ADVERTISEMENT

This makes sense to me (walkout)

osutater

Heisman Winner
Gold Member
Jan 28, 2007
12,894
10,062
113
I think this is my first post on this board. I come to read the crazy shit toontown says.

The union demanding where taxes should be taken from has kept me from supporting the walkout. I’m sick of hearing the capital gains exemption only benefits “wealthy” Oklahomans.

From my view this is the best thing I’ve seen from any of the idiots at the capitol, and I haven’t seen this posted anywhere yet.

http://okcfox.com/news/walkout-watch/state-reps-file-6-bills-to-fund-education-without-tax-increases
 
Why did they wait till now?

But those are all good ideas and would happily support them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Medic007
That’s a good question.

If this moves forward, the union will claim that they won unfortunately. I think they look like morons, especially the lady that keeps talking on TV. It does appear that the walkout did force some officials to think outside the box. I think the officials were looking at a bunch of blowback if they caved into the demands on the union. Especially the complicated capital gains exemption and it’s full effect if eliminated. I read a lengthy explanation of it from Dr. Shannon Ferrell. It made my head hurt. I’ll post it here if anyone wants to see it.
 
Are you in favor of an across-the-board decrease in energy tax credits? (Crazy shit I know lol)
 
That’s a good question.

If this moves forward, the union will claim that they won unfortunately. I think they look like morons, especially the lady that keeps talking on TV. It does appear that the walkout did force some officials to think outside the box. I think the officials were looking at a bunch of blowback if they caved into the demands on the union. Especially the complicated capital gains exemption and it’s full effect if eliminated. I read a lengthy explanation of it from Dr. Shannon Ferrell. It made my head hurt. I’ll post it here if anyone wants to see it.

Why is the union claiming they won unfortunate if the end result is our officials thinking outside the box and ultimately doing things that many here seem to think will end up helping?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GunsOfFrankEaton
Are you in favor of an across-the-board decrease in energy tax credits? (Crazy shit I know lol)
Not really. It’s favorable for us to have companies like Devon and Continental base their business here. We take away those incentives they move to places like Dallas and Houston.

I live in NW OK and the amount of money the wind farms are dumping into schools is great. It’s being used on stupid shit like gyms and football fields but that’s because of poor leadership.
 
Why is the union claiming they won unfortunate if the end result is our officials thinking outside the box and ultimately doing things that many here seem to think will end up helping?
Because they didn’t. Their plan was ridiculous. Granted they did a good job organizing the walkout but look at the signs they are holding and the interviews from teachers. Most of them don’t even know what they are there for or understand what they are asking for. I heard one lady that said she was a teacher and a ranchers wife. If she understood there is zero chance she would have been the supporting the elimination of the capital gains exemption.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tulsaaggieson
Because they didn’t. Their plan was ridiculous. Granted they did a good job organizing the walkout but look at the signs they are holding and the interviews from teachers. Most of them don’t even know what they are there for or understand what they are asking for. I heard one lady that said she was a teacher and a ranchers wife. If she understood there is zero chance she would have been the supporting the elimination of the capital gains exemption.

Whether or not they won is certainly debatable (they are getting parts of their plan and not other parts) but if positive change like the consolidation bills just submitted for consideration come as a result, IDGAF if they claim victory, personally.
 
Last edited:
“Eighty-six percent of the tax breaks went to people making at least $200,000 a year, according to a study by PFM, a consultant to the Oklahoma Incentive Evaluation Commission.”

Capital gains exemptions
 
“Eighty-six percent of the tax breaks went to people making at least $200,000 a year, according to a study by PFM, a consultant to the Oklahoma Incentive Evaluation Commission.”

Capital gains exemptions
Jealous?

What about the 14% that aren’t making $200,000 a year.
 
Because they didn’t. Their plan was ridiculous. Granted they did a good job organizing the walkout but look at the signs they are holding and the interviews from teachers. Most of them don’t even know what they are there for or understand what they are asking for. I heard one lady that said she was a teacher and a ranchers wife. If she understood there is zero chance she would have been the supporting the elimination of the capital gains exemption.


I think I am missing your point. What does the rancher do to generate a capital gain?
 
I think I am missing your point. What does the rancher do to generate a capital gain?

Glad you asked. From Dr. Ferrell

So you want to know about Senate Bill 1086, the Oklahoma capital gains deduction, and how it might impact farmers and ranchers (and anyone else, for that matter)? Grab a beverage and settle in, because this is gonna take a while...

