Smartskies

[bravodude]

Everyone should check this out and send a letter to your congressmen.

www.smartskies.org

 

[tailhookah]

You mean a letter to support the corporate world paying much more for their fair share of the atc usage fees.... right? It's about time the uber rich pay their fair share....

tail

ps- do you still work for citation shares....

 

[Dizel8]

I certainly don't want to see GA taxed out of business, by GA I mean the cubs, cherokees and Cessna, but while I may be wrong, I do not consider CS, Flexjet or netjets to be GA.

 

[Allen1]

You mean a letter to support the corporate world paying much more for their fair share of the atc usage fees.... right? It's about time the uber rich pay their fair share....

tail

ps- do you still work for citation shares....

Yeah because the airlines really pay there fair share and the govt never gave them billions of dollars, or wait they did. Despite what the airlines say GA does pay there fair share and is not the reason for all the delays. We pay plenty of taxes on fuel and pay plenty of ramp and landing fees to the airports we land at. Yeah lets give control of the nations airspace to airline mgmt who can't manage there way out of paper bag and penalize companies that know how to make a profit, great idea!

 

[bravodude]

The point is the Airlines shouldn't have to shoulder the burden of paying for the atc system. while i agree that a 172 or a pa-28 shouldn't have to pay anymore then they already do, the GV operator can afford to pay his fair share. corporations should also have to pay its not just up to the airlines anymore.

 

[GogglesPisano]

I don't think users should pay solely by a tax on fuel. A Learjet uses just as much airspace and receives just as many services as an airliner but pays much less for those services because it pays less in fuel taxes.

 

[Flopgut]

The fractional concept was based on using an interchange agreement among owners to avert FAR 135 rules for: wx reporting, required rwy lengths, AND not paying federal excise taxes (10%) on total distance/mileage charges for FAR 135 ops. Of course it was the partnership aspects that made it a big advantage over jet ownership, but the operational AND tax loopholes were fully exploited. I don't want the airplanes with spark plugs taxed big time, or the regular charter types who've always paid the FET. However, these fractionals could stand to pay a lot more!

 

[Allen1]

I think the airlines were repaid there burden with the govt bailout and getting rid of all the pensions. The airlines aren't just trying to get fractionals to pay there fair share they want them to pay it all just so they can make there tickets 20 dollars cheaper. I think are pax can pay the average amount of tax every other pax pay per flight. Airlines should pay more since are pax don't use TSA the airlines should also help fund that too.

 

[Flopgut]

I think if we truly got into the greater tax scheme, we would discover the real reason fractionals have grown so much is that the ultra rich have simply grown in number. They've done so by not paying a comensurate amount of the tax burden. That's not only in private jet travel, but everything they do. And that's probably going to ebb and flow a bit...probably should, really. 91K ought to pay the same amout of taxes the airlines do.

As to your comment:

"I think the airlines were repaid there burden with the govt bailout and getting rid of all the pensions."

What the he!! are you talking about? The ATSB loaned out a FRACTION of the money they were in charge of (it wasn't even theirs to begin with), they witheld TWO attempts by UAL to get a loan (singlehandedly ruined thier pensions) and then had the AUDACITY to report a PROFIT on the money! It was the taxpayers money! If all they were supposed to do was make money with it they should have simply invested it. He!!, they would have made enough to give the airlines what they needed and STILL made a profit. It's was ridiculous! They could double the taxes on frax ops and it still would not be as unfair as the airlines have been treated.

BTW, your grammar is terrible.

 

[FlyBoeingJets]

Yeah because the airlines really pay there fair share and the govt never gave them billions of dollars, or wait they did. Despite what the airlines say GA does pay there fair share...

Airlines are considered a national asset. Part of the transportation system that is protected by the Railway Labor act. They haul U.S. mail too.

Congress thinks airlines have a greater value than you do. So much so they make sure courts have the tools available to kick labor in the jimmies at every avaliable opportunity in the name of national security. That is why there may be a tax advantage built in for them.

Corporate jets are not considered a national asset and are luxury items. They SHOULD be more heavily taxed.

You want fair? Not gonna happen when you talk about politics.

 

[BOOZENEWS]

Airlines are considered a national asset. Part of the transportation system that is protected by the Railway Labor act. They haul U.S. mail too.

Then why the hell were they deregulated in 1978. If they are so important why doesn't congress reregulate them.


Can't have it both ways.

As for the right to strike, this ought to be take all the way up to the supreme court sooner rather than later. The union leaders and many (not all) rank and file airline pilots have no stones.

 

[Alamanach]

You want fair?...

No, I want money. "Fair" is a specious idea we teach to children in the course of making them morally upright. There's no such thing as "fair".

Airlines themselves provide the perfect example. Does a first-class seat really entail three times the costs of an economy seat? Of course not. But in any business, the price you charge has nothing to do with the costs you incur; the price you charge is dependent only on what the customer is willing to pay. If you can get three times the money out of him for only, say, 1.5 times the cost, go for it. You make your money where you can.

This stupid "fair share" argument for user fees completely ignores this. The airlines pay somewhat more for ATC services (and it's not an outlandish amount more, by the way) because they need it more. A GA pilot can simply choose not to fly. A corporate passenger can leave the GV at home and fly first class once in a while. Those guys have choices. But an airline can't choose not to fly; flying is the only thing an airline does. The airlines are cornered, and that's why they pay a little more. If we make it "fair", we're going to choke off revenue and have fewer funds for ATC.

Beware of this push for user fees. All it is is an attempt to strangle GA in an attempt to stop the VLJ air taxi services.

 

[finnjl]

check your facts corporate aviation pays much more in fuel taxes, about 29 times more than the airlines. The airlines get a huge tax break in fuel taxes. By the way the airlines do not pay a penny out of their pocket in taxes. It is a very small fee that the passengers pay on the price of a ticket. It is collected by the airlines and transferred to the general aviation fund. Do not think for one minute that airlines would reduce tickets by 3 dollars per segment if congress changes the taxing scheme. As a matter of fact I think the airlines should pay the same amount of taxes on jet fuel as everybody else does. You do not hear the airline type people letting that information out to the public. I am kind of tired of the airlines and all their crying all the time. They have so many breaks it is unreal. So if you really think about it the passenger in the corporate jet pays much more per person per gallon of Jet A into the general aviation fund than the passengers on the airline anyday based soley on the cost of fuel.

 

[DGdaPilot]

My fear is that this is gonna be written by someone with no clue between the differences of fracs, GA, and airlines. New students and weekend warriors are gonna be choked out.

 

[time builder]

check your facts corporate aviation pays much more in fuel taxes, about 29 times more than the airlines. The airlines get a huge tax break in fuel taxes.

Exactly. For this reason, my company gets most of its fuel from DHL and UPS fueling contracts, because if they don't, they'll pay $2 more per gallon at the FBO.

While I agree that Corporate Aviation is a luxury, I do think they're paying enough in fuel tax to be considered their "fair share."

On the other hand, if the motivation is to discourage people from using personal transportation, and promote mass transit to save fuel consumption and decrease pollution, I'll go for that.