And, as an aside, if communities want to protect forest or other lands
from turning into subdivisions, there are many local government tools to
do so. Here in Boulder County we have thousands and thousands of acres
of "open space" - land permanently protected from development with
conservation easements, zoning designation, and other land use
mechanisms. Citizens have almost uniformly voted over the years for
small taxes to fund the purchase and maintenance of this land. Those
are appropriate tools to meet such goals, not timber subsidies!
Open space policies have kept the towns in Boulder County encircled by
prairie and mountains, created wildlife corridors, hiking trails, etc.
Places us recyclers go to recreate!
Reindl, John wrote:
Hi Megan ~
The Wisconsin Department of Revenue found that the tax breaks that Wisconsin
provides to forest lands are basically only subsidizing the timber industry.
I believe that if the subsidies were eliminated, the cost of virgin fiber to
the mills would increase and that recyclers would receive a higher price for
their paper. This would make recycling program more economical, resulting in
more scrap paper being recycled, and at the same time reduce the consumption
I am not in favor of giving subsidies; I am instead in favor of imposing
fees that reflect the cost of the environmental externalities.
I would hope that the WTO would take a more aggressive stand against
From: Megan Kershner [mailto:Mkershner@no.address]
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 9:10 AM
Subject: RE: [greenyes] U.S. Trade Policy
I can't speak for all subsidized industries, but I do know
private forest tax breaks/subsidies in Wisconsin are about the only
thing keeping private forests from turning into subdivisions. Without
incentives to do the right thing, who will? Energy conservation is a
And then I have to ask myself - is it really the tax breaks and
subsidies that is creating this waste product? Will removing the tax
breaks and subsidies change demand? Maybe.
On the issue of tax subsidies and the wTO, does anyone have any
"Reindl, John" <Reindl@no.address> 10/13/2004 7:07:23 AM >>>
about why the subsidies for mining and forestry are also not being
before the WTO?
As a recycler, I am especially concerned about the subsidies to
since paper and wood are the largest components of the material stream
we handle, and are the largest parts of what goes into landfills.
Forestry not only receives massive subsidies in the US at the federal
but also at the state and local level, through state and county
forests that don't pay property taxes, income taxes or sales taxes,
programs to provide tax breaks for private forests, such as
which has a price tag of somewhere around $50 to $100 million a year.
Dane County, WI
I would like, if I may, to ask you a question concerning basic tradedispute
principles, in light of the U.S. position with regard to our Airbus
with the European Community.free
If I understand our position in that case correctly, we argue that
trade under WTO rules is not whatever laissez-faire decrees, butrather
about fair competition and a level playing field," as you werequoted in
October 7, 2004 Wall Street Journal ("U.S., Europe Sue Each
Over Aircraft Subsidies"). In that regard, it seems to be our claimthat
Airbus enjoys excessively large tax subsidies, creating an unlevelplaying
field on which Boeing cannot fairly compete. We, therefore, havepetitioned
to have WTO rule that the tax subsidies are an unfair trade
subject to penalties.