Recent days have seen much discussion about the capital gains tax exemption in Oklahoma, and that discussion has become much more intense since the announcement that passage of Senate Bill 1086 is one of the two requirements (along with re-enactment of the $5 hotel tax proposed in an earlier revenue package) announced by OEA as a requirement to end the teacher walkout (see http://bit.ly/2IAV3bw). I have received a number of questions about what the passage of SB1086 would mean, particularly for agriculture, so I have prepared a very brief analysis here (you might not think it's that brief, but trust me, it could be WAY longer). This analysis is not intended to be a statement in support of or opposition to passage of SB1086, but rather an objective analysis to help you determine the bill’s potential impacts to you.

WHAT DOES SB 1086 PROPOSE?
SB 1086 (full text here: http://bit.ly/2Js2J0Z) would eliminate the exemption of capital gains income from Oklahoma income tax. Under current Oklahoma law, an Oklahoma taxpayer takes their federal adjusted gross income and makes specified additions or subtractions to arrive at Oklahoma taxable income. As Oklahoma law currently stands, the amount of “capital gains” reported for federal tax purposes can be deducted from the income of individuals and corporations (and other entities, such as LLCs) when calculating Oklahoma taxable income. SB 1086 would eliminate that deduction for both individuals and corporations with respect to any capital gains transactions occurring after December 31, 2018.

WHAT IS A CAPITAL GAINS TRANSACTION?
To understand this question, you need to understand what your “tax basis” in an item is. If I buy a piece of land in a normal, arms-length transaction (there are dozens of other ways the transaction could happen, of course), my tax basis in that piece of property is the price I paid for it. If I buy the land for $1,500/acre, my tax basis in the land is $1,500/acre. If I hold the land for the required "holding period" (Oklahoma holding periods vary, as discussed later), then sell it for $2,500/acre, the amount by which the sale price exceeds the tax basis is treated as a capital gain. In this case, I have $1,000/acre in capital gains ($2,500 sale price - $1,500 tax basis = $1,000 capital gain).

At the federal level, capital gains are taxed a much lower rates than “ordinary income.” The amount of capital gains tax paid depends on the federally-taxable income of the taxpayer. Depending on your income, federal capital gains tax rates are 0%, 15%, or 20%. However, the amount of the capital gain (and not the amount of capital gains tax paid) is deducted from taxable income under current Oklahoma law if the required Oklahoma holding period is met.

If SB 1086 is passed, capital gains would not be allowed as an adjustment from Oklahoma income to determine Oklahoma taxable income; rather, the amount of capital gains would be considered ordinary income and taxed at your Oklahoma marginal tax rate (Oklahoma's current rates top out at 5.0%).

WHAT ARE SOME COMMON CAPITAL GAINS TRANSACTIONS IN AGRICULTURE?
One example is mentioned above – the sale of land that has increased in value since its purchase. Note that the treatment of the sale price of land that was inherited or received through a trust after the initial owner died is different (that, too, is another discussion).

If you have purchased company stock or other investments and those investments increased in value, the increase in value might also be a capital gain depending on the nature of the stock and if you held the stock for the required holding period.

Capital gain treatment does not impact most equipment in agriculture since equipment generally depreciates and is sold for less money than it was purchased (handling “depreciation recapture” is also another discussion, though I will mention it briefly below).

However, there is one area of agriculture where understanding capital gains can be even more confusing than usual, and that is with breeding livestock (and note, the following discussion does not apply to stocker or feeder animals). When it comes to capital gains in breeding livestock transactions, there is a difference between purchased breeding animals and raised breeding animals.

Let’s consider a breeding bull. If I bought the bull for $5,000 four years ago and took $4,000 in depreciation deductions, its tax basis is now $1,000. If I sell the bull for $1,250, then $250 (the amount of the sale price over my tax basis in the bull; $1,250 sale price - $1,000 tax basis = $250) is taxed as ordinary income since it is “recaptured” depreciation. The remaining amount of the sale price, $1,000, is not taxable since it represents the tax basis I already had in the bull. In this situation, there is no capital gain.

On the other hand, if I raised the breeding bull myself, my tax basis in the bull is $0.00. If I use the bull for five years (my "holding period") and then sell him for $1,000, the entire sale price would be treated as a capital gain ($1,000 sale price - $0.00 tax basis = $1,000). Under current tax law, the $1,000 would be taxed at my capital gains rate at the federal level, and would be excluded from my Oklahoma taxable income. If SB1086 is enacted, the $1,000 would be added to my Oklahoma taxable income and taxed as ordinary income for my Oklahoma taxes.

