Anybody on their local cattle associations?

[15444]

Regarding CCA's proposed check-off increase in the next year or so, our local association has drafted a resolution to take to provincial level to halt increases and instead enforce current mandatory checkoff on on-farm sales.

CCA says they need more checkoff because cow numbers are dropping. BS. It's because, even on a local level, only half of cattle go through auction barn, so only 1/2 of checkoff is collected. I know in Thunder Bay area, only 5-10% of total potential checkoff is collected/remitted.

Anyways, if you want to share your email here, I will forward a copy of our resolution that you can modify and present to your own associations.

[DaneG]

I believe the increase is the national checkoff which is used for research, beef promotion both here and abroad. The odd thing that I've noticed is CCA faces have been front and centre promoting the increase checkoff,NCO dollars are not readily available to CCA and should not be. When NCO BIC and CBEF were merged to form Canada Beef one of the corner stones of the merger was to be arms length from CCA. But it may not be as arm length as was intended by the merger committee, The directors of Canada Beef can and do also sit on CCA also there is a bit of a worm hole between the two that goes through BCRC which is a committee of CCA.

[15444]

I believe the increase is the national checkoff which is used for research, beef promotion both here and abroad. The odd thing that I've noticed is CCA faces have been front and centre promoting the increase checkoff,NCO dollars are not readily available to CCA and should not be. When NCO BIC and CBEF were merged to form Canada Beef one of the corner stones of the merger was to be arms length from CCA. But it may not be as arm length as was intended by the merger committee, The directors of Canada Beef can and do also sit on CCA also there is a bit of a worm hole between the two that goes through BCRC which is a committee of CCA.

Yes, the increase is national checkoff - which was already stated. But provinces collect all checkoff and then submit federal portion to CCA. So the halt in checkoff increases has to start from grassroots up. Time to go after those who don't pay at all, versus the rest of us getting our teeth kicked in further. In Ontario, the checkoff is law and an authorized auditor exists to prosecute those who fail to pay checkoff on farm-sold cattle. All we need is leaders with balls to let him off the leash.

[DaneG]

You are correct checkoff slippage is a big deal the dealers (country buyers) are hard to police to begin with there has to be a will to enforce. In the mean time what is collected should be used for it's intended purpose .

[15444]

You are correct checkoff slippage is a big deal the dealers (country buyers) are hard to police to begin with there has to be a will to enforce. In the mean time what is collected should be used for it's intended purpose .

You do not police the dealers, you police the sellers. They are the ones who are to remit checkoff payment for cattle sold outside auction marts.

In this way, in Ontario at least, the auditor is to request proof of payment of checkoff. Very easy to do with either auction pay slip or remittance receipt. If not, payment, penalties and interest should come into deciding final bill. If it could go retroactive to a certain date, I know some producers who would owe multiple thousands of dollars, maybe even tens of thousands.

[Eastcoaster]

I attended our local region's membership meeting here in NS a few nights ago and the the same discussion came up. The proposed increase here is to double the current rate of $3.00 to $6.00 with $1.50 going to the National level and $1.50 increase for the provincial association.I too believe that the problem is with the ones not paying. You indicate that the sellers and not the dealers are the ones responsible, but the problem I have with that is when the dealers become the sellers. They can turn the cattle over mostly in a short period of time making a profit equal or greater than the profit made by the farmer and he,the dealer, gets the same benefits from the organization as the farmer does and doesn't have to pay the check-off. The idea keeps coming up here that the check-off be paid on the purchase of the RFID tag. Again that is putting most of the burden of funding the organization onto the cow-calf guy as that is where most of the tags go. I don't have a problem as such with the amount but if it is mandatory to pay the check-off , everyone should be paying it. Sometimes I question if we are getting good value for our check-off buck, especially here in the Maritimes from the National portion, but I do beleive we need an organization to represent the industry and having an organization does cost and everyone benefiting from the organzatiion should share in the costs.

