Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

McConnell’s Farm Bill Priority: Tax Breaks For Thoroughbred Race Horse Owners($60-70M)»

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 12:00 PM
Original message
McConnell’s Farm Bill Priority: Tax Breaks For Thoroughbred Race Horse Owners($60-70M)»
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/05/14/mcconnells-farm-bill-priority-tax-breaks-for-thoroughbred-race-horse-owners/

McConnell’s Farm Bill Priority: Tax Breaks For Thoroughbred Race Horse Owners»


This week, Congress is expected to take up a $300 billion farm bill, which President Bush has vowed to veto. The AP reports that the bill “contains something for everyone” — including the following important project tucked within the massive bill:

A tax break for horse owners was included by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.

Politico’s Crypt explains:

The measure would essentially allow race horse owners — who pay millions for Triple Crown contenders — to write down their investment over four years. … Senate aides say it will cost between $60 million and $70 million.

McConnell’s measure is a shameless ploy for votes in Kentucky. His spokesman claimed, “it’s the largest agricultural product in Kentucky.” But the tax break would most likely apply only to the very wealthy; after all, the average cost of training and racing one racehorse is $30,000 per year — which does not include purchase price of the horse, anywhere from $12,000 to millions.

The millionaire-only earmark is just McConnell’s latest attempt to have it both ways on pork barrel spending. After securing nearly $195 million in earmarks for FY2008, he voted in favor of a one-year earmark moratorium in March. Yet his “eleventh hour” decision earned him criticism that he was “playing both sides by not lobbying for the measure, which ensured that it failed, while voting for the amendment in order to insulate himself from attacks on the right.”
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC