"Christmas Tree Tax" Was Not a Tax, Not Obama's, But Local Farms Trying to Help Themselves

We've all seen "Got Milk," "Beef. It's What's for Dinner," and who could forget "The Incredible, Edible Egg"? With the rise of processed food, people had abandoned their milk for cola and eggs for Pop-Tarts. Christmas trees almost got a catchy slogan, but today the right-wing blogosphere is congratulating itself on having put a stop to it.

In recent years the sales of artificial Christmas trees have grown, as they are promoted as "safer" and sold in many box stores. Natural trees have no ads on TV, and conditions for farmers are worsening because of the recession. There are no major corporate players in the natural Christmas tree business. Like many small farmers, Christmas tree growers' business is local and their revenue is very seasonal. So this year, the Department of Agriculture passed a proposal that Christmas tree growers would pay a 15¢ fee for each tree sold. The money would be used to form a National Board, like those for milk, beef and 16 other industries, to research, promote and maintain the tree-growers' industry.

Within days, The Drudge Report, Fox and The Heritage Foundation started funneling anti-Obama sentiment toward the idea of another Obama attack on Christmas (remember the last one, Obamacare passing on Christmas Eve?); evidence that he not only wants to oppress us with taxes, but that he's Muslim and "hates Christians" too.

Firstly, this wasn't exactly a "tax" because it wasn't meant to raise government revenue. And it wasn't Obama's proposal. In fact it's a fee to be paid by growers, not sellers, who "requested" the idea in 2009. Plus, do the math. 15¢ on each Christmas tree -- which are around $40 these days -- is a tax of .375%. Not quite four-tenths of a percent. Sales tax in New York is nearly 9%. And even firehouses are forced to pay sales tax on Christmas tree fundraisers (pg. 19). So is Andrew Cuomo 24 times the Grinch that Obama is, or is this just hysteria?

In a statement, The National Christmas Tree Association asserted, "The program is not expected to have any impact on the final price consumers pay for their Christmas tree" (emphasis theirs). And before the trickle-down zealots chime in: even in the event that a cash-strapped grower raises the price of their trees, shouldn't the market allow them to find the 15¢ cheaper tree nearby? Would 15¢ prevent anyone for having a Christmas tree in their home? Not according to the growers, who feel it is small price to pay for the sustainability of their local farms.

As WPDE reporter Joel Allen so eloquently put it, while peeping out from behind a South Carolina spruce, "Christmas tree growers like to point out that if you buy an artificial tree, you're just supporting a manufacturer -- with its workers possibly in China. Whereas, if you buy a natural tree, you're supporting a family business." Yes, in a recession, Obama is being attacked for trying to promote family businesses.

The saddest part is that, under pressure from the right-wing blogosphere, the administration immediately abandoned the plan, leaving the conspiracy theorists to feel vindicated, and tree growers out in the cold.

For more holiday news -- alarming and frivolous alike -- check out http://christm.us.

 

Follow Paul Snyder on Twitter: www.twitter.com/christm_us

Comments

[Iamrebelriser]

02:06 PM on 11/14/2011

I hope you TPers will come aboard and read this account of how your lying leaders were trying to get us to believe President Obama was adding a tax to Christmas trees. Now, don't you finally realize how Limbaugh and FOX were aiding and abetting a lie to hurt this President? Now, apply this big fat lie to all other information you hear on a daily basis when you put your grubby fingers to the buttons and turn on FOX & Limbaugh.

[puckey]

11:01 AM on 11/13/2011

Although the "tax" is paid by tree growers, they are using federal labor to collect funds and administer a program ostensibly to foster competitiveness, but which in reality is targeted against artificial tree producers. Not a proper role for government. I'm surprised that they didn't lobby instead for a real tax on the artificial trees.....But what really surprises me is the Liberal support for BO on this "tax". Why aren't environmentalists outraged at this attack on our forests, and others at the annual deaths from christmas tree fires?

[kmgraham11]

12:53 PM on 11/14/2011

This isn't an attack on forests. People own some land and grow trees specifically for this purpose.

[Iamrebelriser]

02:19 PM on 11/14/2011

You still don't get it, puckey or pukey. The Pres. did NOT instigate this cost, not a tax that was wanted by christmas tree growers. They're simply farmers who grow these trees on their land, many in northern & southern Wisconsin also. I'm sure the Pres knew nothing about this project, but you uninformed(would like to call you worse)TPers are ignorant enough to believe everything you hear on FOX or from Limbaugh and come here huffing & puffing, repeating lies. I wonder why the media, which you uninformed try to call "Liberal" were repeating untruths about President Obama and Christmas tree tax. They probably knew the truth all along.

[puckey]

10:54 AM on 11/13/2011

While the growers may be taxing themselves, they are nevertheless using federal staff to collect the funds and administer the program whose real purpose is not to foster industry competitiveness but to reduce the marketing effectiveness of the artificial tree industry. It would be more logical to impose the tax on the artificial trees. What really startles me is the Liberal support for BO on this issue. Environmentalists should be outraged on this attack on living trees, and lives lost to real tree fires every year.

[Iamrebelriser]

02:25 PM on 11/14/2011

Pukey, who even said they were using federal means of collecting the added costs for trees? I repeat, as another told you, TPer, these are NOT trees in forrests. These growers have land on which they plant evergreen trees to be sold as Christmas Trees. I repeat, they're not forrests. I've been to these tree farms. Get the story right or be quiet for once, you who like to find poor excuses for blasting our president. You should know by now that whatever you hear on Limbaugh & FOX is lies.

