- Location
- Scottish Highlands
?Do you know highland mule you are quick to criticise I wonder if you have ever challenged anything even you thought it wrong.
?Do you know highland mule you are quick to criticise I wonder if you have ever challenged anything even you thought it wrong.
Why? If you base levies on profit that effectively means the profitable subsidise the unprofitable. Plus of course profit is a very moveable feast. Do you base it on accounting profit or taxable profit? Big difference. Why should two farmers who produce exactly the same amount of output pay different amounts of levy? If The AHDB are doing the job they say they do and increasing demand and prices for products both will benefit equally. So why shouldn't they pay in equally?
Plus it would be very easy to game. Farmer A makes £25k profit and pays his levy based on that. Farmer B makes the same underlying profit but pays his wife a £25k salary as 'Farm administrator' , and pays no levy. Farmer C runs his business as a company and pays himself all the profits as salary and pays no levy. And of course many farms have non-farming streams of income nowadays, so you'd have to extract that from the accounts, otherwise the person who runs a camp site or some small industrial units on their farm would have to pay extra AHDB levies based on the profits from that.
Turnover is easy to calculate and very hard to game. Profit is very hard to calculate in a manner that compares like with like, and is very easy to game.
[/The system is unfair which ever way you look at it,farmer A owns his farm his turnover is half a million (profit £50,000)farmer b is a tenant farmer also half million turnover (profit £25,000) lets just rid ourselves of all this nonsense if you need advice pay for it ,if you came over to holland with me it's a completely different ball game over there they don't need somebody to hold their hand and in most cases certainly not someone who can only farm on a blackboard,
I don't think they should be based on TO or profitWhy? If you base levies on profit that effectively means the profitable subsidise the unprofitable. Plus of course profit is a very moveable feast. Do you base it on accounting profit or taxable profit? Big difference. Why should two farmers who produce exactly the same amount of output pay different amounts of levy? If The AHDB are doing the job they say they do and increasing demand and prices for products both will benefit equally. So why shouldn't they pay in equally?
Plus it would be very easy to game. Farmer A makes £25k profit and pays his levy based on that. Farmer B makes the same underlying profit but pays his wife a £25k salary as 'Farm administrator' , and pays no levy. Farmer C runs his business as a company and pays himself all the profits as salary and pays no levy. And of course many farms have non-farming streams of income nowadays, so you'd have to extract that from the accounts, otherwise the person who runs a camp site or some small industrial units on their farm would have to pay extra AHDB levies based on the profits from that.
Turnover is easy to calculate and very hard to game. Profit is very hard to calculate in a manner that compares like with like, and is very easy to game.
they are not based on TO or profit in other sectors are they ?
Not based on turnover at all as far as I can see
Anyway the main reason I don't think they should be based on TO is that its nobody else's fecking business
Which bit of get rid of it don't you understand highland muleTricky to find a way that’s not open to abuse if it’s not got some connection to production though. What would you suggest, if not output related?
Which bit of get rid of it don't you understand highland mule
Not in potato and horticultural sector they don't.The question was directed at someone else. We all know you’re bitter and see no value in AHDB, but plenty others see value from what they do.
Not in potato and horticultural sector they don't.
well other sectors are output based, so much per lamb, so much per ton why not so much per cabbage ?Tricky to find a way that’s not open to abuse if it’s not got some connection to production though. What would you suggest, if not output related?
Well if they were in favour they should have said so they had a chance.so far out of 81 replies not one is in favour of keeping them.When they had the review only o.45% responded about 900 of which 129 were from our sector ,When will your so called silent levy payers start to make themselves known because that's a review and a poll they missed.Some will. Whether there’s a majority or not is way beyond both our understanding. Only the bitter will have contacted you - plenty will be quietly working away.
you have asked everyone that grows and sells veg or spuds have you ?Not in potato and horticultural sector they don't.
Well ahdb thought that 0.45 % was enough of a mandate to carry on so obviously you don't need to ask everyone.you have asked everyone that grows and sells veg or spuds have you ?
You do to truthful make the statement you did aboveWell ahdb thought that 0.45 % was enough of a mandate to carry on so obviously you don't need to ask everyone.
well other sectors are output based, so much per lamb, so much per ton why not so much per cabbage ?
Majority will do ,just noticed you said per ton for cabbage not many sold per ton it's per unit.You do to truthful make the statement you did above
just noticed you said per ton for cabbage
You do to truthful make the statement you did above