@article{Agricultural:338332,
      recid = {338332},
      author = {Bureau of Agricultural Economics},
      title = {An Analysis of the Effects of the Processing Taxes Levied  Under the Agricultural Adjustment Act},
      address = {1937-05},
      number = {1485-2023-1067},
      pages = {126},
      year = {1937},
      note = {Published by the Bureau of Internal Revenue, U. S.  Treasury Department.  This study was prepared by members of  the staff of the Bureau of Agricultural Economics under the  direction of F. L. Thomsen, principal agricultural  economist.  Economists primarily responsible for the  various sections follow:  Preston Richards, hogs; Robert E.  Post, wheat and rye; Maurice R. Cooper, cotton; F. J.  Hosking (resigned) and Malcolm Clough, corn and rice;  Ernest W. Grove, tobacco; Gustave Burmeister, peanuts; F.  L. Thomsen and Gustave Burmeister, sugar.},
      abstract = {Excerpts from the report Introduction:  This analysis is  designed to determine the incidence of the processing taxes  levied under the provisions of the Agricultural Adjustment  Act on hogs, wheat, rye, cotton, tobacco, corn, rice,  peanuts, and sugar.  As not all of the facts necessary for  a complete analysis are available, it is possible to show  only some of the effects of the processing taxes, and in  some instances the conclusions are quite tentative and  subject to modification on the basis of new facts that may  be developed.  The collection and use of processing taxes  as conceived under the Agricultural Adjustment Act involve  two separate and distinct questions: (1) The effects on  processors, distributors, consumers, and producers of the  collection of processing taxes and the distribution of  funds so obtained in the form of "benefit payments" to  farmers, and (2) the effects on these same groups of the  production-adjustment programs in which farmers  participated upon the partial inducement afforded by the  benefit payments.  Processing taxes might be collected, and  benefit payments made, without any resort to production  adjustment; and adjustment programs might be conducted and  financed without resort to processing taxes.  This report  deals only with the first of the above questions, which  includes (a) the extent to which the processing taxes were  absorbed by processors and distributors as a whole, or paid  by consumers as an addition to prices that they would have  paid had there been no processing taxes, or by producers  through a reduction in prices below what they would have  been if the program had been financed by means other than  the processing tax; and (6) the extent to which "rental and  benefit payments” to producers affected their income, aside  from any effects of production adjustment upon farm prices  and income.  Therefore, the analysis is not intended or  adapted for use as an appraisal of the effects, advantages,  or disadvantages of the production-adjustment programs as a  whole.},
      url = {http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/338332},
      doi = {https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.338332},
}