Montana HB 677, another gem.

[TheTone]

You're right.

How we stop APR from abusing Montana’s tax code

In central Montana the American Prairie Reserve has amassed 420,000 acres of prime ranch land. This is a fraction of their ultimate objective: to control 3.2 million acres.

dailyinterlake.com

This is an op ed by the bill"s sponsor.
"I wish we could legislate them out of existence". So there's the motive.

Because willing sellers are forced to take an offer from groups. Ugh!

 

[tdhanses]

Personally I think the bill is stupid, if people or groups can afford the land no legislation should dictate who can buy.

 

[BuzzH]

Personally I think the bill is stupid, if people or groups can afford the land no legislation should dictate who can buy.

I agree, its funny to listen to the R side of the aisle carry on about private property rights (which I happen to agree with, private property rights), then introduce legislation to limit who a landowner can sell their property to.

Any landowner should have the right to sell to a business, another private landowner, a non profit, a for profit, etc.

Willing buyers and willing sellers should not be controlled by legislation like this.

Funny how property rights become unimportant when its agenda driven.

 

[Billinsd]

From Dan Bartel. "To be clear, my legislation does not outright prohibit organizations like APR from buying agricultural land — it only says that they cannot use a nonprofit vehicle to do so. APR and other nonprofits are free to organize for-profit entities through which to make their land purchases. The only difference is they will be required to pay taxes like the rest of us." You can agree or disagree with this, but it is NOT about private property rights, it's about Non Profits not paying taxes for things that are questionable as charity. Is buying land to take out of ranching and agriculture charity is the issue. I personally don't think it's charity and I agree with Dan completely.

 

[Billinsd]

HB 677 is in the House Agricultural committee. This bill prevents non-profits from purchasing agricultural lands greater than 80 acres (unless you're a religious entity for example).

Not EXACTLY, they can buy as much land as they want, if the money they use they pay taxes on and donors don't get a tax break on. That's the the jist of the bill as I understand it. Some of you guys are extremely disingenuous. Carry on....

 

[BuzzH]

Not EXACTLY, they can buy as much land as they want, if the money they use they pay taxes on and donors don't get a tax break on. That's the the jist of the bill as I understand it. Some of you guys are extremely disingenuous. Carry on....

Then apply the g-damn law equally, which he didn't do. He exempted Church's...which buy a boatload of land under 501c3 status. I would argue the entire bill is disingenuous when it exempts some c3's and not others. Its a targeted bill that would have made it tough on RMEF, TNC, and of course APR and other non profits to acquire crucial habitat.

Might be worth listening to this podcast, clears up a lot of the misinformation about the tax issues, etc.

Ep. 148: American Prairie Reserve | MeatEater Podcasts

Bozeman, MT- Steven Rinella talks with Sean Gerrity, the founder of the American Prairie Reserve, along with Ryan Callaghan, Sam Lungren, Michelle Chandler, and Janis Putelis of the MeatEater crew.Subjects discussed: questions about Ryan Callaghan; when ballparkin' goes wrong; Santa Claus as a...

www.themeateater.com

It also strips property rights from willing sellers, no matter how you slice it. If I want to sell my house/land to a c3, a c4, a c6...or peddle it to the hippies that live under a bridge, that's my RIGHT.

 

[Billinsd]

Then apply the g-damn law equally, which he didn't do. He exempted Church's...which buy a boatload of land under 501c3 status.

OK, that's wrong if he's doing that!! I'm pretty much done with both parties!!! I think, though he says buying ranch land to make prairie isn't charitable to him. What are churches doing with all the land they are buying?

 

[BuzzH]

OK, that's wrong if he's doing that!! I'm pretty much done with both parties!!! I think, though he says buying ranch land to make prairie isn't charitable to him. What are churches doing with all the land they are buying?

I don't care what they're doing with their land, none of my business. Graze it, farm it, let is sit idle, use it to benefit wildlife, pray on it, build a church, sacrifice a goat on it for all I care...whatever, its private property.

 

[Billinsd]

I don't care what they're doing with their land, none of my business. Graze it, farm it, let is sit idle, use it to benefit wildlife, pray on it, build a church, sacrifice a goat on it for all I care...whatever, its private property.

That's a Libertarian view that I totally agree with. I don't care what people do with their land either, farm it, ranch it, build high rises, subdivisions, etc. The issue this bill addresses is forcing charitable organizations that buy large chunks of land to pay taxes on the money they use to buy the land like everyone else, also a Libertarian way. People can still buy and sell land, not as much after paying taxes.

 

[Billinsd]

Then apply the g-damn law equally, which he didn't do. He exempted Church's...which buy a boatload of land under 501c3 status. I would argue the entire bill is disingenuous when it exempts some c3's and not others. Its a targeted bill that would have made it tough on RMEF, TNC, and of course APR and other non profits to acquire crucial habitat.

Might be worth listening to this podcast, clears up a lot of the misinformation about the tax issues, etc.

