New User FAA User Fee Being Proposed

[CL300Pilot]

Go to www.nbaa.com and read about this. This will greatly impact all of us.

 

[greygoose]

Go to www.nbaa.com and read about this. This will greatly impact all of us.

Lets make this easier to find.



NBAA Calls Proposed FAA Budget a ‘Sweetheart Deal’ for the Big Airlines

FAA Plan Includes Airline Giveaways, at a Cost to General Aviation and Congressional Authority

Contact: Dan Hubbard at (202) 783-9360 or [email protected]

WASHINGTON, DC, February 14, 2007 - The National Business Aviation Association (NBAA) today denounced a funding plan by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for providing a huge tax break and other giveaways to the large airlines, while punishing the mostly small and mid-size businesses in general aviation, and stripping Congress of most of its role in aviation system funding decisions.

“It’s fitting that the FAA’s plan has been introduced on Valentine’s Day, because it’s a sweetheart deal between the Agency and the commercial airlines,” NBAA President and CEO Ed Bolen said. “Going into the FAA reauthorization process, the airlines wanted three things. They wanted user fees – they got them. They wanted to shift their costs to general aviation – they got that. And they wanted to reduce congressional oversight of the aviation system decision-making – they got that, too.

“As a result of airline lobbying, this proposal gives the giant airlines a major tax break by imposing massive tax hikes and onerous new user fees on the businesses that rely on general aviation. It also essentially removes Congress from its traditional role in overseeing funding decisions for the FAA.”

To underscore his point, Bolen pointed to the following elements in the FAA’s plan:

• A more-than tripling of the fuel taxes paid by general aviation aircraft operators. Under the FAA’s proposal, the taxes would increase more than 300 percent, from 21.8 cents-per-gallon, to 70 cents-per gallon.
• New user fees for general aviation flights that pass through the airspace within several miles of large airports.
• A litany of other new, transactional user fees for pilot licensing, aircraft certifications and other services.
• The creation of a new control board that is expected to be dominated by the airlines and largely influence decisions about aviation system priorities.

“Perhaps the most egregious of these ideas are the new user fees, which necessitate large, administrative bureaucracies,” Bolen said. “We think the Agency should be focused on safety rather than revenue collection. We don't want to see the FAA Administrator adding ‘tax czar’ to his or her list of duties, and we don’t need to create an IRS branch at the Agency.

“The changes proposed by the FAA would overthrow a funding structure that has proven to be stable, reliable and efficient for several decades,” Bolen added. “Revenues going into the Airport and Airways Trust Fund are at record levels, and no less an authority than the Congressional Budget Office has said that the FAA will continue to have sufficient funds to fully support the transition to the Next Generation Air Traffic System. The fact is, the FAA’s scheme promotes radical changes in order to provide a giveaway to the big airlines.

“The general aviation community has long led the way in working to strengthen the nation’s aviation system, and we will continue to do so,” Bolen said. “It’s unfortunate that the FAA has ignored the tens of thousands of small and mid-size businesses, and towns across the country, that rely on general aviation because they have little or no airline service.

“Hopefully, we’ll get a better hearing from those in Congress who traditionally oppose big new government bureaucracies and care about the nation’s small and rural communities,” Bolen concluded.

 

[hyper]

And even easier to do something about it:

http://www.nbaa.org/userfees

 

[Sparse]

At the urging of AOPA, (which everyone in GA should belong to) I receved this response from my Congressman. Interpreting his political doubletalk, it sounds as though he will support it.


Thank you for contacting me regarding the reauthorization of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). I sincerely appreciate the benefit of your views.

As you know, authorizations for aviation programs are set forth in Vision 100 - the Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act (Public Law 108-176) as well as authorization of the existing aviation tax structure that provides revenue for the aviation trust fund, which are set to expire at the end of September, 2007. The U.S. Congress may consider a variety of financing options to provide a sufficient revenue stream for ongoing operational costs and planned infrastructure improvements. Congress may also examine airport financing mechanisms including airport improvement program (AIP) grants, passenger facility charges ( PFCs ), bonds, and other revenue sources.

During the reauthorization debate, Congress may consider a variety of aviation trust fund revenue alternatives that may include keeping the existing passenger ticket and fuel taxes largely or completely intact, moving to a tax revenue scheme based solely on fuel taxes, adopting a user fee-based system, or developing a hybrid scheme that consists of some combination of these alternatives. One hybrid approach that has been discussed is to charge fee-for-service type user fees for airlines and operators of larger general aviation aircraft, while small general aviation users would continue to contribute solely by means of a fuel tax, although these fuel tax rates and structure could differ from what currently exists.

As a member of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Subcommittee on Aviation, I will keep your thoughts in mind as this important issue is debated in the 110th Congress. Hearing the views of all Georgians gives me the opportunity to better understand how important issues could impact the people of Georgia and the future interests of the nation. In the context of future legislative action on this important topic your views will prove most helpful.

For additional information regarding current legislation and my representation of the Third District, I invite you to visit my website at http://www.house.gov/westmoreland



Sincerely,
Lynn A Westmoreland
Member of Congress

 

[finnjl]

This could end the growth in the business aircraft market.....We all could be working at the airlines again and some of us would be back at the bottom of the list at a reional. It is pretty serious, I am suprised there is not too much talk about it from the business aircraft companies. I think the tax increase is from .20 to .80 per gallon (this is only on general aviation fuel not the fuel airlines buy). That is huge. User fees. Fees around 300-400 to process a medical. 1000 to take a written test. 10-30 for every ATC service. I've written my representatives and I got the typical response of keeping my thoughts in mind. If Bush gets this past I may have to reconsider my voting habits. If this gets passed in its current state general aviation would be gone or at least 50% of what it used to be. I figured compianies like Bombardier, Cessna, Raytheon, etc. and all the Fractionals would be lobbying to make sure this does not pass. Well see in October what happens.

 

[jonjuan]

This REALLY is a big deal, gang. IMHO, the biggest looming threat to business aviation. The potential impact makes this industry less stable for professional pilots than most realize. 121 is out for blood.

 

[AirBadger]

Shouldn't the companies that operate large flight departments have a big say in this, like Wal-Mart? You would think they would have their slimey lobbyists fighting against it.

 

[RNObased]

This is a big deal. The airline lobby is strong, however it won't pass in any way, shape or form. Too many of the people that helped put a lot of these politicians in office, own or ride on biz jets. While the airlines think they are powerful, think about where the REAL power brokers of this country ride, sure as hell not on a airliner.

 

[minijet60]

>>>Fees around 300-400 to process a medical. 1000 to take a written test.<<

For real?!?! Where'd these figures come from? And do they apply to GA only? It'd be kinda hard to distinguish a GA ATP/med from a 121 ATP/med.

 

[BeechScrub]

That NBAA link is really easy, I already received an automated response from my reps.

Would it be kosher for NJA and other affected companies to politely let their owners and customers know about this legislation, explain the ramifications, and urge them to use their lobby to oppose it?