[grassfarmer]

You need to look at the national picture. If you don't like people not paying levy on private sales what about the provinces that have a refundable levy? What about purebred sales off farm? I know of Alberta Beef Producer leaders who campaign for this levy increase and against producers reclaiming their levy yet sell cattle off farm and don't remit levy.

I see this as a cash grab driven by CCA reflecting the higher values we have had for cattle recently. If it were to be used for what it was intended for, as DaneG says, I would have less complaint. If it is to further enrich the already lavish spending of the provincial and national boards I will continue to view the refundable levy as a tool I can use to record my dissatisfaction. As far as stopping the proposed levy increase I think that boat has already sailed. Alberta has already approved it as will Manitoba. Its a done deal.

[15444]

You need to look at the national picture. If you don't like people not paying levy on private sales what about the provinces that have a refundable levy? What about purebred sales off farm? I know of Alberta Beef Producer leaders who campaign for this levy increase and against producers reclaiming their levy yet sell cattle off farm and don't remit levy.

I see this as a cash grab driven by CCA reflecting the higher values we have had for cattle recently. If it were to be used for what it was intended for, as DaneG says, I would have less complaint. If it is to further enrich the already lavish spending of the provincial and national boards I will continue to view the refundable levy as a tool I can use to record my dissatisfaction. As far as stopping the proposed levy increase I think that boat has already sailed. Alberta has already approved it as will Manitoba. Its a done deal.

Official word from Ontario is that the process to increase national levy will take at least a year from now to complete and that it is far from a done deal.

[DaneG]

It is not a done deal but it most likely will be. IMO The best action to take is in the form of a resolution at your provincial meeting safeguarding NCO checkoff dollars for intended purposes and not for perceived issues which may funnel NCO dollars to CCA for lobby efforts.

[15444]

It is not a done deal but it most likely will be. IMO The best action to take is in the form of a resolution at your provincial meeting safeguarding NCO checkoff dollars for intended purposes and not for perceived issues which may funnel NCO dollars to CCA for lobby efforts.

If the issue goes ignored, the next resolution will be to have a refundable checkoff in Ontario.

[grassfarmer]

Would you be in favour of a refundable levy if the proposed increase goes through 15444?

The problem I've always had with paying levy is funding "marketing". As others have asked in the past how much levy do steel makers pay to the automobile manufacturers to fund their advertising and market development costs? The answer is zero yet the steel manufacturer is better able to set his price than the seller of live cattle into the beef processing sector. I think our levy dollars should go to fund research and development of cattle production.

[DaneG]

The provincial checkoff and NCO are two different beasts, provincial checkoff is under provincial legislation ,NCO is federal legislation it would require all provinces to agree to a refundable checkoff. The farm products act is pretty clear what the NCO can be used for,the problem arises with interpretation of the act.

[15444]

Would you be in favour of a refundable levy if the proposed increase goes through 15444?

Absolutely. And if that fails, I guess I will have to start looking at selling to dealers to avoid paying checkoff as well. Industry is sending clear message that they don't care who pays, as long as someone does and the gross dollars never change.

[BFW]

I believe that these checkoffs should be refundable to provide some accountability to the whole process. The possible exception may be the National portion used for promotion and research but even then we need to ensure that there is proper governance and some method to help determine that we are getting some kind of value for the investment. At the provincial level in my mind a producer should have the right to request a refund. All this talk of freeloaders and people not paying their fairshare sounds a lot like the whole federal wealth distribution talk. These associations need committed, intelligent people willing to invest their time and experience. That's what drives success, not sitting around worrying about tracking every last person that may or may not be paying his fair. That is what will help move the cattle industry forward in my mind and we are stuck until we get that.

[DaneG]

In theory a refundable checkoff works but in reality there will be those who will refund because they can ( cheap) also there will be the large operators cow calf and feedlot that will refund for individual wants or issues over looking the collective betterment of the industry a lot of this is because of not being involved with in the nitty gritty provincial business. I realize cattlemen are busy running their own operations and time is a valuable commoditee, for the most part provincial checkoff is spent wisely.