the Union Army, 174 Anderson, H. W., 303 Arthur, Chester A,, 175, 206, 208 Assay omces, 105, 166 Andrew, John, 235 Astor, John Jacob, 120 Andrews, Mary.
    [Show full text]
  • A Historical Examination of the Constitutionality of the Federal Estate Tax
    William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal Volume 27 (2018-2019) Issue 1 Article 5 October 2018 A Historical Examination of the Constitutionality of the Federal Estate Tax Henry Lowenstein Kathryn Kisska-Schulze Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, and the Taxation-Federal Estate and Gift Commons Repository Citation Henry Lowenstein and Kathryn Kisska-Schulze, A Historical Examination of the Constitutionality of the Federal Estate Tax, 27 Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 123 (2018), https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol27/iss1/5 Copyright c 2018 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj A HISTORICAL EXAMINATION OF THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE FEDERAL ESTATE TAX Henry Lowenstein* and Kathryn Kisska-Schulze** INTRODUCTION During the 2016 presidential campaign debate, Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton vowed to raise the Federal Estate Tax to sixty-five percent,1 while Republican candidate Donald Trump pledged to repeal it as part of his overall tax reform proposal.2 Following his election into the executive seat, President Trump signed into law the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) on December 22, 2017, which encompasses the most comprehensive tax law changes in the United States in decades.3 Although the law does not completely repeal the Estate Tax, it temporarily doubles the estate and gift tax exclusion amounts for estates of decedents dying and gifts made after December 31, 2017, and before January 1, 2026.4 Following candidate Trump’s campaign pledge to repeal the Estate Tax,5 and his subsequent signing of the TCJA into law during his first year of presidency,6 an interesting question resonating from these initiatives is whether the Estate Tax is even constitutional.
    [Show full text]
  • Mormon Profit: Brigham Young, Tithing, and the Bureau of Internal Revenue
    Loyola University Chicago, School of Law LAW eCommons Faculty Publications & Other Works 2019 Mormon Profit: Brigham oung,Y Tithing, and the Bureau of Internal Revenue Samuel D. Brunson Follow this and additional works at: https://lawecommons.luc.edu/facpubs Part of the Tax Law Commons Mormon Profit: Brigham Young, Tithing, and the Bureau of Internal Revenue Samuel D. Brunson* Since the enactment of the modern federal income tax, churches have been exempt from taxation. But that exemption is neither necessary nor inevitable. In fact, at the end of the 1860s, the Bureau of Internal Revenue decided that tithing received by the Mormon church was taxable under the Civil War income tax. At the time, Mormons distrusted the federal government and the federal government, in turn, distrusted the Mormons. The question of taxation was a small part of a larger legal and existential battle between the Mormons and the government. This Article situates the question of the taxability of tithing in the broader legal and relational conflict. More important, it tells the story of how the income tax threatened to fundamentally change the Mormon church and how Mormon leaders reacted to that threat, both with increasingly sophisticated legal arguments and, in the event their legal argumentationfailed, with plans to take the tax law into account. CONTENTS IN TRO D U CTIO N ................................................................................................... 42 I. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FEDERAL INCOME TAX .......................................... 47 A . The Civil W ar Incom e Tax .......................................................................... 47 B. The Bureau of Internal Revenue ............................................................ 49 * Georgia Reithal Professor of Law, Loyola University Chicago School of Law. I am grateful for comments from David J.
    [Show full text]
  • The First National Income Tax, 1861–1872
    THE FIRST NATIONAL INCOME TAX 1 The First National Income Tax, 1861–1872 SHELDON D. POLLACK* ABSTRACT During the first months of the American Civil War, an important political debate played out in the U.S. Congress over how to restructure the nation’s system of public finance and taxation. The fiscal crisis occasioned by the mili- tary conflict forced Republican leaders (who dominated our national political institutions) to adopt drastic and controversial measures including the expan- sion of public borrowing, the issuance of a national paper currency (so-called Greenbacks), and the adoption of a national income tax. To be sure, there was widespread resistance within the Republican Party to all of these proposals— most particularly, the income tax. Unsurprisingly, conservative Republicans from the Northeast adamantly opposed the impost. Despite this opposition, a majority of Republicans eventually acquiesced to this “odious” tax based on the need to fund the Union war effort. A number of key Republican leaders in Congress preferred this impost over the alternatives (in particular, a national land tax), casting their arguments in favor of the income tax in terms of “equity,” “justice,” and “fairness.” Based on their support, Congress approved a national income tax, signed into law by President Lincoln on August 5, 1861. While the war effort was largely funded by public borrow- ing and increases to tariff rates, the income tax made a modest contribution to financing the Northern military campaign and emerged as an important component in the reconstituted wartime fiscal system. Although the impost was allowed to expire soon after the resolution of the military conflict, the Civil War income tax served as the model for the modern income tax enacted by Congress more than 40 years later.
    [Show full text]
  • 1861 *I865 Financing the Civil War
    1861 *I865 Financing the Civil War The Civil War marked a pivotal period in the history of the Committee of Ways and Means: With the end of the war, the overburdened com- mittee’s jurisdiction over appropriations and banking also came to an end. The chairman during this period, Republican Thaddeus Stevens of Pennsylvania, was the dominant leader in the House. He delegated authority within the committee to subcommittees on revenue and on banking and currency, while the chairman retained personal control over appropriations matters. The committee originated most of the important tax, appropriations, and currency bills in the two war Con- gresses. In the process, the committee reported legislation that raised the protective tariff to its highest levels ever to that time, that institut- ed the first federal income tax, and that authorized the first national paper currency. The workload was so oppressive, however, that Con- gress split the committee along jurisdictional lines in 1865, when the House rules were revised to create separate committees on appropria- tions and on banking and currency. “And yet, szr, powerful as he circumstances under which the Committee of Ways and the committee as TMeans operated during the Thirty-seventh and Thirty-eighth constituted, euen thew Congresses (1861-1865) were quite different from those existing in the 1850s, when sectional tensions had impeded the legislative proc- powers of endurance, ess. All business, from the election of the Speaker of the House to the physzcal and mental, are passage of minor appropriations bills, had been bogged down at vari- not adequate to the great ous times by seemingly endless quarrels between various congression- duty whzch has been al factions.
