Ontario Agriculture

The network for agriculture in Ontario, Canada

The weekend was very productive, the work on the new combine is ahead of schedule, finished up a bit of preventative maintenance on some equipment.  All in an attempt to put off the paperwork.  Some things just can't be put off too long without dire consequences.  

Last year I purchased my home farm, or more properly put, I took ownership of a big mortgage.  With the transfer of land, however, MPAC, the municipal property assessment corp, requires new proof that my 100 acres is in fact farm land and grossing over $7,000 per year.  If they don't get this proof my tax rate goes up 4 fold.  In steps the bureaucracy.  To "prove" i am farming my land I must obtain an FBR (Farm Business Registration) number.  Applications are relatively easy, over the phone, through Agricorp, the same place that has been providing me crop insurance and receiving yield data from me for the last 4 years.  But all that history, for the same farm land, isn't enough.  They need my 2011 tax information.  When I made this call during the first week of January, i like every other farmer and corporation in the province didn't have the prior years data, given it only ended a few days prior.  So we agreed I would send in my 2010 tax information.  Seemed like a reasonable solution - it wasn't.  No they had to have 2011 data.  So I did the income portion of my farm taxes, and sent an unaudited, unofficial, unfilled copy into agricorp.  Well, this paper work was good enough to my great surprise.  Now I have an FBR number, but it won't be valid until i join 1 of 3 farm organizations recognized in the province and pay the cost of membership.

A few weeks pass, and now I receive mail from the municipality of Chatham-Kent that my "no longer farm land" will be taxed at a higher rate and I only have until March to make changes.  So I call MPAC to tell them my FBR number to get this farm tax issue fixed....ah no.  they need to be told by OMAFRA that the land qualifies.  Now OMAFRA can't use this FBR number by simply making a phone call, they need an application mailed to them, and multiple forms filled out since this is a start up operation.  But they will mail all this to me, in two separate envelopes - model of efficiency in this agency.  So its clear I am not going to get my property tax issue fixed today, I figure I will call up the one of three farm organizations and join so the FBR number is fully active when all this paperwork crosses the right desk.  The people on the other end of the phone are very helpful, but I can't join, I must pay through Agricorp.  Apparently they should send me a form to select who i will join and send them the check - who then forwards it on to the organization.  I am sure that is where I started this whole process at the start of the month.

Surprisingly i still wasn't upset.  But then i got to thinking how much bureaucratic BS is being introduced into agriculture.  When I sell grain the GFO takes money off my check - forced membership based on bushels, but not good enough to prove I am a farmer.  Thought that was strange, the GFO would have all the info needed, oh wait Agricorp already had that in actuality.  I am sure this mess will get resolved over the land tax, but what about all the rest.

To be a farmer i have registered for a GST number, obtained a pesticide license, filled farm income tax forms, obtained permits to shoot to scare migratory birds, paid the GFO, registered for some number so i can buy roundup ready seed.  But that still isn't enough to be a farmer.  

I am so looking forward to the day when farmers tell the bureaucrats to get the heck out of agriculture.  How long do you think it will take them to realize you can't eat forms, permits, licenses, registrations, and memberships? 

I farm because thats what I do, there was a time when that was all it took.

Views: 200

Comment

You need to be a member of Ontario Agriculture to add comments!

Join Ontario Agriculture

Agriculture Headlines from Farms.com Canada East News - click on title for full story

Ag in the House: Oct. 26 – 30

Minister MacDonald highlighted how the government is supporting food security

Exploring grape pomace’s potential as pork sausage preservative

Scientists at Iowa State University are studying grape pomace as an alternative preservative for pork breakfast sausage. The U.S. sausage market exceeds $7.5 billion. Processed meats often use synthetic ingredients to maintain overall quality, stability and safety. However, consumer preferences toward “clean-label” ingredients and recent reassessments of some food additives, such as butylated hydroxyanisole, are boosting interest in more natural alternatives. Grape pomace is a by-product of winemaking, obtained after pressing white grapes or after fermentation and pressing of red grapes. GP represents a rich source of fiber and phenolic compounds, but it is usually composted, used as animal feed or discarded. “This winemaking by-product is often wasted, but we know that GP has some antimicrobial and antioxidant properties,” said Aude Watrelot, assistant professor of enology in food science and human nutrition. “How effective would GP be when substituted for current additives in a po

Canadian Pork Research Enters New Phase with More Flexible Funding for Industry Priorities

Canada’s pork industry is strengthening its approach to research and innovation through a funding model designed to address both long-term industry priorities and emerging challenges facing producers. Swine Innovation Porc (SIP), the national organization coordinating research for Canada’s pork sector, has released its 2025–26 annual report, highlighting the continued development of its national research programs and the introduction of additional funding flexibility. At the centre of this approach are two complementary initiatives: the established Swine Cluster program and the newer Advancing Swine Research Program. Together, these programs are intended to strengthen the industry’s ability to invest in scientific discovery while supporting practical research that responds to changing production conditions. Building on More Than a Decade of Collaborative Research Since 2010, Canada’s Swine Cluster program has provided a foundation for coordinated research involving universities, re

Canadian Swine Researchers Face November 13 Deadline for Up to $150,000 in Research Funding

Swine Innovation Porc is seeking research proposals focused on animal health, biosecurity, production efficiency, sustainability and pork quality, with funding available for projects addressing key challenges facing Canada’s pork industry. Canadian swine researchers have until November 13 to submit letters of intent for a new round of funding through the Advancing Swine Research Program, an initiative designed to strengthen the competitiveness, efficiency and long-term sustainability of Canada’s pork sector. Administered by Swine Innovation Porc (SIP), in partnership with the Pork Promotion and Research Agency (PPRA), the program supports industry-focused research that delivers practical benefits to producers, processors and the broader pork value chain. Successful projects may receive funding covering up to 50% of eligible project costs, with a maximum contribution of $50,000 annually over three years, representing a potential investment of $150,000 per project. Research Prioritie

When Pork’s Seasonal Recovery Doesn’t Arrive: What Canada Packers’ Q3 Results Reveal About the Market

Canada Packers’ third-quarter results offer a revealing look at the pressures facing North American pork production. Beyond the company’s $28.1 million loss, the more important story involves weakening pork demand, unusually compressed processing margins, and questions about when the industry can expect more favourable market conditions. For an industry accustomed to seasonal fluctuations, the absence of a typical summer recovery in pork values may be one of the most significant developments emerging from Canada Packers’ latest earnings report. The company reported third-quarter sales of $420.7 million, down 12.7% from the same period in 2025, alongside a net loss of $28.1 million compared with a profit of $25.6 million a year earlier. Adjusted EBITDA declined to $31.5 million from a pro forma $56 million in the comparable period, reflecting the effects of broader market compression. The reported net loss also included a $47.6 million non-cash decline in the fair value of biological

© 2026   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service