Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Cap reform convergence

145791019

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 3,886 ✭✭✭Hard Knocks


    wrangler wrote: »
    They are selling the land but the advisor told them they can put the entitlements from the sold land onto forestry that they have. but that forestry also has it's own entitlements on it already, he's probably right and we're missing something

    Thanks Wrangler
    I was meaning instead of planting they should of sold
    A gripe I have at the moment is a few farms locally there’s regret on planting
    Parents planted as no child was interested to farm now the grants are over the children are complaining the farm is not worth what it was
    Another a young girl inherited, went to an advisor and recommended she plant
    Life style has changed and now she regrets planting
    But in your friends case, if they’re able to maximise there return then fair play to them


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,127 ✭✭✭MIKEKC


    wrangler wrote: »
    It forestry they sowed in the last 10 years, don't know what's in it but the forestry is land that had entitlements of it's own and they were allowed keep using them, I can understand that but selling land and still being able to use the entitlements I can't understand

    Forestry planted I think it's from 2015 is eligible for BPS if it is naked land you would imagine one could put the entitlements on it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,843 ✭✭✭kevthegaff


    MIKEKC wrote: »
    Forestry planted I think it's from 2015 is eligible for BPS if it is naked land you would imagine one could put the entitlements on it.

    Can you plant and claim bps


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,886 ✭✭✭Hard Knocks


    kevthegaff wrote: »
    Can you plant and claim bps
    Currently Yes
    Don’t know how long for after planting


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,656 ✭✭✭Western Pomise


    The Front page of the Journal didn't make reading this week with it looking like the Agriculture Sector in Ireland will be given far less Carbon credits for actions taken by farmers in the new incoming Schemes replacing likes of Glas.

    Looking more and like we will have to jump through plenty of hoops to get less of a payment than were out of likes of Glas and the old REPS:(


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,085 ✭✭✭Grueller


    The Front page of the Journal didn't make reading this week with it looking like the Agriculture Sector in Ireland will be given far less Carbon credits for actions taken by farmers in the new incoming Schemes replacing likes of Glas.

    Looking more and like we will have to jump through plenty of hoops to get less of a payment than were out of likes of Glas and the old REPS:(

    If that's the case they can keep the payments


  • Registered Users Posts: 850 ✭✭✭Sacrolyte


    Grueller wrote: »
    If that's the case they can keep the payments


    Yep. There comes a point where it’s just not worth it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 332 ✭✭JohnChadwick


    The Front page of the Journal didn't make reading this week with it looking like the Agriculture Sector in Ireland will be given far less Carbon credits for actions taken by farmers in the new incoming Schemes replacing likes of Glas.

    Looking more and like we will have to jump through plenty of hoops to get less of a payment than were out of likes of Glas and the old REPS:(

    This seems to offer a bit of an explanation on the alarmist headlines from the IFJ - if you have the time to make sense of the formulas used. I don't!

    https://www.arc2020.eu/hidden-formulas-and-agri-media-can-we-find-a-fair-cap-in-ireland/


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,015 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    Convergence is becoming a dog fight.

    https://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/convergence-frustration-i-feel-very-sore-to-be-giving-to-guys-who-have-done-nothing/

    One thing I notice this time compared to the 2015 is that the IFA viewpoint is countered balanced. As well the ICSA has shifted from bring completely on the the same wavelength as the IFA to slightly moving from there stand point looking for payment to be pushed towards less profitable farming from dairying.

    One thing that I see again that is coming to the fore( I pointed it out 2-3 years ago ) but taught it had drifted away with convergence is a flat rate greening/ environmental payment.

    Greening is going to make up a minimum of 20% of your payment and could be 30%. If it's flat rated it will be 50-80 euro payment/HA accross all farms.

    Just to give an example of its effect if 25%.

    BPS+greening at present high 500/unit

    New payment BISS=375 Greening/Envir 65euro
    Total payment =440euro/HA


    BPS+greening at present low 150/unit

    New payment BISS= 112 Greening/Envir 65euro
    Total payment =177/HA

    As well not the fight seems not to be over Convergence it whether it 85% or 100% convergence. In that case the 500/unit payment would end up at 385ish/HA and the 150 will climb to about 240/HA euro.

    Front loading will definitely became a talking point if these figures happen. There would be a push to load the first 20HA by 20-30 euro/HA to soften the blow to smaller farmers. This might be paid for out of capping of payments.

    Another side effect of these changes is that BISS payment is Pillar 1 but greening/environment is considered Pillar 2. Because of this any attempt to use wages to employees to as a method of reducing effect on capping will be limited as it will only effect the BISS part of the payment. Greening/environment may be capped separately

    Slava Ukrainii





  • Convergence is becoming a dog fight.

    https://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/convergence-frustration-i-feel-very-sore-to-be-giving-to-guys-who-have-done-nothing/

    One thing I notice this time compared to the 2015 is that the IFA viewpoint is countered balanced. As well the ICSA has shifted from bring completely on the the same wavelength as the IFA to slightly moving from there stand point looking for payment to be pushed towards less profitable farming from dairying.