[cadacabezaunmundo]

07:50 AM on 11/13/2011

"... it's a fee to be paid by growers, not sellers..". Don't they grow them to sell them?

[kmgraham11]

12:54 PM on 11/14/2011

Some people buy trees and sell them at their farmers markets even though they did not grow them.

[lambdin1]

10:22 AM on 11/12/2011

It always amazes me how rumors become fact. I'm often reminded of the game where everyone stands in a circle and someone starts telling something to a person on the other side of them. I've seen a script used and it always comes back different to the person who started it! If tree growers wanted to be of service, they could grow trees where the loggers have been. For my part I only use a ceramic tree that I've had for years. It has been more than cost effective and saved a living tree or two.

[Iamrebelriser]

02:27 PM on 11/14/2011

These trees are planted exclusively as Christmas trees. Most of them are cut before they get any taller than ten or twelve feet tall, and new seedlings are replanted. Get right information & get educated or keep quiet.

[VFausone]

04:11 PM on 11/11/2011

You cannot blame people for being suspicious over government tax schemes that hide themselves as all sorts of fees for all sorts of things. If growers want to put together a fund for mutual benefit why do they need the government to do that?

[LadyLazarus]

09:36 AM on 11/12/2011

Suspicious over 15 cents?? Jeez. Some of you need to relax a little.
Everything is not a huge gov't conspiracy and/or cover up.

[beckjr2000]

02:39 PM on 11/11/2011

Quite making excuses! Paul but by your own words the Dept. of Agriculture is the organization proposing the "fee"! "the Department of Agriculture passed a proposal that Christmas tree growers would pay a 15¢ fee for each tree sold" It makes no difference that some tree farmers would like to see this Tax, the Government is the one proposing it. No matter how small it may be it's still a TAX. With the D of A collecting this money who will decide who gets how much? No this is another Administration scam.

[Jim Milks]

05:35 PM on 11/11/2011

Might want to do some more reading. The second paragraph down from the one you copied and pasted:

"Firstly, this wasn't exactly a "tax" because it wasn't meant to raise government revenue. And it wasn't Obama's proposal. In fact it's a fee to be paid by growers, not sellers, who "requested" the idea in 2009."

The GROWERS requested the Christmas Tree Checkoff Program in 2009 (see http://www.christmastree.org/11_PR7.pdf). So in the name of anti-government ideology, your ilk killed off a program that 1) was supported by the industry and 2) was designed to help small business owners. Nice going.

[beckjr2000]

09:35 PM on 11/12/2011

If the GROWERS want to contribute 15 cents per tree to what ever they can. When you get the Feds involved collecting money it's a TAX>

[cadacabezaunmundo]

07:45 AM on 11/13/2011

The growers don't sell their trees?

[LadyLazarus]

09:38 AM on 11/12/2011

Don't you think if it were a "scam" that they'd come up w. something a little more substantial than 15 cents a tree? It's 15 cents, for pete's sake!

[beckjr2000]

09:57 PM on 11/12/2011

Don’t you think it’s a bit peculiar for a Federal Agency to impose a "fee" because some industry group wants to help it’s members? Can’t they just impose this “fee” on their own members if they want it so much? No! The Federal Government should not be involved in this. Someone getting scammed!

[portunus]

02:06 PM on 11/11/2011

Another example of the right spending all their time finding fault, instead of trying to find solutions to the multitude of problems plaguing this country. And you know what, how many people would have even given a Sh*t if they were given the facts not the Fox version.

[AtticusinPa]

01:40 PM on 11/11/2011

This "issue" demonstrates the reality that conservatives have tarred certain words to the degree that the public's response is unreasonable and downright wrong. First, this is not a "tax" but I suspect that were you to call a bus fare a "tax" people on the right would be screaming murder. Secondly, this is not Mr. Obama's. The idea has been around for decades. Pennsylvania tried it in the 90's (http://articles.mcall.com/1999-10-14/news/3281069_1_tree-farmers-pennsylvania-christmas-tree-marketing-eligible-farmers) and the national tree growers brought it up in 2004. It came to a head in 2008 and a study was commissioned and THE GROWERS decided to enact a 15 cent fee on themselves to help market live trees. See, for example, http://mediamatters.org/blog/201111090001?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+MediaMattersForAmerica-CountyFair+(Media+Matters+for+America+-+County+Fair) :

"In February 2008, faced with declining sales, members of the National Christmas Tree Association created a task force to consider the merits of a checkoff program, which would allow the USDA to collect a fee from growers in order to fund research into marketing Christmas trees."

February, 2008 obviously, was months before Mr. Obama was even elected.

We have come to the sad point in America that conservatives can torpedo any effort, however worthwhile, by merely branding it.

The media eats it up and never bothers to check. Never let the facts get in the way of a good slime.

[Iamrebelriser]

02:38 PM on 11/14/2011

The right wing just love it that they have a following of ignorant, unlearned persons who readily believe every lie they can spew out to the airwaves. They lie because their followers are uneducated, easily led know-nothings who will come to these sites and repeat lies.

[Tom Iarossi]

12:37 PM on 11/11/2011

More proof of the brain less foolishness of the right wing.