If Rod Edgar sees the full benefit of cuts to education tax on the agricultural land he farms, he’ll save about $8,000.
On an education tax bill of between $20,000 and $24,000, that’s a significant saving.
“I don’t have it earmarked,” said the Wolseley, Sask., farmer. “It increases my potential for profit.”
Edgar rents about 80 percent of the 37 quarters he farms, so he isn’t sure just how last week’s announcement of permanent tax relief in Saskatchewan will shake out for him. And he said he’ll have to wait for tax notices to know exactly what the numbers will be.
Read Also
Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes
federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million
But he said Saskatchewan premier Lorne Calvert’s decision to deal with the inequity facing farmers is a good one and a long time coming.
“What I don’t like is that we had to put our local councillors and (rural municipality) into a position of breaking the law to get anything done,” Edgar said.
The 144 rural municipalities that were withholding taxes to school boards in an attempt to get action from the province won’t take full credit for the province’s decision.
“We could maybe claim a certain amount of satisfaction,” said Glenn Blakley, a councillor for the RM of Spy Hill and spokesperson for the Tax Action Group.
Calvert announced in Birch Hills, Sask., March 3 that the province would spend an additional $52.8 million on property tax relief to establish a 60-40 funding split between the government and agricultural land taxpayers.
The split has been the other way around for some time, and producers have long complained that they pay far more than their fair share to local school boards.
The additional money will result in a 30 percent cut to tax bills beginning April 1. Producers also receive the eight percent discount that has been available to all property owners for the past two years.
Calvert said the ultimate goal is to reduce education tax for all property classes.
“We’ve decided to act immediately where we believe the need is greatest and the unfairness is most pronounced, and that’s on Saskatchewan farmland,” he said.
Neal Hardy, president of the Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities, said he was satisfied with the announcement although it wasn’t what a coalition including SARM, urban municipalities, school boards and the provincial chamber of commerce had asked for.
It wanted a 60-40 arrangement for all properties by 2008.
Ted Hillstead, president of the Saskatchewan Chamber of Commerce, said he appreciated the government’s help for farmers but the coalition is still in place and will continue to work toward its goal.
“Right now we are going to assume that it’s timing and we’ll see what happens down the line,” he said.
Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association president Brian Ross said the reduction would help producers’ bottom lines.
“It kind of feels good that finally, maybe, we are getting listened to a little bit and hopefully the trend … will continue,” he said.
Dave Brown, vice-president of the Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan, said the reduction will help cut costs on farms of all sizes.
“It will not save farmers from the problems we’re having now but every little bit helps,” he said.
Calvert agreed the measure would not solve the farm income crisis. He said he announced the funding prior to this week’s SARM annual convention so that delegates could concentrate on other important issues.
“The agricultural issue is boiling out there,” added Hardy. “I don’t think he wanted to come to convention with the coalition pounding him from one side and the Tax Action Group pounding him from the other.”
He noted that there is still a ways to go, since Saskatchewan farmland owners still pay twice as much education tax as their Manitoba counterparts.
Meanwhile, Blakley said March 6 he couldn’t speak for all RMs but the cheques to school boards from the RM of Spy Hill had been mailed out that morning.
