From a recent Benzinga news story:
What Happened: North Dakota Attorney General Drew Wrigley shot off a letter to the Gates-linked Red River Trust this week, reported KFYR, Bismarck, North Dakota-based T.V. station.
Wrigley asked the company how they intend to use the land and if they meet exceptions to the state’s corporate farming laws.
"All corporations or limited liability companies (LLC) are prohibited from owning or leasing farmland or ranchland and from engaging in farming or ranching," the letter states, as per the report.
"In addition, the law places certain limitations on the ability of trusts to own farmland or ranchland."
The company has 30 days to respond to the letter dated June 21. Public reaction to the Red River purchase has not been positive, reported KFYR.
North Dakota is practically right next door. They're prohibiting corporate ownership of ag land, in the interest of protecting local farmers and ranchers.
Iowa requires ag land to be owned by people actually farming it.
So does Quebec.
I'm not saying that no corporate ownership must be the rule, as there are corporations made up of farming and ranching interests. But remote, disant, investment, ownership with no local ties. . . ?
Related threads:
4 comments:
Honestly curious: How might the feds view this in terms of interstate commerce, or is that moot, or whatever it is that lawyers say?
Tom
Sheridan, WY
…Or, if corporations are individuals, wouldn't the Fifth Amendment have something to say about denying the right to own property?
Tom
Sheridan, WY
No, in neither case is that correct.
Corporations are persons at law, but they're creatures of the state law, in all but a few instances. I.e., they're a legal fiction. There's nothing that requires states to allow for the creation of corporations at all, and hence the state may place restrictions and conditions on their legal purpose.
What would be problematic would be addressing corporations that already owned property, outside an allowed context, which probably would be unconstitutional.
FWIW, this has already been tested in court, although not at the Supreme Court level. Anyhow, restricting what corporations may do is relatively easy, if properly drafted.
Grazie.
Tom
Sheridan, WY
Post a Comment