Senate bill for FAA reauthorization

[infotango]

The proposed senate bill will keep fuel taxes for piston powered GA exactly where they currently are, and introduce departure fees for turbine powered corporate aviation and commercial aviation.
The senate, according to the article posted, is typically more airline friendly (less GA friendly) than the house, whose members depend more on GA for transport, so I'd guess this represents a worst case for GA.

Personally as someone who flies piston GA a lot, the airlines a little, and corporate GA never, I like the proposal. If you can afford to pay for a Gulfstream, the extra taxes shouldn't be too much of a burden. I've never really liked the fact that we were lumped in the same category as the jet flying corporate mongols.
Still I worry that someday the user fees could be applied to my segment of GA. This is certainly a relief for the time being.

http://thehill.com/business--lobby/...to-lighten-burden-on-airlines-2007-05-01.html

 

[Michael]

If you can afford to pay for a Gulfstream, the extra taxes shouldn't be too much of a burden.

Thats exactly what taxpayers are saying about pistons. If they can afford a plane, they can afford to pay the taxes. Why is it fair for one group but not another? The gulfstream group already pays more in fuel taxes, landing fees...etc...

 

[Ken Ibold]

I'm more concerned about long-term management structure and capital projects funding than the specific level of taxation.

 

[SCCutler]

Translated from German, 1937:

"They're only going after the Jews, they're no threat to us."

Wrong is wrong, even if it skips over us. The ATC system was constructed to serve the needs of the airline industry, and if you removed every single GA plane from the sky, they'd still have to have it, and in essentially the same form.

 

[bkreager]

It will start out as fees just for turbine drivers, then why not add twin pistons down the road, then singles, etc. We need to stop any user fees from starting, so that they can't easily be expanded.

 

[infotango]

I'm not sure that is the case with corporate aviation.
I've seen a collection of GV's and Citations sitting at LGA but never a piston powered plane, Same goes for EWR. New York approach frequency is very crowded in this area, and a lot of that traffic is corporate pilots.

The light plane crowd has put a lot of money into this fight, and the corporate crowd has put very very little. This is what happens. The money for this fight has come mostly from AOPA and EAA which is vastly dominated by piston drivers, and from the NBAA which also contains a very large number of piston operators.
Fact is we know that higher fees will kill us, while the execs are able to soak up the difference. Priced Citations per hour lately?

Remember Boyer saying that he had put ads in some executive magazine asking corporate execs to help fight user fees? What happened to that? If they were so vocal, how come this was the bill that was passed?

We have too many threats facing GA right now, than to worry about higher costs for the higest end users of the system. If and when it comes down to increased fees for GA (again) we'll fight them with all we have that time around.
(Also remember that the senate bill is not the final version.)
Having user fees off the table for now would do nothing to prevent the FAA from asking for them five years from now and ad nasuem. Having precedent that we are protecting light GA from increased taxes IMHO is more important that a symbolic defeat of user fees.

 

[KennyFlys]

I saw that story in Avweb the other day. At first glance, it seems great on the surface. But, in government things seem to have a way to creep over everyone sooner or later. First, I still see it as a way to get more money, not make the costs more evenly distributed based on use.

Think "AMT" when you consider that thought. It will start out affecting only a few but give it time... and Congress won't do a dang thing about it. This is not a compromise. Showing true advances in services and function from the existing revenues would be a beginning to compromise. Recent experiences with FSS proves the opposite is happening.

 

[Cap'n Jack]

As was stated earlier, the general public considers anyone with a plane to be rich- nevermind that I don't have all kinds of fancy toys (I rent the plane).
It's the camel's nose under the tent.

 

[Chache]

.....and remember


when instituted, Federal Income Tax


was a voluntary contribution ...