Any visitor receive a tax bill from CA?

M

MountainDude

Cleared for Takeoff
PoA Supporter
Joined
Jul 29, 2011
Messages
1,466
Display Name
MountainDude
Home Airfield
KPDX
I understand the state can (try to) charge you a user's tax if you're registered out of state. Property tax by a county is a new one.
 
SLB said:
I understand the state can (try to) charge you a user's tax if you're registered out of state. Property tax by a county is a new one.
Click to expand...
Your understanding is incomplete. The use tax applies to the AQUISITION of the aircraft. Property taxes cover aircraft based in the jurisdiction. California is hardly unique in this and it's not limited to airplanes. My car gets taxed if it is garaged in my county regardless of ownership or the jurisdiction it is registered in.

The only issue that arises here is what constitutes the plane being based in the state. The problem with using ADSB tracking or other records (radio transmissions, FBO reports, etc...) is what constitutes the plane actually being based in the jurisdiction. Just because I live in North Carolina and regularly fly to California for visits doesn't make my plane have a situs for tax purposes in California.

Often, however, you do get spurious requests for tax (both property and use) that you don't owe. Usually, the taxing jurisdiction rescinds these when you provide information that shows that the situs doesn't actually exist.
 
This is a little concerning but I'm trying to figure out how it's gonna work. I flew in to KVNY for a few days back in May. I got a bill for the landing fees which I paid. What are they expecting me to file for this property tax, a state income tax form? Cause that's not gonna happen.
 
So from what I read, just parking an aircraft worth more than $100k in L.A. county can get you taxed 1.0-1.2% of the aircraft's value? (For an aircraft worth $300 grand, that's $3,000-$3,200 just for parking).

One thing I don't get is how the time is taxed. The article says "Aircraft are taxed at 1.0-1.2 percent of their assessed value while they’re in the state." Does that mean it's a payment like per day, or is it just a one-time tax?

Either way, it's just California being California.
 
flyingron said:
Your understanding is incomplete. The use tax applies to the AQUISITION of the aircraft. Property taxes cover aircraft based in the jurisdiction. California is hardly unique in this and it's not limited to airplanes. My car gets taxed if it is garaged in my county regardless of ownership or the jurisdiction it is registered in.

The only issue that arises here is what constitutes the plane being based in the state. The problem with using ADSB tracking or other records (radio transmissions, FBO reports, etc...) is what constitutes the plane actually being based in the jurisdiction. Just because I live in North Carolina and regularly fly to California for visits doesn't make my plane have a situs for tax purposes in California.

Often, however, you do get spurious requests for tax (both property and use) that you don't owe. Usually, the taxing jurisdiction rescinds these when you provide information that shows that the situs doesn't actually exist.
Click to expand...
Wasn't there a case in NY where they tried to assess a user tax after an emergency landing was made there?
 
This feels a bit click-baitish. In one of the comments: "Without wanting to comment on the right or wrong of property taxes generally, this is not aimed at visitors. It is aimed at aircraft that are trying to avoid the local tax by being registered elsewhere, but are “habitually” kept in California. In your case, ADS-B data is your friend, not the problem. If challenged you can easily prove that you are a legitimate visitor to the state – you flew in, and you flew back out again."

That certainly isn't definitive but it certainly makes sense. And the context for the statement “If you have an aircraft and it’s here in L.A. County then it’s assessable for the period of time it’s in the county,” would be important.

I'm not saying the worst case isn't happening; I'm saying it feels click-baitish.
 
MountainDude said:
I plan to fly to CA, but want to minimize the risk of dealing with this.
Click to expand...
Did you read the PDF that was embedded in that article? They aren't trying to hit up visitors, they are trying to catch those that are basing their planes in Los Angeles but evading taxation.

Even if you accidentally get caught up in their net, odds are good that you could explain your way out. That is, unless you really are basing your plane there and trying to exploit a tax evasion technique.
 