What about culled breeding cows? If I bought a breeding cow for $1,000 and took $750 in depreciation against her over five years (again meaning I have a five-year holding period), her tax basis is now $250. If I cull her from the herd and she sells for $300, then $50 (the amount by which her sale price exceeds her tax basis; $300 sale price - $250 tax basis = $50) is treated as recaptured depreciation. The remaining $250, which is her tax basis, is not taxed. However, if the cow was raised by me rather than purchased, my tax basis in her was $0.00; if she is culled and sold for $300, all $300 would be considered capital gains. Under current law, that $300 would be taxed at my federal capital gains rate and would be excluded from Oklahoma taxable income. If SB 1086 is passed, the $300 would be added to my Oklahoma taxable income and taxed as ordinary income for my Oklahoma taxes.

WHAT IS THE REQUIRED HOLDING PERIOD FOR ASSETS TO GET THE CAPITAL GAIN EXEMPTION?
As discussed in several of the examples above, the “holding period” (the amount of time you owned an asset that has gained value over its tax basis) matters in determining whether you can claim some or all of the asset’s sale value as a capital gain.

As Oklahoma law stands right now, you can deduct qualifying gains receiving capital treatment which are included in federal Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) from your Oklahoma taxable income. “Qualifying gains receiving capital treatment” means the amount of net capital gains, as defined under federal Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 1222(11). The qualifying gain must:

1) Be earned on real property (land) or tangible personal property located within Oklahoma that you have owned for at least five uninterrupted years (the “holding period”) prior to the date of the sale;

2) Be earned on the sale of stock or ownership interest in an Oklahoma headquartered company, limited liability company, or partnership where such stock or ownership interest has been owned by you for at least two uninterrupted years prior to the date of the sale; or

3) Be earned on the sale of real property, tangible personal property, or intangible personal property located within Oklahoma as part of the sale of all or substantially all of the assets of an Oklahoma headquartered company, limited liability company, or partnership or an Oklahoma proprietorship business enterprise or owned by the owners of such entity or business enterprise for a period of at least two uninterrupted years prior to the date of the sale (in other words, the business is liquidating).

HOW DO I DETERMINE THE IMPACT TO MY TAXES IF SB 1086 PASSES?
Of course, determining this means knowing what your taxable income will be in the future, and that is obviously difficult in agriculture. Past tax returns can be a place to start in determining your average taxable income. You could then add your average or estimated revenues from the sale of raised breeding livestock to Oklahoma taxable income to estimate the change in Oklahoma income tax. The potential tax liability arising from sales of stocks or land can be calculated from the tax basis of the property and using an estimated sale price as well.

CONCLUSION
If you anticipate the sale of assets for more than your tax basis in those assets (and remember that your tax basis in raised breeding livestock is zero), SB 1086 will have an impact on your taxes, but the amount of that impact depends on your taxable income, the tax basis you hold in the property, and your sale price. To calculate the potential impact, gather as much information as you can about the tax basis in all of your property and work with your tax professional to estimate the potential tax liability of any asset sales you are likely to make in the future.
 
You realize how few ranchers would be affected by this?
Enlighten me I guess, I read it as any rancher that grows an animal or buys an animal or a piece of land.

If any rancher already working on thin margins is affected than that’s too many and who the hell is the teachers union to demand that? That’s my problem. The whole rhetoric that only “wealthy” Oklahomans will be hurt by this. It’s wrong and every teacher I see on TV is spouting that shit off.

And you’ve ignored the original post. That piece of legislation is something I can get behind. Consolidation and accountability without raising taxes.

I’m also interested in your response I gave you to the oil and gas credit question you posed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tulsaaggieson
Whether or not they won is certainly debatable (they are getting parts of their plan and not other parts) but if positive change like the consolidation bills just submitted for consideration come as a result, IDGAF if they claim victory, personally.
I understand what you are saying, if we get positive reforms then we shouldn’t care who claims success. I agree with that.

But I also think the OEA needs to be exposed for who they are and what they don’t support.
With exception of low classroom funding, IMO, the OEA is one of the top reasons slowing education success in Oklahoma. They are a roadblock to improve Oklahoma education. They fight to keep poor performing teachers in the classroom, they fight against local bond monies to pay for school funding (like Texas does), they fight against rewarding the best teachers, and they have not fought for school consolidation.
This walkout accomplished nothing, save for craps and roulette. Craps and roulettte are truly the only thing accomplished from the walkout.

Just like our state’s DOE, the OEA provides no incremental value to education in our state. And I would strongly argue they provide negative value.
 
Soon as they said “it only benefits the wealthiest Oklahomans” knew they were jive talkin turkeys! That sounds more like the national liberals and progs than a union trying to do right by the teachers, the children, taxpayers and their longevity. That’s when their cause started taking water.

