More detail on all the lovely goodies larded in via Karim Bardeesy at The Big Money (both someone at TBM and reader Jennifer pointed out the piece). Note that this is a partial list:
DIVISION C-TAX EXTENDERS AND ALTERNATIVE MINIMUM TAX RELIEF
SEC. 308. INCREASE IN LIMIT ON COVER OVER OF RUM EXCISE TAX TO PUERTO RICO AND THE VIRGIN ISLANDS.
(a) IN GENERAL.-Paragraph (1) of section 7652(f) is amended by striking ‘‘January 1, 2008” and inserting ‘‘January 1, 2010”.
(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.-The amendment made by this section shall apply to distilled spirits brought into the United States after December 31, 2007.
SEC. 309. EXTENSION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CREDIT FOR AMERICAN SAMOA.
Subsection (d) of section 119 of division A of the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 is amended-
(1) by striking ‘‘first two taxable years” and inserting ‘‘first 4 taxable years”
SEC. 317. SEVEN-YEAR COST RECOVERY PERIOD FOR MOTORSPORTS RACING TRACK FACILITY.
3 (a) IN GENERAL.-Subparagraph (D) of section 168(i)(15) (relating to termination) is amended by striking ‘‘December 31, 2007” and inserting “December 31, 2009”.
SEC. 325. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF DUTY SUSPENSION ON WOOL PRODUCTS; WOOL RESEARCH FUND; WOOL DUTY REFUNDS.
(a) EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY DUTY REDUCTIONS.-Each of the following headings of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by striking the date in the effective period column and inserting ‘‘12/31/2014”:
(1) Heading 9902.51.11 (relating to fabrics of worsted wool).
(2) Heading 9902.51.13 (relating to yarn of combed wool).
(3) Heading 9902.51.14 (relating to wool fiber, waste, garnetted stock, combed wool, or wool top).
(4) Heading 9902.51.15 (relating to fabrics of combed wool).
(5) Heading 9902.51.16 (relating to fabrics of combed wool).
SEC. 503. EXEMPTION FROM EXCISE TAX FOR CERTAIN WOODEN ARROWS DESIGNED FOR USE BY CHILDREN.
‘(B) EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN WOODEN ARROW SHAFTS.-Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to any shaft consisting of all natural wood with no laminations or artificial means of enhancing the spine of such shaft (whether sold separately or incorporated as part of a finished or unfinished product) of a type used in the manufacture of any arrow which after its assembly- ‘‘(i) measures 5⁄16 of an inch or less in diameter, and ‘‘(ii) is not suitable for use with a bow described in paragraph (1)(A).”.
34 comments
Comments are closed.
Here is some good stuff from Economist View
Mark to Markets Changes
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/
The makers of worsted wool NASCAR sweaters are going to make a fortune
I need to position myself so they may trickle down all over me
This bill has a good chance at failing. European and Asian markets won’t be able to make heads nor tails of the situation
What the flying fuck? Is this some kind of a sick joke?
BANANA REPUBLIC
I think the senators are incapable of accepting the fact that the world has changed and this old BS can no longer go on..
This is so naked… not naked capitalism but naked greed and naked corruption.
By the way, I’ve never posted on your blog before but I’m an avid reader, your output is appreciated and essential! I tip my (tin) hat.
Don’t worry, McCain will make them famous, then the government will never waste a cent again.
And our reps/senators have turned off their phones and the email is DOWN?
WTF?
Just saw this. Yikes
It seems possible that the Bailout Bill got wrapped into an already-existing Senate bill as an amendment for parliamentary reasons…hence the plethora of pre-exiting minutiae.
(although, finding out what the Senate does on their non-crisis days is not very heartening at all, is it?)
the Bailout part of the bill is here:
http://banking.senate.gov/public/
no wooden arrow shafts are mentioned…
GDL
Page 263 of 451: Exemption from excise tax for certain wooden arrows designed for use by children.
The answer is obvious. When this bailout bill fails to rescue the economy, our children will have to learn to catch their own food. The exemption is a preemptive move to help train our children to survive!
See! The government has a contingency plan!
This just gets worse by the minute .
This seems like the cue for the dictator to walk in and grab power in like in 3rd world countries ( bloodless coup in the Banana Republic )
Are we literally being blackmailed by the world to bail out everyone or they sell dollars, stop buying treasuries and let the dollar die along with our economy? Is this a true representation of current events? If it is then isn’t the inevitable collapse of the dollar a certainty in the next year?