Llewtrah381 said:
This feels a bit click-baitish. In one of the comments: "Without wanting to comment on the right or wrong of property taxes generally, this is not aimed at visitors. It is aimed at aircraft that are trying to avoid the local tax by being registered elsewhere, but are “habitually” kept in California. In your case, ADS-B data is your friend, not the problem. If challenged you can easily prove that you are a legitimate visitor to the state – you flew in, and you flew back out again."
Click to expand...
If that were true, they wouldn't be trying to set Situs as low as "present in-state 5% of the time" which is absurd on its face.

I think my state gooberment are over-reaching hard on this one, but... it is gonna take a big fish to slap them back with a lawsuit. Us little fish may be bycatch until that happens :/

I visit in-laws and land at LGB in LA county. It's no skin off of my nose to do FUL in OC instead and shoot LA County the proverbial finger.
 
"It is also important to emphasize that simply flying into Los Angeles County does not make an aircraft subject to property tax here. Assessors use established legal standards and methodologies to determine where an aircraft is habitually situated and whether it has sufficient taxable presence in California. (See CA State Board of Equalization, Assessors’ Handbook, Section 577), Aircraft that merely visit or fly through the county generally would not be subject to assessment here."
 
MountainDude said:
I read online that some people flew to CA to visit and were sent a tax bill.
Apparently, you do not have to be a CA resident to be taxed (that is super weird).
Anyone have any info on whether this is true and how to prevent it?
I plan to fly to CA, but want to minimize the risk of dealing with this.

avbrief.com

L.A. County Using ADS-B To Collect Property Tax on Aircraft (Updated with AOPA Comment) - AvBrief.com

Most aircraft in California are subject to a 1.0-1.2% property tax.
avbrief.com avbrief.com
Click to expand...
I did, years ago. My Domicile and Residency was Washington. I was a Snowbirder and went South for the winters. I bought a plane in Florida and flew it to, and kept in California over the winter. A year or so later I got the bill. I didn’t know it at the time, but yeah, that’s California law. What I found out is if the plane is in ‘transit’ you are exempt. I explained the plane was in transit and they said ok. Fast forward another year and the sales/use tax folk contact me. They wanted sales/use tax. That’s when I found out about the ‘half the year’ in California rule. I lucked out. I had crossed the border out of California literally the day before and beat it. Thankfully I was able to get an invoice from a parking fee and buying fuel in Medford Oregon that night.
 
SLB said:
I understand the state can (try to) charge you a user's tax if you're registered out of state. Property tax by a county is a new one.
Click to expand...
Property Tax is a State thang but County’s administer and collect it
 
donjohnston said:
You better hope that you never have a short work task to perform in NJ. I used to get notices of income tax due because I would teach 2-5 day networking classes there.
Click to expand...
Professional Athletes deal with this all the time. Gotta pay if you’re the visiting team
 
People attempt to use out of state LLCs and out of state registrations to avoid use taxes. Using ADSB data to determine where an aircraft is based isn’t difficult, but it also isn’t perfect.
 
donjohnston said:
You better hope that you never have a short work task to perform in NJ. I used to get notices of income tax due because I would teach 2-5 day networking classes there.
Click to expand...
Airline crews based in CA but who live elsewhere have to prove every year that over 50% of their flights are outside of CA. If they don't the CA will tax their income. At Southwest the base Coordinators have he forms needed/
When I was stationed in CA when I was in the Marines I had to submit a form every year stating that I was not a CA citizen so I wasn't subject to CA income taxes.
 
jayhawk74 said:
When I was stationed in CA when I was in the Marines I had to submit a form every year stating that I was not a CA citizen so I wasn't subject to CA income taxes.
Click to expand...
On the flip side, having grown up in CA, I entered the AF from there and, whenever we were in the state we were subject to income taxes. But outside, we weren’t - and we claimed CA as our state of residence so we were exempt everywhere else. Then when he came of age, our son got in-state tuition in CA even though we were living in TX. Not bad…
 
CA came after CA based airline pilots in the 1990s that were residents elsewhere but domicild/based in CA. in some instances, they would just contact airline to try to withold taxes on pay stub, most often they would send a bill for back takes and potential garnishment. it was up to pilot to prove he didn't meet residency requirements. I think ALPA got involved.

there is a rather famous case where a nevada guy , not sure he was a pilot or small business owner, fought for years after CA put liens on a bunch of his accounts and he eventually won. it cost him something $300k in legal fees.