Love the ideas in the article above and wish those would have been on the table as counter points. Amazing how easy it seems to co-opt a message and maybe even a group. Reminds me of the phrase “the path to hell is litered with good intentions.”
 
Whether or not they won is certainly debatable (they are getting parts of their plan and not other parts) but if positive change like the consolidation bills just submitted for consideration come as a result, IDGAF if they claim victory, personally.

I agree that it’s great if this gets done. I guess I just don’t want to see that lady on TV claiming victory. It’s personal I guess. She’s really unlikable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CowboyJD
I agree that it’s great if this gets done. I guess I just don’t want to see that lady on TV claiming victory. It’s personal I guess. She’s really unlikable.

oustater if you’re talking the OEA rep, couldn’t agree more. Move along little dogie your 15 minutes of fame is overrrrrrrr!
 
  • Like
Reactions: osutater
Glad you asked. From Dr. Ferrell

So you want to know about Senate Bill 1086, the Oklahoma capital gains deduction, and how it might impact farmers and ranchers (and anyone else, for that matter)? Grab a beverage and settle in, because this is gonna take a while...

Recent days have seen much discussion about the capital gains tax exemption in Oklahoma, and that discussion has become much more intense since the announcement that passage of Senate Bill 1086 is one of the two requirements (along with re-enactment of the $5 hotel tax proposed in an earlier revenue package) announced by OEA as a requirement to end the teacher walkout (see http://bit.ly/2IAV3bw). I have received a number of questions about what the passage of SB1086 would mean, particularly for agriculture, so I have prepared a very brief analysis here (you might not think it's that brief, but trust me, it could be WAY longer). This analysis is not intended to be a statement in support of or opposition to passage of SB1086, but rather an objective analysis to help you determine the bill’s potential impacts to you.


Thanks for this. I bet a lot of small ranchers are considering this ordinary income and not a capital gain.
 
Tater as I understand it the capital gains would only apply to those selling land or stocks, so if I’m wrong someone correct me, but cattle doesn’t apply.

As far as energy tax credits, i understand the reasoning behind wanting to keep companies here, but we’re talking hundreds of millions of dollars. Just some of that helps, and no one legislator had the balls to write a bill, but they attack wind credits by themselves.
 
Responding to inspoke. It won’t let me quote correctly.


It’s possible I guess. Probably depends on their accountant. I’m no tax lawyer and Dr Ferrell is one of the most intelligent people I’ve ever met. I had many discussions with him while I was in grad school. Very impressive guy.
 
Last edited:
Tater as I understand it the capital gains would only apply to those selling land or stocks, so if I’m wrong someone correct me, but cattle doesn’t apply.

As far as energy tax credits, i understand the reasoning behind wanting to keep companies here, but we’re talking hundreds of millions of dollars. Just some of that helps, and no one legislator had the balls to write a bill, but they attack wind credits by themselves.
Did you read that from Dr. Ferrell? It absolutely applies to cattle.
 
Tater as I understand it the capital gains would only apply to those selling land or stocks, so if I’m wrong someone correct me, but cattle doesn’t apply.

As far as energy tax credits, i understand the reasoning behind wanting to keep companies here, but we’re talking hundreds of millions of dollars. Just some of that helps, and no one legislator had the balls to write a bill, but they attack wind credits by themselves.
So what’s the best option? Leave millions on the table or risk losing them to another city. It’s hard enough to draw big companies here. Tax incentives make is attractive.

It’s a tough scenario. I’d rather leave them here and employ lots of people.
 
The superintendents pay is not something to tie to the governor's pay unless we can cut the governor's pay also. They're all paid too much.
 
The superintendents pay is not something to tie to the governor's pay unless we can cut the governor's pay also. They're all paid too much.
That’s the only one I’m kinda on the fence about. It’ll get a ton of pushback also. The compromise may be to get rid of that to pass the rest.
 
I thought they exempted ag from the capitol gains.

It does, but Republicans refusing to allow it to put to a vote claim that makes it an unconstitutional “special law” (it doesn’t IMO, we already give farm trucks a break on tags/registration taxes) and claiming that’s another reason not to allow it to be voted on
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ostatedchi
It does, but Republicans refusing to allow it to put to a vote claim that makes it an unconstitutional “special law” (it doesn’t IMO, we already give farm trucks a break on tags/registration taxes) and claiming that’s another reason not to allow it to be voted on
Well hell, that's the Oklahoma Supreme Court's job to figure out. If you like it, vote on it and let the courts settle it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CowboyJD
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT