| Description: | The U.S. Supreme Court in 2005 affirmed the constitutionality of the so-called beef check-off program, one of the 18 generic promotion programs for agricultural products that are now active nationally. Supporters view check-offs as economically beneficial self-help activities that need minimal government involvement or taxpayer funding. Producers, handlers, and/or importers are required to pay an assessment, usually deducted from revenue at time of sale - thus the name check-off. However, some farmers contend they are being "taxed" for advertising and related activities they would not underwrite voluntarily. The Supreme Court's decision to uphold the beef check-off is considered significant for the future of the other programs, although the Court left open the possibility of additional challenges. |
|---|---|
| Creator(s): | |
| Creation Date: | October 20, 2008 |
| Partner(s): |
UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
|
| Collection(s): |
Congressional Research Service Reports
|
| Usage: |
Total Uses: 11
Past 30 days: 0
Yesterday: 0
|
| Creator (Author): |
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Creator (Author): | ||
| Publisher Info: |
Publisher Name: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress
Place of Publication: Washington, D.C.
|
|
| Date(s): |
|
|
| Description: | The U.S. Supreme Court in 2005 affirmed the constitutionality of the so-called beef check-off program, one of the 18 generic promotion programs for agricultural products that are now active nationally. Supporters view check-offs as economically beneficial self-help activities that need minimal government involvement or taxpayer funding. Producers, handlers, and/or importers are required to pay an assessment, usually deducted from revenue at time of sale - thus the name check-off. However, some farmers contend they are being "taxed" for advertising and related activities they would not underwrite voluntarily. The Supreme Court's decision to uphold the beef check-off is considered significant for the future of the other programs, although the Court left open the possibility of additional challenges. |
|
| Physical Description: |
6 pages. |
|
| Language(s): | ||
| Subject(s): |
|
|
| Partner: |
UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
|
|
| Collection: |
Congressional Research Service Reports
|
|
| Identifier: |
|
|
| Resource Type: | Text | |
| Format: | Text | |
