Good…embarrassing…or just plain out of touch?

[Sparse]

Actually, that was Bubba Clinton that had the bright idea of a "luxury tax" and decimated the boat-building industry in the US. But your point is well taken.

My Bad. But I guess we are both wrong. It was signed by George H.W. "read my lips" Bush according to this article but the argument against it is the same.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/will102899.asp Interesting how Ted Kennedy offered up a fix including, shh "Taxxxx Creeedits". No not a democrat.


http://watchingamerica.com/News/94396/u-s-luxury-tax-—-a-total-failure/



http://www.boortz.com/weblogs/nealz-nuze/2011/jun/30/lesson-yacht-tax/

 

[rajflyboy]

Gret is pretty damn smart compared to the rest of us

 

[gret]

Gret is pretty damn smart compared to the rest of us

..not really as I can't sing or dance disco-

http://www.bodylanguagesuccess.com/2012/02/negotiation-nonverbal-communication_18.html

 

[BoilerUP]

As mentioned, most of the depreciation deductions aren't even utilized because the aircraft isn't used predominately for business purposes.

That might be true for a fractional, but is most certainly not true for many part 91/industrial aid flight departments.

 

[gret]

That might be true for a fractional, but is most certainly not true for many part 91/industrial aid flight departments.

You would think so...but they don't benefit as much as you think as they lose the deduction in proportion to the personal use of the a/c by executives compared to business use. Depending on the company, it is significant. Also, the tax benefits of the aircraft are usually not considered, except to rationalize the purchase...wink...wink. If the big guys want a plane, they go out and get one.

The other point is that many US companies don't have a heavy tax burden. The top ten earners in the US have an effective tax rate of 9%. Substantial earnings are not subject to tax (foreign operations) until brought back to the US and they aren't doing it in anticipation of a tax holiday being granted by our boys in Washington.

 

[BoilerUP]

You would think so...but they don't benefit as much as you think as they lose the deduction in proportion to the personal use of the a/c by executives compared to business use. Depending on the company, it is significant.

That's my point.

There are some operators that have 95% or more business use (my company is one) and for many those operators the tax benefits help a purchase decision...or help a purchase decision NOW vs. a year or two from now, which is the whole purpose of economic stimulus.

I'm not interested in an economic or tax policy debate as I am not a CPA, MBA and didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night...just want to reinforce that one can't reasonably say that accelerated/bonus depreciation is a useless policy.

Some folks won't benefit from it, while others will - let's not make blanket statements (politicians are good enough doing that without our help) and throw the baby out with the bathwater.

And let's be honest - the ONLY reason to exclude aircraft from bonus depreciation (which is extended to any number of business-related capital purchases) is purely political...not monetary.

 

[gret]

Aircraft aren't being singled out, the provision affects all capital assets.

My point is that the NBAA uses what little political capital it has anymore on areas that provide little benefit or to fight battles it can't win...it would seem more prudent to hold back and lobby for more important items that affect private aviation and do it like grown ups.

The NBAA and NATA are not organizations that have a lasting impact on our lives one way or another...most aviation professionals only having a passing interest or knowledge about them....except for the salary survey of course... which is incredibly bogus

They are simply dues collectors who try and justify their existence by making noise about something that they really don't know anything about. Waste of any kind is bad.

 

[Flying Illini]

Aircraft aren't being singled out, the provision affects all capital assets.

My point is that the NBAA uses what little political capital it has anymore on areas that provide little benefit or to fight battles it can't win...it would seem more prudent to hold back and lobby for more important items that affect private aviation and do it like grown ups.

The NBAA and NATA are not organizations that have a lasting impact on our lives one way or another...most aviation professionals only having a passing interest or knowledge about them....except for the salary survey of course... which is incredibly bogus

They are simply dues collectors who try and justify their existence by making noise about something that they really don't know anything about. Waste of any kind is bad.

Interesting take. My company pays NBAA dues and this is a cause that is important to us so we are glad that NBaA is lobbying for it. An industry group should lobby for anything and everything that benefits their members. I'm curious, what is your background as I can't tell from your profile?

 

[gret]

Interesting take. My company pays NBAA dues and this is a cause that is important to us so we are glad that NBaA is lobbying for it. An industry group should lobby for anything and everything that benefits their members. I'm curious, what is your background as I can't tell from your profile?

Agreed, they should work on all matters that improve the private aviation industry. However, one has to choose the proper points to make and how to make them. Below are three pieces addressing the use of corporate owned aircraft...without laughing or being biased...who seems more credible and makes their points objectively, effectively, and without sounding condescending-


Corporate Jet Set: Leisure vs. Business

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703551304576260871791710428.html

NBAA Sample

http://www.forbes.com/sites/busines...-from-the-president-stings-business-aviation/

NATA Sample

http://www.nata.aero/PressRelease/default.aspx?id=85

It is also recognized that the heads of the NBAA and NATA have tough jobs trying to defend the indefensible (i.e. using the corporate jet (Falcon 2000 if I remember) to fly the CEO’s teenage daughter back and forth to California from Colorado on a weekly basis for a year so she can finish high school).

Too many examples of this that taint the entire industry and as usual, the exception is what gets the attention. It's kinda funny that many of the executives who abuse the situation laugh at the criticism and continue their bad behavior while we are trying to defend them so we can have jobs.

My background is primarily working patient intake at a meatpacking plant in Kansas and I’m trying to land a job as head of public relations at a national business jet industry group.

 

[JimNtexas]

I'm old enough to remember the 10% 'luxury tax'.

The same types of people who are now saying 'rich people don't really care about tax increases, they'll still buy planes and boats even if they cost a bit more' were saying it then.

The luxury tax was part of a tax comprise plan demanded by Democrats. It was going to help balance the budget and restore fairness to the tax code. Sound familiar?

People with rudimentary understanding of economics knew that when you raises taxes on something, you get less of that thing. Then as now, this simple concept fell on the deaf ears of the moocher class.

Even most conservative economic observers were shocked at the magnitude of the economic disaster caused by the luxury tax.

American custom boat building was pretty much wiped out, as sales of American made custom boats fell to almost zero. Custom boat building moved to Taiwan. Private aircraft sales of airplanes hit by the tax (those priced above $250000) were crippled.

It cost more to administer the luxury tax than the tax ever collected.

To give credit to Bubba, even though he promised higher taxes, he did help kill the insane luxury tax.

The same is about to happen again. Democrats are going to force insane tax hikes with the sole purpose of satisfying the emotional needs of the moocher class.

Most Democrat leaders (other than the Choomster) know that raising taxes during a recession will drive the economy deeper into the ditch, they don't care.

Senior Democrats will still get rich. They'll get jobs as 7 figure 'coordinators' in non-profits, subsidized green energy firms, or lobbying firms.

It's only the proles like you and me who will suffer.