Please, be polite. Avoid name-calling and profanity.
For credibility, sign your real name; stand behind your comments. Readers will give less credence to anonymous posts.
PabloCruz · October 23, 2020 at 3:30 pm
Easemens granted in Fauquier are unique in a couple of ways. For example, in other states in order for a conservation easement to be granted, it must have a demonstrable public benefit, and the land must be open for public use.
In Fauquier, easements/land conservation was initially justified in terms of the land that would be spared from development. But trying to prove a negative in terms of land that was not developed because it was placed into easement is difficult, if not impossible to do, especially when you look at where most of the land is in easement.
In researching public records, it becomes apparent that much of the land in easement and receiving tax breaks is owned by many out-of-state LLC's, very wealthy corporate types, horse breeders, etc. These individuals and corporations are being subsidized by the rest of us, and any public benefit from this activity is highly dubious at best.
Because of the projected income loss from Covid-19, the BOS severely cut the budget, including much needed increases in public safety staffing. They did not cut the Purchase of Development Rights program funding, over $815,000 was still included in the budget. A gross and totally unnecessary transfer of wealth from those who need the money most, to those who need it least.
Mark House · October 23, 2020 at 11:54 am
Wealthy investors seem to be exploiting land-conservation tax breaks, and the Senate is taking notice.
Syndicated conservation easements — tax breaks granted to protect undeveloped land — have become increasingly common over the last decade, but they are attracting increasing scrutiny from lawmakers and the IRS as a means for the wealthy to avoid paying their appropriate share of taxes.