in the 1980s or early 99s they even wanted airlines to collect sales tax for any sales while in flight over California....headset, liquor sales....which was fought and never made it to law.

they have the reputation of accusing many and putting citizen in position of proving they are not resident....some can cure this with a call or letter, others need to document it, others have to go to court.

as far as boats and planes go, each state has different time frames how long it stays in state....but from personal experience, be wary of buying a California plane and not getting it out of state within a short time as they will demand sales tax...im not sure what this period is anymore, but there is typically an affidavit if you keep it in state for maintenance work and it's not being used. this may also apply if you break down there or have extensive work done and adds days the plane is in state over a years time.

CA still comes after out of state pilots and others, and has a sizable tax investigator division ....they use public info to make their case you meet residency requirements, and can get warrants to see your credit card and cell phone usage, and cumulative count how many days you are there and simply deem you a resident and garnish paychecks or sue you if they think you meet the requirements.

if you are aopa member, they may likely have more info and help if you get a bill. the state is broke, so expect to see more of this stuff. I'm based on lax but live elsewhere....they make me pay into the state workers comp insurance even though I have it through employer...I have no choice.

they are currently cracking down on cars registered in LLCs from montana ... they are tracking them and making it a criminal matter of fraud rather than just sending bill, to set but if fear I suppose. . I'm sure more to come.
 
They do this with boats. It’s a sales tax but they call it a use tax if boat doesn’t change ownership. This is for Florida.

NYC is the same. You can’t claim residency in Florida if you spend most of the time in NYC.
 
It sounds like visiting CA for a week or so has a tiny chance of triggering a tax bill, which can easily be disputed.
Thanks all.
 
When I was stationed in California as active duty military with a home state of Florida, California wanted to tax my military income. They weren't successful. I think sometimes they just count on people paying without ever challenging them.
 
dans2992 said:
Is the onus on them to prove how long it was there?
Click to expand...
I think the county assessor has a Grima Wormtongue whispering sweet ADS-B and AI nothings into his/her ear. I mount strongly in suspicion of Vector still.

The people making up this 5% = Situs bullsniz are not the same people who have to prove anything nor live with the repurcussions. They'll be too busy enjoying some party favors in the back room with "V" branding on them. Presumably in the shape of samsonite suitcase.
 
Iowa recently passed a local option sales tax (LOST) law allowing towns and cities to charge 1% sales tax for transactions delivered in their jurisdiction. As I wrote to my representatives, there are very few retails establishments NOT in a city limit. That means that I have to pay the 1% tax if I buy in town. But, I live in the country, outside the town. I am not allowed to vote on the tax. Half of the sales tax is used to reimburse in-town property taxes. You don't have to live there, just own property. So Aunt Maud, who owns a house in Oxford but lives in Miami, gets a rebate on the property tax she pays, but I, who pay the 1%, don't get any relief on my rural property tax. I'll grant the Aunt Maud probably didn't vote for the tax. If I buy something delivered to my rural address, I don't owe LOST on it. To avoid getting lumped into the local town, I have to be careful to use my full nine-digit zip code and hope the vendor's tax software programs can discriminate based on it. It's great deal for the town dwellers and totally taxation without representation to the rural folks who have to buy in town.
 
Isn’t funny how the same people who think local governments should pay for the airports they use with local income, real estate and sales taxes really object to paying local taxes on their planes.
 
I used to ferry jetliners for leasing companies, delivery from on airline to a paint shop and final delivery to new owner. even most foreign operated planes, even if leasing Co may not be based in US, keep the usa N# as it's easier to repo and other things. we would ferry the thing to a tax free, or lower tax, jurisdiction for actual closing to save taxes which were obviously way more than cost of the flights. California was never ever an option.
 
Clip4 said:
Isn’t funny how the same people who think local governments should pay for the airports they use with local income, real estate and sales taxes really object to paying local taxes on their planes.
Click to expand...
Most municipalities refuse to use ANY local money for airports, hence landing fees, fuel flowage, etc etc.
 
dans2992 said:
Most municipalities refuse to use ANY local money for airports, hence landing fees, fuel flowage, etc etc.
Click to expand...
Based on what data. FPR in Fort Pierce, MIE in Muncie Indiana, KGT in Pigeon Forge all do and thats just pulling airports out of an hat. Even Whitman with all the AirVenture airshow revenue available gets local $$.
 