    One thing that I see again that is coming to the fore( I pointed it out 2-3 years ago ) but taught it had drifted away with convergence is a flat rate greening/ environmental payment.

    Greening is going to make up a minimum of 20% of your payment and could be 30%. If it's flat rated it will be 50-80 euro payment/HA accross all farms.

    Just to give an example of its effect if 25%.

    BPS+greening at present high 500/unit

    New payment BISS=375 Greening/Envir 65euro
    Total payment =440euro/HA


    BPS+greening at present low 150/unit

    New payment BISS= 112 Greening/Envir 65euro
    Total payment =177/HA

    As well not the fight seems not to be over Convergence it whether it 85% or 100% convergence. In that case the 500/unit payment would end up at 385ish/HA and the 150 will climb to about 240/HA euro.

    Front loading will definitely became a talking point if these figures happen. There would be a push to load the first 20HA by 20-30 euro/HA to soften the blow to smaller farmers. This might be paid for out of capping of payments.

    Another side effect of these changes is that BISS payment is Pillar 1 but greening/environment is considered Pillar 2. Because of this any attempt to use wages to employees to as a method of reducing effect on capping will be limited as it will only effect the BISS part of the payment. Greening/environment may be capped separately

    Re the article, it's always good to hear from the shouty IT'S MY MONEY brigade :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 339 ✭✭TPF2012


    Some amount of entitlement in that article, a sense of entitlement that is.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,015 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    Real interesting article in today's FI. It seems for all the propaganda the average dairy farmers received a higher rate/ Ha than the average drystock. The difference is 37/ HA.

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,983 ✭✭✭✭wrangler


    Real interesting article in today's FI. It seems for all the propaganda the average dairy farmers received a higher rate/ Ha than the average drystock. The difference is 37/ HA.

    Haven't i been saying that all along, the people supporting convergence are taking the subsidies off small suckler farmers and giving it to big dairy farmers.
    It'll be worse from now on, the big acreage of the new dairy farmers will hoover up a lot of our countries €1.3bn or whatever the budget will be in the new CAP,


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,015 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    wrangler wrote: »
    Haven't i been saying that all along, the people supporting convergence are taking the subsidies off small suckler farmers and giving it to big dairy farmers.
    It'll be worse from now on, the big acreage of the new dairy farmers will hoover up a lot of our countries €1.3bn or whatever the budget will be in the new CAP,

    You are miss reading. At present dairy farmers have higher payments per HA by 37 euro. It is they who are losing to convergence

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,611 ✭✭✭Mooooo


    I'd imagine a share of that is a combination of large tillage/ beef operations that may have switched to dairying and those paying rents in which the bps as added on to.
    Is the average 270? The cuts of the last number of years brought us below this and don't seem to be stopping for some reason




  • wrangler wrote: »
    the big acreage of the new dairy farmers will hoover up a lot of our countries €1.3bn or whatever the budget will be in the new CAP,

    If that were the case FG & ICMSA would be head cheerleaders of convergence. They aren't, what does that tell anyone.


  • Registered Users Posts: 332 ✭✭JohnChadwick


    How the heck can the IFA accept anything other than 100% convergence. 75% convergence would be rubbish for 70000 small farmers.


  • Registered Users Posts: 339 ✭✭TPF2012


    How the heck can the IFA accept anything other than 100% convergence. 75% convergence would be rubbish for 70000 small farmers.

    You think the IFA priority is the small farmers, they are well down the list.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,983 ✭✭✭✭wrangler


    If that were the case FG & ICMSA would be head cheerleaders of convergence. They aren't, what does that tell anyone.

    A lot of expanding dairy farmers are looking forward to converegence, One of my tenants had 140 cows when he started with me and heading for 300 now. He is looking forward to convergence.
    and lots of similar around
    Dairy farmers wouldn't be high entitlements in general and when theiri entitlements are spread over twice the acreage there'll be lots of room for convergence.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,920 ✭✭✭MayoAreMagic


    How the heck can the IFA accept anything other than 100% convergence. 75% convergence would be rubbish for 70000 small farmers.

    Well because there are no small farmers in the upper echelons of the IFA. The majority of them will lose out on convergence, so it is turkeys voting for christmas.
    Have they polled their members about convergence at all?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,983 ✭✭✭✭wrangler


    Well because there are no small farmers in the upper echelons of the IFA. The majority of them will lose out on convergence, so it is turkeys voting for christmas.
    Have they polled their members about convergence at all?

    Turkeys voting for Christmas is right, no one is going to serve on a commitee and give up their free time to lobby for something that's injurious to their farm.
    We're not fools




  • wrangler wrote: »
    A lot of expanding dairy farmers are looking forward to converegence, One of my tenants had 140 cows when he started with me and heading for 300 now. He is looking forward to convergence.
    and lots of similar around
    Dairy farmers wouldn't be high entitlements in general and when theiri entitlements are spread over twice the acreage there'll be lots of room for convergence.