    [Show full text]
  • Business & the Role of Government, 1790-1900
    Unit 5, Period 6 Continuity/Change over Time… Business & the Role of Government, 1790-1900 From the 2015 Revised Framework: Patterns of Continuity and Change over Time Historical thinking involves the ability to recognize, analyze, and evaluate the dynamics of historical continuity and change over periods of time of varying length, as well as the ability to relate these patterns to larger historical processes or themes. Students will … -Identify patterns of continuity and change over time and explain the significance of such patterns. -Explain how patterns of continuity and change over time relate to larger historical processes or themes. Key Concept 6.1: Technological advances, large-scale production methods, and the opening of new markets encouraged the rise of industrial capitalism in the United States. …Some argued that laissez-faire policies and competition promoted economic growth in the long run, and they opposed government intervention during economic downturns. Review the thematic timeline (on the back of this page), then address the following prompt using your thesis formula. (see your writing guidelines if you do not remember the formula) Prompt: Explain the ways the role of federal government changed from 1790 to 1865. To what extent did laissez-faire policies of the Gilded Age maintain continuity or foster change in United States work, exchange, and technology from 1865-1898? Written by Rebecca Richardson, Allen High School using the 2015 Revised College Board framework for A.P. U.S. history and notes from Wikipedia.org and ushistory.org Continuity/Change over Time… Business & the Role of Government, 1790-1900 1791 First BUS…Most banks that existed in the 18th century were land banks (mortgages for buying land) …Jackson passed his Specie Circular (Coinage Act) to deal with trouble with all the various paper without monies for business investments.
    [Show full text]
  • Selective Consumption Taxes in Historical Perspective WILLIAM F
    Excerpt from Adam J. Hoffer and Todd Nesbit, eds., For Your Own Good: Taxes, Paternalism, and Fiscal Discrimination in the Twenty-First Century. Arlington, VA: Mercatus Center at George Mason University, 2018. CHAPTER 1 Selective Consumption Taxes in Historical Perspective WILLIAM F. SHUGHART II Jon M. Huntsman School of Business, Utah State University Imposts, excises, and, in general, all duties upon articles of consumption, may be compared to a fluid, which will, in time, find its level with the means of paying them. The amount to be contributed by each citizen will in a degree be at his own option, and can be regulated by an atten- tion to his resources. The rich may be extravagant, the poor can be frugal; and private oppression may always be avoided by a judicious se lection of objects proper for such impositions. It is a signal advantage of taxes on articles of consumption, that they contain in their own nature a security against excess. They prescribe their own limit; which cannot be exceeded without defeating the end proposed, that is, an extension of the revenue. When applied to this object, the saying is as just as it is witty, that, “in po liti cal arithmetic, two and two do not always make four.” If duties are too high, they lessen the consumption; the collection is eluded; and the product to the trea sury is not so great as when they are confined within proper and moderate bounds. — Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 21 19 William F. SHUGHART II ntil the ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment to the US Constitution in 1913, which authorized the collection of taxes on incomes, the federal government of the United States relied heavi ly Uon indirect taxes (import duties and selective excises) to generate revenue.1 In 1912, for example, internal tax receipts (90.4 percent of which were generated by vari ous excise taxes) represented just over half (50.8 percent) of all federal revenues; customs duties accounted for most of the rest (40.8 percent of the total) (Yelvington 1997, 44, 47).
    [Show full text]
  • The Government Unsheathes an Old Weapon to Target Practitioners for Criminal Tax Offenses Dante Marrazzo
    The University of Akron IdeaExchange@UAkron Akron Tax Journal Akron Law Journals 1997 Practitioners - Beware the Trojan Horse: The Government Unsheathes an Old Weapon to Target Practitioners for Criminal Tax Offenses Dante Marrazzo Please take a moment to share how this work helps you through this survey. Your feedback will be important as we plan further development of our repository. Follow this and additional works at: https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akrontaxjournal Part of the Criminal Law Commons, and the Tax Law Commons Recommended Citation Marrazzo, Dante (1997) "Practitioners - Beware the Trojan Horse: The Government Unsheathes an Old Weapon to Target Practitioners for Criminal Tax Offenses," Akron Tax Journal: Vol. 13 , Article 3. Available at: https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akrontaxjournal/vol13/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Akron Law Journals at IdeaExchange@UAkron, the institutional repository of The nivU ersity of Akron in Akron, Ohio, USA. It has been accepted for inclusion in Akron Tax Journal by an authorized administrator of IdeaExchange@UAkron. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Marrazzo: Criminal Tax Offenses PRACTITIONERS - BEWARE THE TROJAN HORSE: THE GOVERNMENT UNSHEATHES AN OLD WEAPON TO TARGET PRACTITIONERS FOR CRIMINAL TAX OFFENSES by DANTE MARRAZZO I. INTRODUCTION Nestled within the many criminal sanctions of the Internal Revenue Code' is a little known, less understood, and, until recently, seldom used statute pro- scribing attempts to interfere with administration of the Internal Revenue laws. This article will discuss the exponential increase in use of that provision, section 7212(a) of the Internal Revenue Code, in the last decade to seek prosecution of tax scofflaws, particularly practitioners, who might have otherwise escaped crim- inal sanctions.
    [Show full text]