Ag-Visors

A tax case, Mullins v. United States, decided in the United States District Court in Knoxville, Tenn., considered an individual who owned and operated a cattle-raising operation who claimed he was entitled to deduct losses over a period of years. The court issued an opinion which focused on the fact that the taxpayer had consulted industry and legal experts, and that the land used for the cattle operation had appreciated in value. The court held that these factors indicated the individual's profit motive.

A tax case, Mullins v. United States, decided in the United States District Court in Knoxville, Tenn., considered an individual who owned and operated a cattle-raising operation who claimed he was entitled to deduct losses over a period of years. The court issued an opinion which focused on the fact that the taxpayer had consulted industry and legal experts, and that the land used for the cattle operation had appreciated in value. The court held that these factors indicated the individual's profit motive.

Let’s continue about lameness. Two topics we have not covered are white line disease and cork screw toes. White line disease is started with instability of the third phalanx or coffin bone in the toe. This is caused by many factors, including laminitis or founder. This laminitis is a separation of the insensitive lamina and sensitive lamina. The line between this lamina is called the white line. As we separate these two, a small space is allowed and dirt and debris get trapped causing an abscess. Most generally this is a mixed infection with a lot of fungus and/or yeast.

It's not a stretch to say many farmers and farm families can benefit from investing in IRAs and getting their estate plans in order. Many Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) have been hard hit by the fall in asset values. However, even bad markets can create estate planning opportunities.

Demand for beef is down. Can you blame the recession? Not entirely, but it’s a darned inconvenient coincidence.
It’s hard to argue that beef quality was too low, because production of every class of premium beef has been trending up for some time.

In the last article I started a series on foot problems and lameness in cattle. We covered regular foot rot and basic anatomy. Let’s move on to a common lameness in dairy cattle, and one seen once in a while in beef cattle, hairy heel warts. This is an infection caused by a Serpien species of bacteria. It is found in wet and nasty conditions, commonly in manure. This bacterium invades the heels of the rear feet, commonly causing strawberry-looking lesions with hair growing out of them. Hence, the name hairy heel warts. Others have also called it strawberry foot rot.

Does a landowner or tenant owe a duty of care to someone that trespasses on their property? Most of us would say no, but a recent case in Dunklin County confirms that there are exceptions to that general rule.

In a lengthy decision, the Tax Court recently underscored the difficulties taxpayers have in convincing the IRS that family-run farms are engaged in for profit. The case, Smith v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo 2007-368, ruled on two families’ limited partnerships, involving a cow and dairy farm, a cutting horse operation and dog breeding. The court held that the cow and dairy farm was engaged in for profit under the IRS hobby loss rules, but not the other activities. The taxpayers had taken significant tax deductions against their income from the activities, thus prompting an IRS audit, which they lost and then appealed to the Tax Court.

One of the main problems I see a lot of is feet. It takes special equipment or effort to be able to work on cattle’s feet. To work on feet it either takes a tip chute, ropes and lots of arm power or drugs. Personally, I don’t like the drugs, they are closer to death. This leaves ropes or the tip chute. I prefer the tip chute.

In a lengthy decision, the Tax Court recently underscored the difficulties taxpayers have in convincing the IRS that family-run farms are engaged in for profit. The case, Smith v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo 2007-368, ruled on two families’ limited partnerships, involving a cow and dairy farm, a cutting horse operation and dog breeding. The court held that the cow and dairy farm was engaged in for profit under the IRS hobby loss rules, but not the other activities. The taxpayers had taken significant tax deductions against their income from the activities, thus prompting an IRS audit, which they lost and then appealed to the Tax Court.