| Tobacco
Quota Buyout
Last week's column provided an overview of several agriculture-related
provisions that were included in the American Jobs Creation Act,
the corporate tax reform legislation that passed Congress just moments
before their adjournment last week and is now headed to the President's
desk. During floor debate on the bill, one lawmaker described the
measure as a Christmas tree laden with gleaming ornaments: the add-ons
designed to broaden support for the complex measure. For tobacco
farmers in the Southeast, the much-anticipated and long awaited
- albeit controversial - tobacco quota buyout included in the legislation
was the bright shining star crowning the tree.
Attempts to push the tobacco buyout through Congress in the tax
reform measure did not take Washington by surprise. The first generation
buyout proposal was introduced more than 7 years ago during debate
on the comprehensive tobacco settlement between states and major
cigarette manufacturers. That first major push failed when the tobacco
settlement legislation topped the $500 billion mark and participating
manufacturers backed away, finally settling separately with states
for more than $200 billion in 1998.
At that time, there was only limited support for the tobacco buyout
among quota owners and growers. But things got worse for tobacco
farmers. Much worse. Much, much worse. Since 1997, the amount of
tobacco that farmers were able to grow and market under the federal
quota program has been cut by more than half, with another cut as
large as 30% expected for next year. Not only was production slashed,
but profitability on the remaining production declined as a major
cost of production, the cost of obtaining the quota or rights to
market the crop, skyrocketed.
To illustrate the severity of the economic woes, an average burley
tobacco farmer in Tennessee may have produced 10,000 pounds of tobacco
on 5 acres in 1997. The value of the quota that he was required
to own or lease was about 8 to 10 cents per pound, compared to a
market price above $1.80 per pound. This farmer could have reasonably
expected to pocket $8,000 to $9,000 from his year of work. Fast
forward to 2004. This same farmer's 10,000 pounds of quota shrank
to 4,200 pounds. And the quota rights now costs him upwards of $0.60
per pound. With a market price near $2.00 per pound, this farmer
could reasonably expect his profits to range from a few hundred
dollars to $1,000 for his year of work.
Under the federal tobacco program, the situation was not expected
to improve, only worsen. The irony of the tobacco story is that
the same federal tobacco supply control and price support program
that was largely credited with the high level of profitability and
stability in the tobacco market since 1938 was largely to blame
for the hasty demise. The structure of the program has prevented
U.S. producers from reacting efficiently to increasing competition
from lower-price foreign competitors with improving quality leaf.
Rapid introduction of direct contracting, combined with increasing
health concerns, taxes, and legal challenges have further strained
the effectiveness of the federal tobacco program.
Since the late 1990s, the handwriting on the wall has become clear
to most tobacco farmers: the federal tobacco program is broken and
there is no easy fix. As the economic reality facing tobacco farmers
set in, support for a tobacco quota buyout and policy transition
strengthened.
Since the late 1990s, there have been too many versions of "a"
tobacco quota buyout introduced to keep track of. Previous generations
of "a" buyout have included various payment levels and
post-buyout production programs and safety nets, some linked to
legislation granting the Food and Drug Administration the authority
to regulate manufactured tobacco products and some not.
Tobacco farmers pinned their hopes on buyout after buyout that failed
to materialize. Following the fate of the buyout has been a roller
coaster ride, to put it mildly. By mid-summer, two separate versions
of a tobacco buyout emerged in the FSC/ETI corporate tax reform
packages put forward by the House and Senate, and once again the
roller coaster hit a new high. Through the magic of black-box politics
(feel free to substitute your own favorite terms here), the ride
was over as a favorable compromise was reached on "the"
tobacco buyout.
The tobacco quota buyout, which will become official when the American
Jobs Creation Act is signed by the President, terminates the federal
tobacco quota and price support programs. It provides $9.6 billion
in total compensation and transition payments to tobacco quota owners
and active growers. Quota owner payments are $7 per pound multiplied
by 2002 basic quota. Grower payments are $3 per pound multiplied
by 2002 effective quota. An additional $0.5 billion is included
to compensate USDA for losses incurred in the disposal of pool stocks,
bringing the total cost of the buyout to $10.1 billion. The buyout
is funded entirely by assessments on tobacco product manufacturers
and importers. Quota owner and grower payments are to be made in
10 equal annual installments, 2005-2014.
Phase II payments that most tobacco farmers were receiving (expected
to be over $2 billion through 2010) will end with passage of the
buyout. There are not any provisions included that would provide
a post-buyout safety net for tobacco growers or geographic restrictions
on future production or FDA authority over manufactured tobacco
products. Going further than the peanut buyout, the tobacco quota
buyout will be an historic transition to a market without government
intervention, subsidies or supports. I guess we just thought the
roller coaster ride ended when the buyout passed.
This column was written by Kelly Tiller, Assistant Professor with
the Agricultural Policy Analysis Center. More detailed information
about the tobacco quota buyout is available from the Tobacco Buyout
section of APAC's website:
http://www.agpolicy.org/tobquota.html.
Daryll
E. Ray holds the Blasingame Chair of Excellence in Agricultural
Policy, Institute of Agriculture, University of Tennessee, and is
the Director of UT's Agricultural Policy Analysis Center (APAC).
(865) 974-7407; Fax: (865) 974-7298; dray@utk.edu;
http://www.agpolicy.org. Daryll
Ray's column is written with the research and assistance of Harwood
D. Schaffer, Research Associate with APAC.
Reproduction
Permission Granted with:
1) Full attribution to Daryll E. Ray and the Agricultural Policy
Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN;
2) An email sent to hdschaffer@utk.edu
indicating how often you intend on running Dr. Ray's column and
your total circulation. Also, please send one copy of the first
issue with Dr. Ray's column in it to Harwood Schaffer, Agricultural
Policy Analysis Center, 310 Morgan Hall, Knoxville, TN 37996-4519.
|