Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder on May 8 signed a bill empowering the Natural Resources Commission to decide whether to allow wolf hunting.  A day after Snyder signed Senate Bill 288 into law, the commission, on a 6 to 1 vote,  approved regulations for Michigan's inaugural wolf hunt this fall, making Michigan the sixth state to authorize the hunting of wolves since federal protections were removed.  It set the total harvest at 43 animals.

Animal protection groups did their best to force a statewide vote on the issue. The state Board of Canvassers on May 22 certified petition signatures gathered by Keep Michigan Wolves Protected to put a wolf hunting referendum  before voters in Nov. 2014. Although 161,305 valid signatures were needed to qualify for the ballot, referendum supporters collected 255,000 signatures by the March 27 deadline. The ballot measure was rendered moot, however, with the signing of the bill on May 8.

Keep Michigan Wolves Protected  wanted to suspend Public Act 520 which designated wolves as a game species.  Under previous law, only the Michigan Legislature had the power to designate a game species. It was then up to the Natural Resources Commission to determine if there should be a hunting season. The only dissenter was Commissioner Annoesjka Steinman of Muskegon, whom Snyder appointed to the seven-member panel last year.

The Upper Peninsula's first wolf hunt is scheduled between Nov. 15 and Dec. 31. The harvest of  43 wolves - roughly 7 percent of the estimated herd,  is restricted to three zones.  Zone one includes a portion of Gogebic County and the city of Ironwood. The second zone encompasses portions of Baraga, Houghton, Ontonagon and Gogebic counties while the third hunting zone is in portions of Luce and Mackinac counties.

The Health Insurance Tax, which targets a health insurance company's net premiums, will likely drive up prices  for individuals and small businesses through increased premiums,  complained New York Farm Bureau President and dairy owner Dean Norton.

Norton, testifying May 9 before the House Small Business Subcommittee on Health and Technology,  said rising insurance premiums has forced businesses to sharply reduce contributions to employee health plans. "We've had to significantly change the cost structure from covering about 90 percent of the insurance cost to approximately 50 percent through a high deductible,'' Norton told the committee. "Unfortunately, the people who are really hurt by this change are the employees. They now have to contribute a larger portion of the expenses when they seek medical attention.''

Beginning in 2014, the health care law imposes a new tax on the health insurance policies that most small businesses purchase.

The financial squeeze on small businesses is palpable, according to a 2012 survey of employer health benefits conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation. Health insurance costs for small businesses have increased 103 percent since 2000, the survey reported.

The Health Insurance Tax - part of  the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, will hike family insurance premiums by $400, or 2.5 percent in 2016, making it even harder for farmers to purchase coverage, according to a report from the Joint Committee on Taxation.

This is why Norton, the New York farmer, supports a bipartisan effort in the U.S. House to repeal the annual fee on health care providers. HR 763, introduced by Reps. Charles Boustany, R-La., and Jim Matheson, D-Utah, would also prevent increases in insurance premiums for individuals and small businesses in the fully insured health insurance marketplace.

Norton told lawmakers most farmers and other small businesses do not self-insure because they do not have a large enough pool of employees, opting instead to purchase health insurance on the fully insured market.

Because the smallest employers rarely self-insure, they'll be hardest hit by the Health Insurance Tax. The Kaiser Family Foundation survey reported that only 15 percent of the smallest employers self-insure.

After having lost at trial, and an initial appeal, the case arrived at the Supreme Court earlier this year. In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with Monsanto, finding that the farmer was essentially replicating Monsanto's patent technology and therefore infringing on its patent.  The farmer argued that his conduct was allowed under the doctrine of patent exhaustion, which limits a patentee's right to control what others can do with an article embodying or containing an invention. Under that doctrine, the initial authorized sale of a patented item terminates all rights to that item (e.g., once you have purchased a patented iPhone, you are free to resell that same item to anyone you choose). The Supreme Court, however, concluded that the doctrine was inapplicable because the farmer was not merely reselling the patented soy beans he purchased, but was making additional patented soy beans without Monsanto's permission. As the Court put it, "Monsanto's patent would provide scant benefit … [if] farmers themselves need only buy the seed once, whether from Monsanto, a competitor, or … a grain elevator."

The presidential permit awarded by the State Department April 12 clears the way for construction to begin in Michigan on the New International Trade Crossing Bridge.  The new span  will "serve the national interest,'' the State Department said in granting the permit.

Michigan is Canada's largest trade partner, with trade in 2011 exceeding $70 billion. That's nearly 11.7 percent of the total U.S. trade with Canada. More than 8,000 trucks currently cross the Detroit-Windsor border daily.

Called "Michigan's Bridge to the Future,''  the New International Trade Crossing Bridge will be built near the existing Ambassador Bridge that links Detroit with Windsor. Michigan voters in November overwhelmingly rejected a ballot proposal spearheaded by Ambassador Bridge owner Matty Moroun to require voter approval for any bridge built between the U.S. and Canada.

Under a deal struck last year between Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper,  Canada will pay for the bridge, with construction costs repaid by Canada through tolls.  Snyder said in a statement the crossing will create jobs and get Michigan-made products to market quicker."

From the standpoint of Michigan agriculture, this additional transportation capacity is vital to streamline and expand our access to markets in Canada,'' Michigan Farm Bureau Legislative Counsel Matt Smego said in prepared remarks.

