Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to state that this legislation has bipartisan support in the House. Cosponsors of the bill include Mr. Hostettler, Mr. Peterson of Minnesota, Mr. Lightfoot, Mr. Stenholm, and Mr. Laughlin. Additionally, I would like to thank Mr. Gibbons for his kind letter offering support of this bill. On the Senate side, identical legislation has been introduced by Senator Daschle, and his bill also has cosponsors from both sides of the isle. A number of important agricultural organizations have announced their support of this bill, including the National Cattlemen's Association, the National Pork Producers Council, the National Farmers Union, and the American Farm Bureau Federation. Mr. Chairman, thank you for allowing me the opportunity to testify on behalf of this small, but nonetheless very important, change in our tax code. I am certain that you and the rest of the committee will agree that it is unfair to deny the disasterrelated provisions of the tax code to livestock producers just because the disaster involved is a flood and not a drought. I ask you to join me in making this common-sense change to the federal tax code, and provide some needed assistance to our nation's livestock producers. While I am before you, I would like to share my concerns relative to another area where our tax code needs some clarification. Since I was not called before the committee to testify on this matter, and I know that you have a very busy schedule, I will not spend a great deal of your time discussing this problem. However, I would like to call your attention to how certain agricultural vehicles are affected by the highway excise tax. As you know, an excise tax is placed on the sale of heavy trucks, trailers, and tractors in order to compensate for the wear and tear of these vehicles on our highways. Many agricultural vehicles such as those used to prepare and haul feed, seed, and fertilizer — are exempt from this tax based on the principle that their use on the highways is limited. However, it seems that the IRS has interpreted congressional intent in an overly-narrow fashion, and has attempted to apply the excise tax to some agricultural vehicles despite the fact that they are only used on a seasonal basis (3 to 4 months per year), that they contain specialized equipment that is used for loading and unloading farm products, and that several states restrict their use on the highways. I am referring specifically to cotton module trucks and trailers. One company that manufactures these cotton module haulers is based in the town of Eden, South Dakota. I believe that Congress should clarify its original intent in order to ensure that the highway excise tax should not be applied to specialized farm equipment that is used on a seasonal basis. I am working with the National Cotton Council and the National Ginners Association on legislative language that would clarify the tax code as pertaining to agricultural vehicles of this sort. I hope that you will look favorably upon this legislation at the appropriate time. a high degree of confidence that all excise taxes are being collected. The use of joint excise tax reporting forms, with identical copies going to state agencies and the Treasury, offers cost saving opportunities. Restrains increases in tax collection points through minimum gallonage requirement and by operation of brand franchising contracts and state laws which qualify purchasers of distilled spirits at wholesale. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I believe that this "All-In-Bond" proposal promotes sound tax policy by ending discrimination against domestic products while freeing up substantial working capital for U.S. family-owned businesses. In addition, it unifies the point of payment of both federal and state excise taxes, thus strengthening tax administration and compliance by providing parallel tax audit trails. "All-In-Bond" provides additional revenue protection in the form of annual estimated tax payments. It is revenue neutral. Attached to my written testimony are photographs depicting the regulatory burden resulting from the requirement to regulate warehouse facilities under dual agency supervision. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the Committee's time and trust that the Committee will include this proposal in the package under consideration. Attachments |