I really don’t know but I do have respect for this blog and the people who comment. Anyone help me out with an informed opinion?
There is some stuff which might help Main Street…
The WSJ had an article yesterday or today about community banks facing a double hit on Agency preferred losses…
This bill contains a provision to allow banks to write off their Agency preferred losses against ordinary income instead of only against capital gains…
Local banks dying off would make this crisis a Main Street issue pretty quickly.
(not that relying on Agency preferred shares to juice yield is something those local banks should be given a free pass for)
GDL
As I read the list, a warm and fuzzy feeling is growing inside…it’s called nausea!
Hey — Lemme know when you guys come up with a better idea! But no need to hurry, 'cause hey, these bastards deserved what was coming, right? So please, go fine-tune your models and chillax over a bottle of Shiraz.
Meanwhile, in the real world….
Credit Crisis May Affect 2009 Harvests, Schafer Says (Update2)
By Alan Bjerga
Oct. 1 (Bloomberg) — The credit crisis roiling financial markets may affect next year's corn, wheat and soybean output should farmers find themselves unable to get loans to buy seeds and fertilizer, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer said.
“We certainly could see tight credit having an effect on agricultural production'' in the U.S., Schafer told reporters today after speaking to Department of Agriculture workers in Washington."
….
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aQfDSBXUXOo0&refer=home
That’s BS – the farmer’s have sweeteners more than you and I will ever HAVE! They’re making RECORD PROFITS this year – that’s BS and spin at its best…if anything the price went up because we ran all the itinerant migrant workers out and no one is around to pick the stuff!
>>That's BS – the farmer's have sweeteners more than you and I will ever HAVE! They're making RECORD PROFITS this year – that's BS and spin at its best..
Two things: 1. These record profits came at ag prices twice what they are now, and, even then, to put a finer point on it, "record profits" against years of the lowest ag prices since the 30's doesn't mean a whole lot. Secondly, 2. Just becuase you've made profits doesn't mean you don't need finance. It is actually very expensive to plant a crop — the fancy seeds (courtesy of Monsanto), fertilizer (priced that recently?), planting expenses (read fuel), etc. If you think these guys have squireled away enough retained earnings to self-finance, well, you're likely not from the midwest, are you?
But hey, the farmers had it coming too, didn't they? Besides, who needs them? So what if they get sucked into Roubini's Great Black Hole. Who says you can't live off Shiraz?
Because the House did not pass a version of the bill, in order to consider the Treasury proposal the Senate had to take a totally unrelated bill and “amend” it by in effect adding the text of the Treasury plan. They obviously have added a few provisions, but most of the totally irrelevant material was from the unrelated House bill and will be removed when the Senate bill is sent back to the House of Representatives,
I would assume that McCain will vote against this bill, because of all these, um, earmarks?
<< Are we literally being blackmailed by the world to bail out everyone or they sell dollars, stop buying treasuries and let the dollar die along with our economy? Is this a true representation of current events? If it is then isn't the inevitable collapse of the dollar a certainty in the next year? >>
Yes, yes, and yes. No one in Washington is thinking past the range-of-the-moment (November election). No one in Wall Street is thinking, period. The last time they tried thinking it broke the bank, so we jolly well won't have any more of that silly thinking business, now, will we?
This blog is going off the deep-end with unwarranted hysteria.
Is it possible that because this is an amendment, the “pork” (or whatever) in this bill WAS ALREADY THERE.
Failing to make a determination on that, which the post does not, this post and the entire thread is just a lot of ill founded arm waving.
I think in the last post, about “pork”, someone posted that they started crying.
I mean, come on people this is getting silly.
Doug
Pulling the wool over our eyes, indeed…
Voters have a bazooka being held to their heads in this do-or-die effort to confuse people.
The main point here is, which wall street firms need the cash, and why do they need it? This needs to be clarified like The Chrysler bailout — we need clear individual contracts versus the bullshit of a bailout for a pool of nameless crooks that will hide behind derivatives, and then go back to work, drunk as hell to power back up the nuclear reactor.
There needs to be individual accountability for anyone getting taxpayer revenues! We at the very least, need to see structures like Bear Stearns has and we need to see disclosure of all the toxic garbage!
Doug,
With all due respect, you have clearly not been following this bill, as most readers have been (some of the people in the thread are regulars).
The original bill, as discussed here in several posts before the horse-trading started, was three pages, and that included definitions, for the Treasury Secretary to have blanket authority, no review, to buy assets from financial firms (rather broadly defined) as he saw fit.