Last edited:
It's all true. First of all, airplanes are considered luxuries by the political powers in California, even small ones, and California owners are sent a property tax bill every year for their airplane. It's about 1% the value of the plane. I know, because I pay it. Property taxes are collected by county tax collectors, and the rates vary by county. Counties can tack on extra taxes above a base rate if approved by voters. These are to fund almost anything the voters vote for, say supporting fire departments, community colleges, water infrastructure, you name it. Owners must also disclose all additional equipment added to their plane since it came out of the factory. This is so the county can accurately assess the value and increase the assessed tax to account for improvements. For an old plane, that means digging through years of log books to figure this out! If you have a Garmin G750Xi for instance installed in your Mooney, expect a higher bill than one with an old Nav/Com or two. The county can inspect and audit the plane too if they have their doubts about the reported information. They can also sieze your plane and sell it at a tax lien auction if you don't pay the tax bills. These taxes are treated very much like real estate taxes, in that material improvements on the asset raise the yearly tax bill. California also assesses sales tax on all airplane sales, new or used. That can be quite expensive, between about 7-10% depending on the owner's county and city of residence. This tax regime is agressively enforced too.

And yes, California definitely taxes transient aircraft. I know less about this than I do about the property tax on planes since I live here. However, I will tell you I recently met a guy who flew here for two months from Texas (where he resided) to visit his 90+ something year-old mother who was ill and needed his help. He had a really good looking Bellanca Viking tied down next to my plane at the time. He told me that he was being assessed two months of property tax on his plane for his visit by the state of California. So it appears they are tracking visits of transient aircraft and issuing pro-rated property tax bills. Visit at your own financial peril.

If all this is not bad enough, I have even worse tax stories about California taxing non-residents I can tell, but they are not directly related to aviation so I'll keep those to myself! Incidentally I would say the majority of voters here support all this. Most tax increases are routinely rubber-stamped by the voting public here and have been as long as I've been here (about 36 years). BTW I also think most Californians, and certainly those in the ruling class, think their way of life and governance are superior to that of most other states and they'd be more than happy to impose it nationwide given the chance. I really think they feel the rest of the country, while resisting at first, would ultimately appreciate it! I don't happen to feel this way myself, but I'm in the minority here. Oh yes, the weather, wine, and natural beauty are fabulous here!! (so good it might even make up for some of the governing insanity)
 
Last edited:
davela said:
It's all true. First of all, airplanes are considered luxuries by the political powers in California, even small ones, and California owners are sent a property tax bill every year for their airplane. It's about 1% the value of the plane. I know, because I pay it. Property taxes are collected by county tax collectors, and the rates vary by county. Counties can tack on extra taxes above a base rate if approved by voters. These are to fund almost anything the voters vote for, say supporting fire departments, community colleges, water infrastructure, you name it. Owners must also disclose all additional equipment added to their plane since it came out of the factory. This is so the county can accurately assess the value and increase the assessed tax to account for improvements. For an old plane, that means digging through years of log books to figure this out! If you have a Garmin G750Xi for instance installed in your Mooney, expect a higher bill than one with an old Nav/Com or two. The county can inspect and audit the plane too if they have their doubts about the reported information. They can also sieze your plane and sell it at a tax lien auction if you don't pay the tax bills. These taxes are treated very much like real estate taxes, in that material improvements on the asset raise the yearly tax bill. California also assesses sales tax on all airplane sales, new or used. That can be quite expensive, between about 7-10% depending on the owner's county and city of residence. This tax regime is agressively enforced too.
Click to expand...

If your plane is more than 35 years old and you have it on a public display once a month you don't have to pay property tax

Aircraft of Historical Significance property-tax exemption under California Revenue and Taxation Code § 220.5. To qualify, the aircraft must be either:

  • At least 35 years old; or
  • A type/model with fewer than five known examples worldwide.
Click to expand...
 
