The USDA farm bill proposes changes on payment limitations, including making farmers ineligible if their adjusted gross income (AGI) is $200,000 or more (now $2.5 million). My guess, without doing much research, is that this is just another proposal that won't be enacted. That's the history of changes in payment limitation; lots more get proposed than get enacted.
There are at least two aspects of the proposal, aside from the general opposition to payment limitations, that will play into the prospects:
- The size of the change, from $2.5 mill to $200 K. The bigger the change, the stronger the opposition from groups that are opposed.
- The all or nothing aspect.
My suggestion, to USDA, to Congress, would be to consider a progressive payment structure. Assume that FSA has the payee's AGI recorded in its payment system. (The bureaucratic problem is getting the data attached to the payee; once you do that, getting the data into the computer system should not be a big deal.) It then would be easy to program the payment calculation to factor payments according to a progressive rule. For example:
AGI Payment
- < $100,000 100 percent of calculated amount
- <$200,000 80 percent of calculated
- <$500,000 50 percent of calculated
- <$1 mill 25 percent
- >$1 mill 0
Vary the amounts and percentages however you want, put in as many levels as you want.
The advantages of the proposal are:
- Makes the implementation more gradual
- Counters the widespread criticism that the bigger the farmer the bigger the payment--makes payments "progressive" in some sense
- Might make payees less likely to try to evade the limitation. (The incentive to evade is variable, like boiling a frog slowly.)
Based on my experience with the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings factoring of payments in 1986, it would be imperative to think through the relationship of factored payment dollars to the payment limitation.
No comments:
Post a Comment