We certainly appreciate the $20 million in cost savings that are coming here, because that is significant. I think farmers are currently incurring about $38 million of CGC costs. If the $20 million savings hadn't come along, we'd be looking at overall fees of $80 million plus, maybe even closer to $90 million. So the $20 million saving is appreciated. But it still creates a gap between the $38 million we're paying now and the potential to go to $50 million or $55 million going forward under full cost recovery. That is still a big hit.
Even though we appreciate the $20 million cost savings that we anticipate, it's still going to be a net increase to farmers that will probably almost double their fees, going from $1.60 a tonne to possibly $3 or $3.50 a tonne after that. On a typical farm with 5,000 acres and growing a tonne an acre, that's 5,000 tonnes that a farmer produces. Those fees would have been $8,000 last year; going forward they're going to double. It will be about $16,000 for the average farmer. It is still significant, and that's including the $20 million cost savings.
We're not looking for a subsidy or for the taxpayers to subsidize farmers for services that benefit farmers specifically, but we do want some recognition for this brand that the CGC has provided Canada. It's good for all Canadians that the maple leaf says something, not only for grain sales, but for Canada's reputation around the world. We think those are the kinds of things that the public purse is probably more appropriate paying for, rather than specifically and solely farmers.
As for the 25%, I think what we're saying is that we think that $5 million number should be upwards of around $15 million or $20 million coming from the federal government for the public good component.