Supposedly tax people would walk the ramp and marina docks taking down tail and boat numbers.
 
AlphaPilotFlyer said:
CA came after CA based airline pilots in the 1990s that were residents elsewhere but domicild/based in CA. in some instances, they would just contact airline to try to withold taxes on pay stub, most often they would send a bill for back takes and potential garnishment. it was up to pilot to prove he didn't meet residency requirements. I think ALPA got involved.
Click to expand...

My cousin was a pilot for American back in the 90's... he was LAX based for a while; however, still a resident of Pennsylvania. He paid PA state tax, nothing to California. Same thing when he was NYC/JFK based.. nothing to New York..

On the other hand, is you're a pilot for a commuter where you spend most of your flight time say BUR > OAK > BUR three times a day, but live in Arizona, yes you pay CA tax.

davela said:
And yes, California definitely taxes transient aircraft. I know less about this than I do about the property tax on planes since I live here. However, I will tell you I recently met a guy who flew here for two months from Texas (where he resided) to visit his 90+ something year-old mother who was ill and needed his help. He had a really good looking Bellanca Viking tied down next to my plane at the time. He told me that he was being assessed two months of property tax on his plane for his visit by the state of California. So it appears they are tracking visits of transient aircraft and issuing pro-rated property tax bills. Visit at your own financial peril.
Click to expand...

What I understand is that for private GA aircraft, the county will normally ask: Where does the aircraft go when the trip is over? And, then base the tax as of January 1.
 
This story has a little more detail.

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-...-county-tightens-tax-rules-out-state-aircraft

LA county particularly aggressive-as little as 19 days gets them to go after you. Other counties 30-60 days. But nebulous and I guess it would depend on how much of a budget deficit the county is facing...

Not a fan of California's over aggressive taxation stance. Wish it would occur to our legislators that maybe, just maybe, they should stop spending so much money...

On the other hand, I do see where some of this is coming from. As an andecdote, a number of years back I lived in a well to do neighborhood of LA County. My next door neighbor had 3-4 cars always parked at his home. Nice car's-Land Rover, Porsche, Maserati, and more. Easily 300k of cars. All had Idaho plates. All sitting next door for 350 of 365 days. So yeah, there is that.

I never liked the guy but am not in favor of CA doing a big data grab of Flock data to nail that guy, nor am I a fan of using ADSB, a safety system, to dig for gold.

So you're fine if you're not here that long. Maybe stay out of LA county though...(This applies even if you're not flying!)
 
Clip4 said:
Based on what data. FPR in Fort Pierce, MIE in Muncie Indiana, KGT in Pigeon Forge all do and thats just pulling airports out of an hat. Even Whitman with all the AirVenture airshow revenue available gets local $$.
Click to expand...
Falcon Field in Mesa, AZ claims that the airport is allegedly not “self sufficient” (the 5th busiest GA airport in the country) and since the city refuses to “subsidize aircraft owners”, they need a $20 minimum landing fee per landing!
 
dans2992 said:
Falcon Field in Mesa, AZ claims that the airport is allegedly not “self sufficient” (the 5th busiest GA airport in the country) and since the city refuses to “subsidize aircraft owners”, they need a $20 minimum landing fee per landing!
Click to expand...

This is just a lot of nonsensical hand waving by county governments. They get federal dollars for airport improvement projects. This money does not come from the county that Mesa resides. The last budget report that I could see online shows actual airport reviews (for 2023) to exceed the budget. So a small surplus. Seems to me the county just wants to spend more money on something else, or rearranged the buckets of money away from the airport into some other county project of need.

The problem is that the county just hasn't thought this one out. While your average cirrus pilot will grumble, but will pay, what about all the flight schools? Think about a TOL's session. say 6 TOL's in 1.5 hrs with your CFI and 172. That's pushing 600$ if you charge 20$ per landing. Students and flight schools will just move on to a different airport because of the cost considerations. The airport might still get some landing revenue, but it will be less and offset by the lack of taxes and paid employees when the flight school and its employees leave the county...

Totally get why everyone is getting a private LLC... May not work forever, but seems to be something to consider.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top