    They'll have to buy or claim entitlements from YFS first to be able to do any of that.

    Again, why has Mr Production himself (Coveney) and ICMSA been arguing against convergence if it's the goose that lays the golden egg for dairy?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,920 ✭✭✭MayoAreMagic


    wrangler wrote: »
    A lot of expanding dairy farmers are looking forward to converegence, One of my tenants had 140 cows when he started with me and heading for 300 now. He is looking forward to convergence.
    and lots of similar around
    Dairy farmers wouldn't be high entitlements in general and when theiri entitlements are spread over twice the acreage there'll be lots of room for convergence.

    What percentage of dairy farmers does this apply to though? Convergence is aimed at farmers who are frankly already getting shafted and deserve fairness at the least. If a few dairy lads make a few pound along the way then fair enough as far as im concerned. That could always he addressed with a cap on income further down the line.
    Besides, if their payments are increasing you can increase your rent...




  • Well because there are no small farmers in the upper echelons of the IFA. The majority of them will lose out on convergence, so it is turkeys voting for christmas.
    Have they polled their members about convergence at all?

    Just to clarify one thing, the small vs big farmer contains a shítload of factors unique to each farm. It IS possible to have farmers on farms that have a small # of hectares but high value payments. It's wording I've seen people get blown up over in the past.
    What percentage of dairy farmers does this apply to though? Convergence is aimed at farmers who are frankly already getting shafted and deserve fairness at the least. If a few dairy lads make a few pound along the way then fair enough as far as im concerned. That could always he addressed with a cap on income further down the line.
    Besides, if their payments are increasing you can increase your rent...

    "Front loading" would see a lot of farmers on smaller hectare farms (but higher payments today) not lose much if anything of their payment regarding convergence. BUT, it's my understanding that to adopt front loading would be a member state option, and you can be absolutely sure Ireland wouldn't adopt this.

    I will gain under 85% convergence. IF front loading was adopted I could actually lose a little from what I have today - depending on the %'s taken and how many hectares FL would be capped at.

    I'm actually in favour of front loading as I see it as fair.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,983 ✭✭✭✭wrangler


    They'll have to buy or claim entitlements from YFS first to be able to do any of that.

    Again, why has Mr Production himself (Coveney) and ICMSA been arguing against convergence if it's the goose that lays the golden egg for dairy?

    In 2013 CAP reform it was your single farm payment divided by whatever you claimed on that year, Aneighbour with high entitlements sold 90% of them and kept two spread over his acreage and they are now converging upwards every year, where as they would've been in freefall had he kept them


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,421 ✭✭✭J.O. Farmer


    They'll have to buy or claim entitlements from YFS first to be able to do any of that.

    Again, why has Mr Production himself (Coveney) and ICMSA been arguing against convergence if it's the goose that lays the golden egg for dairy?

    If it goes like last time if you had 50 entitlements and 100Ha after the new CAP you'll have 100 entitlements at half the value.

    Assuming the 50 entitlements are less than 150% of the national average 75% convergence would benefit them. At 100% convergence if the 50 were less than double the national average the convergence would benefit them too.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,920 ✭✭✭MayoAreMagic


    wrangler wrote: »
    Turkeys voting for Christmas is right, no one is going to serve on a commitee and give up their free time to lobby for something that's injurious to their farm.
    We're not fools

    But the IFA isnt there to serve one particular type of farm, it is there to serve all farmers equally. If peoples goals are to get as much for themselves as possible, even at the expense of other farmers, then what is the point of the group at all?




  • wrangler wrote: »
    In 2013 CAP reform it was your single farm payment divided by whatever you claimed on that year, Aneighbour with high entitlements sold 90% of them and kept two spread over his acreage and they are now converging upwards every year, where as they would've been in freefall had he kept them
    If it goes like last time if you had 50 entitlements and 100Ha after the new CAP you'll have 100 entitlements at half the value.

    Assuming the 50 entitlements are less than 150% of the national average 75% convergence would benefit them. At 100% convergence if the 50 were less than double the national average the convergence would benefit them too.

    Ok, fair points. I have no information whether that will or won't be the case this time :confused:


  • Registered Users Posts: 332 ✭✭JohnChadwick


    If peoples goals are to get as much for themselves as possible, even at the expense of other farmers, then what is the point of the group at all?

    This is exactly what 100% convergence would solve - a flattening of payments so farmers aren't unfairly paid based on what way their land was farmed 20 or 30 years ago.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 18,440 ✭✭✭✭_Brian


    If peoples goals are to get as much for themselves as possible, even at the expense of other farmers, then what is the point of the group at all?

    Isn’t that what we do every time we go to the mart to buy or sell. I don’t see lads refusing to buy cheap animals because it means the last man didn’t make any money ?

    Lads that have gotten above average payments for 30 years hardly have a place to complain now that some fairness is being suggested.


Advertisement