I suggest you be certain of your facts before you start casting aspersions. The pork was added when the bill went from its interim 110 page version to its current 451 page form.
I think our country is in very serious trouble.
I see several differences between now and 1929:
* Our government was considerably better in 1929
* Americans had savings in 1929
* We had the gold standard in 1929
I’ve been trying to decide if Paulson is evil or just plain incompetent. I’m leaning towards evil at this point. It’s inconceivable that someone could come up with a bailout plan so corrupt unless they had corrupt intentions. The parties that are going to benefit the most are Friends of Hank and most likely foreign creditors.
There’s been plenty of experience with banking crises and how to resolve them efficiently. Paulson’s plan is shockingly bad.
Bernanke has spent his whole career preparing for such a situation, and he has failed miserably.
The mainstream press, including Wall Street Journal, have failed the American people regarding this legislation, just as they failed the American people in the lead up to the Iraq war.
Sy Krass said…
I guess it is time for me to apoligize. You see this is all my fault. It’s all because I just started trading options in August. You see I have the Midas touch. I have had several online offshore gambling accounts. Every once in awhile, the rules would change, I wouldn’t be able to pull my money out, it would be outlawed by some arcane procedure in congress by poeple who know best what is good for me to do and not do, and well now… I guess…this is happening… to all…those sophisticated…traders…investors…people who don’t… ‘gamble’ with their retirement accounts…AAAGGHH!!!…AAAGGHHHHHH!!!!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!
I don’t think that’s what Doug means. What he’s asking is whether the extra 200 pages were in the bill which the Senate amended so they might send something back to the House. (The bill they amended was originally known as Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act of 2007 and, of course, had nothing at all to do with the financial crisis … kind of funny name though, given the situation.) I am not really sure as to the answer, but my guess given “Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following:” is that all the language is new … or at least newly added to the bill. Worrisome, given the serious language people have been putting forth to the general public, but I cannot say definitively.
freude bud,
A DC guy who speaks to Congressmen (a lobbyist) e-mailed me and told me the pork was added specifically to get votes. He said it was horse trading.
He might be wrong, but I certainly don’t think he was trying to spin me. I am too far down the food chain to count and an interested party would play down rather than play up the unseemly aspects.
I do not know who uttered this famous quote regarding Massachusetts politics; probably it was old before it’s current speaker was born:
—Nothing is on the level.
—Everything is a deal.
—No deal is too small.
The US Congress creates, and lives in, its own reality. Only in a real crisis, when the drape is drawn back, do we see the bathetic little men and women groping, grinding, and guzzling through their business as usual, while telling us not to mind those rats behind the curtain but attend to the phosphorescent (and stinking) effusions of the Great and Terrible Fund.
For years, we’ve watche this same kind of spectacle from afar; in places like Ecuador, the Philippines, Turkey, Thailand, . . . Japan. But we were supposed to be, well, _better- than that. Or at least bigger. Or, so we thought, richer. Instead, we’ve joined the peer group.
I’m surprised that the Senate didn’t think that the people would be made aware of this horse trading, but I am glad that the people are being appraised.
Maybe it’s the only way that things can get done in the Senate, generally speaking, but given the presumptive gravity of the situation, this really does seem beyond the pale.
Anyone have a definitive answer about how much of the trash quoted in the post is new or old? Or know where an inquisitive person might be able to track the timing of additions?
But to add a quick thought: Regardless of whether it’s trash put in to pass a bailout bill, or trash to help pass the “Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act of 2007”, this is still some incredibly brazen misuse of funds (or unbelievably opaque government spending). What does any of this have to do with the bailout bill OR mental health and addiction?
(Thanks for all the posts, Yves, and thanks for the helpful comments to everyone here)
The formal title of the Senate contrivance vehicle for the Pigout proposal, a hollowed out hunk of legislation, is so indescribably apt and hilarious it is beyond the scope even of the best writers of British absurdist humor in its detail. I would be laughing over it to the point I couldn’t breath if the consequences were not so dire.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/02/business/02tax.html?_r=1&th=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&emc=th&adxnnlx=1222971406-czPDn5VoOT2CmAX932bLNw
A NYT article that states, unevquivocally (though they could be wrong), that some of the terms found in the bailout bill were added on to win over some Senators. So perhaps some of the individual sections Yves quotes were part of getting the original mental health and addiction bill passed, but there certainly are tax breaks added to get the bailout bill passed as well.