Ep. 148: American Prairie Reserve | MeatEater Podcasts

Bozeman, MT- Steven Rinella talks with Sean Gerrity, the founder of the American Prairie Reserve, along with Ryan Callaghan, Sam Lungren, Michelle Chandler, and Janis Putelis of the MeatEater crew.Subjects discussed: questions about Ryan Callaghan; when ballparkin' goes wrong; Santa Claus as a...

www.themeateater.com

It also strips property rights from willing sellers, no matter how you slice it. If I want to sell my house/land to a c3, a c4, a c6...or peddle it to the hippies that live under a bridge, that's my RIGHT.

 

[Billinsd]

It also strips property rights from willing sellers, no matter how you slice it. If I want to sell my house/land to a c3, a c4, a c6...or peddle it to the hippies that live under a bridge, that's my RIGHT.

You can still sell your land to hippies or anyone you want under this bill, with the exception of non Profits that haven't paid taxes on the money the use to buy the land. It doesn't strip the rights of private property owners it forces buyers to pay taxes on the money they use to buy the land. You can be against that, that's the issue. I would argue against this bill by saying that what the Prairie company wants to do by, buy buying land to revert to prairie is charitable and therefore they should not pay taxes on the money they raise to buy the land. I'd also say this hurts RMEF who has been buying lots of land for conservation with tax exempt funds for decades this for decades will get hurt!! That this bill is solely targeted to trying to slow down the Prairie company, which it is. The issue is charitable organizations and being tax exempt or not. Property rights argument is a strawman.

 

[BuzzH]

You can still sell your land to hippies or anyone you want under this bill, with the exception of non Profits that haven't paid taxes on the money the use to buy the land. It doesn't strip the rights of private property owners it forces buyers to pay taxes on the money they use to buy the land. You can be against that, that's the issue. I would argue against this bill by saying that what the Prairie company wants to do by, buy buying land to revert to prairie is charitable and therefore they should not pay taxes on the money they raise to buy the land. I'd also say this hurts RMEF who has been buying lots of land for conservation with tax exempt funds for decades this for decades will get hurt!! That this bill is solely targeted to trying to slow down the Prairie company, which it is. The issue is charitable organizations and being tax exempt or not. Property rights argument is a strawman.

It has a lot to do with property rights, but in particular the sellers. How and who I choose to sell or give my land to is nobodies business and the State Legislature should stay out of it. That includes this ridiculous bill and its wrong-headed sponsor.

It went down in flames like it needed to.

 

[bsnedeker]

That's a Libertarian view that I totally agree with. I don't care what people do with their land either, farm it, ranch it, build high rises, subdivisions, etc. The issue this bill addresses is forcing charitable organizations that buy large chunks of land to pay taxes on the money they use to buy the land like everyone else, also a Libertarian way. People can still buy and sell land, not as much after paying taxes.

The Libertarian view is that no one should be forced to pay taxes, full stop. Taxation is theft!

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

[Billinsd]

The Libertarian view is that no one should be forced to pay taxes, full stop. Taxation is theft!

I don't know if you are serious or not? However, you are completely wrong.

 

[Billinsd]

It has a lot to do with property rights, but in particular the sellers. How and who I choose to sell or give my land to is nobodies business and the State Legislature should stay out of it.

We completely disagree on this. I'll move on. Thanks Bill

 

[bsnedeker]

I don't know if you are serious or not? However, you are completely wrong.

I am? That will be news to the Libertarian party!

Taxes | Libertarian Party

When you pay taxes, do you do so voluntarily? Or do you do so because you are forced to do so? If you don’t pay your taxes, what will happen? Will you be fined further? Harassed by the IRS or other government entities? Jailed? The Libertarian Party is fundamentally opposed to the use of force […]

www.lp.org

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

[Deadfall]

From Dan Bartel. "To be clear, my legislation does not outright prohibit organizations like APR from buying agricultural land — it only says that they cannot use a nonprofit vehicle to do so. APR and other nonprofits are free to organize for-profit entities through which to make their land purchases. The only difference is they will be required to pay taxes like the rest of us." You can agree or disagree with this, but it is NOT about private property rights, it's about Non Profits not paying taxes for things that are questionable as charity. Is buying land to take out of ranching and agriculture charity is the issue. I personally don't think it's charity and I agree with Dan completely.

Hallelujah, so glad you posted this...

 

[BuzzH]

We completely disagree on this. I'll move on. Thanks Bill

That's fine, we can agree to disagree on that.

But, Mr. Bartel is trying to pass legislation specifically to limit one group, just like he admitted to in this article:

I wish I could say that we can legislate them out of existence, but that’s not the way the law works. But at least we can level the playing field and stop APR from abusing the tax code by forcing all Montanans to subsidize their radical plan.

Probably against the Montana State Constitution....and exactly why this bill needed to go away, which it did.

Its not the State Legislatures place to hand pick winners and losers via legislation. Like I said initially, apply it equally or pound sound Mr. Bartel.

 

[Billinsd]

I am? That will be news to the Libertarian party!

You are right about being forced. Libertarians don't believe people should be forced to do anything. I'm definitely not a full Libertarian. "The Libertarian Party is fundamentally opposed to the use of force to coerce people into doing anything. We think it is inherently wrong and should have no role in a civilized society."

 

[Billinsd]

I don't know if you are serious or not? However, you are completely wrong. Edited to say I'm wrong about the forced to pay part.