FedEX HKG LOA is out, and boy is it funny...

[F18-FDX]

You would come out ahead by staying in the right seat of the MD-11.

Yes, I speak French but No, I'm not a moron. My standing bid is in, and it doesn't include the 757. But if this LOA passes it sets a really bad precedent...vote NO.

 

[ilandopr]

Vote No!!!

Yes, I speak French but No, I'm not a moron. My standing bid is in, and it doesn't include the 757. But if this LOA passes it sets a really bad precedent...vote NO.

NOTHING THAT I WROTE IMPLIED THAT I CALLED YOU A MORON. WOW! YOU ARE WOUND UP WAY TOO TIGHT.
THOUGHT WE WERE ON THE SAME SIDE.

 

[Gummo]

Just did a trip to FRA last month. Give "the man" a hundred bucks and get 71 Euros in return. That's 29%!
You would come out ahead by staying in the right seat of the MD-11.

I don't get this. I keep hearing this in discussions of the FDA and it doesn't make any sense (or cents). France is not expensive because the Euro exchanges at 71 cents to the USD. It's expensive, but that is not why. The Hong Kong dollar exchanges at 7.8 to the USD and that sure doesn't make Hong Kong cheap!

Exchange rates have no direct bearing on the cost of living normalized to the USD. Yes, Europe is expensive and has gotten more so for us as the dollar has slide in relation to the Euro. The change in the exchange rate over the past 4-5 years is indicative of the changing relative costs of many commodities and services, and any short term change is going to be directly felt as a change in dollar costs to visit Europe. But many things were more expensive in Europe than the US even when the Euro was below the USD, and you sure can't say that it is 29% more expensive now just based on the exchange rate.

France is expensive because of high taxes, anti-competitive regulations and business practices, inefficient infrastructure, and an inclination to socialist government policies. The exchange rate has gone in the crapper, because of high oil prices, our uncontrollable hunger for foreign goods, and emerging concerns by foreign (and domestic) investors that our economy is going into a long-term slide due to unrestrained gov't spending and our entanglement in an intractable conflict in the Middle East.

Thanks for listening - now vote NO.

 

[DLax85]

I don't get this. I keep hearing this in discussions of the FDA and it doesn't make any sense (or cents). France is not expensive because the Euro exchanges at 71 cents to the USD. It's expensive, but that is not why. The Hong Kong dollar exchanges at 7.8 to the USD and that sure doesn't make Hong Kong cheap!

Exchange rates have no direct bearing on the cost of living normalized to the USD. Yes, Europe is expensive and has gotten more so for us as the dollar has slide in relation to the Euro. The change in the exchange rate over the past 4-5 years is indicative of the changing relative costs of many commodities and services, and any short term change is going to be directly felt as a change in dollar costs to visit Europe. But many things were more expensive in Europe than the US even when the Euro was below the USD, and you sure can't say that it is 29% more expensive now just based on the exchange rate.

France is expensive because of high taxes, anti-competitive regulations and business practices, inefficient infrastructure, and an inclination to socialist government policies. The exchange rate has gone in the crapper, because of high oil prices, our uncontrollable hunger for foreign goods, and emerging concerns by foreign (and domestic) investors that our economy is going into a long-term slide due to unrestrained gov't spending and our entanglement in an intractable conflict in the Middle East.

Thanks for listening - now vote NO.

OK...let's keep it simple:

Relative Non-Housing Cost Indexes for the cities in question with Memphis indexed at 100 (...NYC added for reference).

Memphis = 100
New York = 140
Paris = 143
Hong Kong = 153

Of the top 15 most expensive cities in the world, Hong Kong is #5, Paris is #13 and NYC is #15.

Much needs to be fixed in the LOA .... vote "No"

 

[Ninerfan]

CDG Schedule

Just flew with one of the SIG fellas. His intial hack on the 757 CDG flying is that it will be very commuter unfriendly. Thus, the co. wanted to keep the 100nm rule intact. Another reason not to bid it.

Separately, I am voting no on the LOA.

 

[Diesel]

bump.....

 

[propjob27]

You are bumping the wrong thread:

This one needs to be read more:

http://forums.flightinfo.com/showthread.php?t=100955

Contains a great Box Stuffer too.

GET THE WORD OUT

 

[Scarabus]

I want to know who is getting paid to get fedex to mess with the expat tax exemption? It's sad the cathay and emirates is out doing the home team when it comes to this money issue for taxes, housing, and schools for your kids.

