On the other hand, if such an exchange is considered equitable, then the quota holders arguably regain their market share after FETRA and are justly compensated anyway.
176) With the passage of FETRA, many such farmers have ceased or will soon cease farming, yet these farmers still possess heavily financed equipment.
Thus, certain quota holders may present compelling arguments that FETRA effected a taking of their property interest under either the categorical standard or the balancing standard.
Having determined that FETRA gives rise to valid takings claims, the final analytical step is to determine whether FETRA's payment provisions constitute just compensation.
In the case of tobacco, the turmoil in the years preceding the passage of FETRA depressed quota prices.
191) Thus, the final question in the analysis is whether the compensation offered by FETRA (56 percent of the value of the quota rights) is "just.
Therefore, FETRA effects a taking of the quota holders' property interest in their quota rights and does not provide just compensation.
In conclusion, the passage of FETRA effects a taking of private property without just compensation in its elimination of the tobacco quota holders' property interest, under either the categorical standard of Lucas or the balancing standard of Mahon.
In the case of the buyout of tobacco quota holders, the enactment of FETRA is sufficient to meet the state action requirement.