Construction has already started on the Canadian side. Michigan Gov. Snyder said he hopes for groundbreaking on the Detroit side within the next two to three years. Construction is expected to take seven years.

The city of Windsor, meanwhile, on May 28 asked Michigan officials for more information regarding the Michigan Department of Transportation's recommendation to open the existing Ambassador Bridge to trucks carrying hazardous materials for the first time in its 83-year history. The recommendation excludes the transportation of explosives.

The ATRA makes permanent the $5,000,000 "applicable exclusion amount" (i.e. each person's gift and estate tax "exemption" amount). The exemption amount is important because it is the dollar value of assets that can be transferred during life or at death without any adverse gift tax or estate tax consequences.   The estate and gift taxes are all indexed for inflation going back to 2011, so the starting point for each tax in 2013 is actually $5,250,000. This amount will continue to increase periodically based on the rate of inflation.  Unfortunately, the ATRA increased the estate tax rate on taxable estates over $5,250,000 from 35 percent to 40 percent.  In addition, the ATRA continues the concept of "portability" which means that if the estate of the first of a couple to die is not large enough to fully utilize his or her applicable exclusion amount, the unused portion is shifted to the surviving spouse.

Also of interest to farmers is the extension of the "enhanced deductibility" of donations of conservation easements which allows donors to deduct from their taxes the value of an easement up to 50% of their annual income (and up to 100% in some situations) with any remaining easement value carried forward for up to 15 years.  Unlike the permanent changes to the estate tax laws, the enhanced deductibility provisions are applicable only to easements donated in 2013 and retroactively to 2012.

Reid said on the Senate floor that he plans to take up the bill, but he did not give a timetable.

Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., said Reid considers the farm bill as “one of several privileged, top priority bills.”

Stabenow said, “Last year we were able to pass a farm bill with overwhelming bipartisan support, saving more than $23 billion in taxpayer money and reforming farm bill programs to be more cost-effective and market-oriented. Unfortunately, the House didn’t bring the farm bill to the floor.”

Stabenow said the committee will mark up a bill “as soon as possible.”

According to the Agri-Pulse article, "The Senate approved the Agriculture Reform, Food and Jobs Act (S.2340) on June 21, 2012. The legislation Reid introduced will be used as a placeholder for whatever language comes out of the committee."

Wheat World reports, "House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas (R-Okla.) also expressed his commitment to a long-term bill, saying in a statement that, “As we renew efforts to complete a five-year comprehensive farm bill, I pledge to work with the Secretary [of Agriculture], my House and Senate colleagues, and all interested parties to advance a fiscally responsible, reform-minded, and balanced farm bill this year.”"

A key strength of crop insurance is that farmers and agents work together to design a risk management strategy tailored specifically for that farm, noted Robbie Minnich, senior government relations representative with the National Cotton Council.

Panelists at the 2013 Crop Insurance Industry Convention say crop insurance should be a top priority in the Farm Bill, noting that crop insurance is critical in wheat country, particularly given the ongoing drought.

As budget concerns increase, some panelists expressed concern that crop insurance could come under pressure, which could harm both the participation levels and overall effectiveness of the program.

The article went on to say, "The bill, S. 175, is similar to H.R. 872 in the last Congress, which would have clarified Congress’ intentions that National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits are not required for applications of pesticides already regulated under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).

"H.R. 872 was passed by the full House of Representatives in 2011 but expired with all other pending legislation at the end of the session. The Senate Agriculture Committee approved H.R. 872’s companion legislation, though that bill faced procedural roadblocks that prevented full Senate consideration.

"The issue at hand stems from a 2009 Sixth Circuit Court ruling saying for the first time that pesticide applications that could come into contact with water are point sources of pollution requiring NPDES permits in addition to compliance with FIFRA label requirements.
Since early 2012, the EPA has enforced a now-permanent rule in response to the ruling, requiring approximately 35,000 pesticide applicators to get permits to cover about 500,000 applications per year.

"EPA estimates the permit rule will cost states, localities and pesticide applicators $50 million and require one million hours to implement per year. The Clean Water Act penalizes unlawful discharges with fines of $37,500 per day.

"Legislative proposals to address the NPDES permitting issue have been strongly supported by NAWG and other ag groups, whose members are facing an enormous amount of new paperwork and legal and regulatory risk because of the ruling."

Michigan Farm News reported that Senate Bill 862, sponsored by Sen. Bruce Caswell and signed into law by Gov. Rick Snyder as Public Act 368 of 2012 to takes effect March 28, will help some farmers avoid an 18-mill property tax assessment.

Property assessment rules guide how local assessors reevaluate properties under the current law. "Farmland is exempt from the 18-mill tax, but contiguous properties might not be if they aren't used for agricultural purposes and have separate parcel descriptions," reports Michigan Farm News.

Prior to the new law taking effect on March 28, assessors were instructed to tax each separate parcel individually, regardless of whether it was owned by the same person or not. Farmers owning contiguous properties not joined under a single property description would see any or all of that contiguous property taxed at full rate if it wasn't qualified as agricultural land.

There are many reasons assessors may choose not to join properties together and the new law does not direct local governments to do so. On March 29 when the new law takes effect, having separate parcel descriptions won't matter as long as they're all owned by the same owner and all contiguous.