 

[Diesel]

Bump em' all I say.

For those that say "I'm too senior for it to affect me." Or, "If the MEC votes yes so do I."

Should practice those lines infront of the mirror so when you get informed that you're spending 3 months in HKG and costing your family money you can say it with a straight face to your spouse.

 

[El Pobre]

Just Voted NO.. I hope alot of others do to. I can't believe that our union says that this isn't concessionary. Any pilot going to Paris is taking a 35% paycut right off the bat.

No Cola...even the military isn't this bad. I hope this gets voted down by a significant margin and gets fixed now. Otherwise we'll have to fix it during our next contract negotiations at the expense of 1) QOL, 2) Pay, 3) Retirement, 4) Work Rules.....you pick which one you want to sacrifice to fix this substandard LOA in the future.

 

[eatme]

I want to know who is getting paid to get fedex to mess with the expat tax exemption?

Why do you say this? IRS supercedes anything in the contract or LOA. The foreign earned income tax exclusion is irrespective of any agreement between FDX and the pilots.

 

[AV80R]

Why do you say this? IRS supercedes anything in the contract or LOA. The foreign earned income tax exclusion is irrespective of any agreement between FDX and the pilots.

Propjob27's original message:
...
6--We're getting "tax equalization." In other words, you will pay the exact same taxes as if you lived in the USA. Isn't that the whole point of being an ex-pat, to avoid paying US Federal income tax (on the 1st 84K anyway) Take away that benefit, and still expect guys to live in THE most expensive, one of the MOST polluted (complete with air you can see), and crowded cities in the world?? I have never, ever, in the history of any US company basing employees overseas, heard of taking away the tax benefit Is FedEX honing its stand-up routine or what?
...

 

[eatme]

Still doesn't answer my question re how FDX corp can take it away. IRS tax law supercedes any "tax equalization" agreement between FDX and ALPA. Doesn't it mean taxes minus host countries tax minus IRS tax exclusion?

 

[AV80R]

Still doesn't answer my question re how FDX corp can take it away. IRS tax law supercedes any "tax equalization" agreement between FDX and ALPA. Doesn't it mean taxes minus host countries tax minus IRS tax exclusion?

Not sure and I'm not even a purple pilot but my friend said that as far as his W2 form, the taxes would be as much as if he lived in the US. Not sure how it'll work...

 

[FlyBoeingJets]

Still doesn't answer my question re how FDX corp can take it away. IRS tax law supercedes any "tax equalization" agreement between FDX and ALPA. Doesn't it mean taxes minus host countries tax minus IRS tax exclusion?

In a way, you have a valid point.

FedEx could be on the hook for extra tax over and above your expected U.S. tax burden. But they can also make money with equalization if your tax burden is lower with the exclusion.

It's possible newhires going to Hong Kong and Paris will actually make the company money as their tax burden may (I don't really know) be lower overseas with the foreign tax exclusion and low first year pay.


How can they take the exclusion away? By having you sign an individual contract (as is proposed in the LOA) that commits you to the equalization. Every person that bids (or newhires that go as a condition of joining FedEx in this decade) a foreign domicile is required to sign the individual contract.

 

[AV80R]

Tax burden in France will defintely not be lower than in the US (not sure about Hong Kong but I doubt that as well).

 

[Little Bubba]

Tax burden in France will defintely not be lower than in the US (not sure about Hong Kong but I doubt that as well).

16% tax in HK...

 

[eatme]

In a way, you have a valid point.

How can they take the exclusion away? By having you sign an individual contract (as is proposed in the LOA) that commits you to the equalization. Every person that bids (or newhires that go as a condition of joining FedEx in this decade) a foreign domicile is required to sign the individual contract.

So you are saying FDX would rather pay more in tax by taking the exclusion away? Also, who cares what the LOA says re taxes and equalization..not addressed specifically just as an addendum to the contract. My point is why would they choose to file a return for you without the exclusion. Even so, this does not preclude your rights under federal law to give up a legal exclusion.

 

[AV80R]

16% tax in HK...

Do they have a flat income tax no matter what your income is?

 

[AV80R]

So you are saying FDX would rather pay more in tax by taking the exclusion away? Also, who cares what the LOA says re taxes and equalization..not addressed specifically just as an addendum to the contract. My point is why would they choose to file a return for you without the exclusion. Even so, this does not preclude your rights under federal law to give up a legal exclusion.

I probably totally misunderstood this but I thought it was about the host countries wanting to get some of the tax revenues one way or the other, am I wrong?