flyingcheesehead said:
Remember that airlines do not pay fuel taxes, they (or rather, their passengers) pay per-ticket taxes instead. I also have not heard ANYTHING suggesting that the fuel taxes will be decreased if we have user fees. The FAA claims to be short of money, and that suggests that we will only be adding user fees, not subtracting anything.
The problem with user fees lies in the concept, not the specific implementation. Once there is an infrastructure in place for collecting user fees, we will no longer have much control over what happens to them in the future. Remember when the ADIZ went up, and it was "temporary"? Congress even ordered the FAA to justify it. Well, it doesn't look like the ADIZ is going anywhere, and even AOPA has given up on trying to get rid of it completely. Expect the same progression if we have user fees of any sort whatsoever.
This MUST be stopped.
Kent I see your point, and I agree that the userfees will possibly set a precedent which will be very hard to shake, and could eventually effect light general aviation. This alone might make a good reason to fight user fees.
But,
The FAA is funded by fuel taxes and excise taxes which are charged to passengers on the purchase of their tickets and to freight customers. The airlines also pay a tax on their fuel, of 4.3 cents per gallon, which is less than the 19 cents we pay and the 21 cents Jet A GA users pay. This income from the taxes goes into a trust fund which is used to support the operation of the NAS, and for airport improvement projects. These projects are critical to GA, and unfortunately would be most likely to be cut if the FAA was required to cut its budget. In addition to funding airport improvements, receipt of these funds makes it illegal to shut an airport, a critical problem in GA aviation right now.
The airlines claim that they use a disproportionate percentage of FAA services to the amount of money which they put into the trust fund. This is probably a false argument since the airlines also cause most of the congestion at airports and in the airspace. However the corporate sector hasn't been entirely forthcoming about their use of airspace either.
-The FAA is facing a budget shortfall this year. I can't remember how much it is right now. Since none of us want the FAA to cut services (cuts would be felt most by GA) there are basically three options to cover the operating shortfall. 1) have congress cover the shortfall with money out of the general income tax base. Given the currently huge deficits the country is running, this probably won't happen. 2) charge user fees to increase revenue 3) raise fuel and excise taxes across the board.
The user fees, as proposed, will only affect heavy and Jet-A powered segments of GA, and will not be charged to light users. Don't believe AOPA and NBAA's numbers for fund contribution to use ratios, since these numbers fail to seperate the GA sector into its to component parts, Light private flights and Corporate flights.
Corporate aviation uses a disproportionately high percentage of the services to the money they pay in fees. Almost all corporate flights are operated on IFR flight plans, and many arrive into busy terminal areas. Still they pay only 2 cents more per gallon of gas over the light GA (piston) sector, who very rarely uses IFR services or arrives in terminal areas. The Corporate sector is receiving a free ride on light GA and the airlines.
If the FAA is unable to charge userfees to the corporate sector of GA, than they will next start looking in other places. The most obvious source will be an across the board increase in the fuel and excise taxes that we all pay. An increased fuel tax will be disastrous to us light piston folks.
I really am not sure that I have a problem making the corporate sector of Aviation pay more in fees. I, and 90 percent of the people on this board will never set foot in a corporate jet. I worry that in absence of corporate jet user fees, the taxes for the rest of us bug-smasher pilots and cattle car riders will go up. The FAA nor AOPA had discussed what they plan to do if they can't raise user fees or get money from congress. The obvious answer seems to be a general increase in fuel and excise taxes. Most of us are not in a position to pay much more for gas. Most corporate flight departments won't be hurt by having to pay more per trip. (Okay they may have to down grade to a lowly hawker from a G-V.
)
Clearly, the ATA has an agenda here, but so does NBAA and AOPA who both represent the corporate sectors of general Aviation.
So until I know more about what user fees entail for all of us, I'm going to be VERY careful what I wish for. No user fees could potentially mean much higher prices at the pump for all of us.
Edit, sorry for such a long post, but I've spent a lot of time thinking about this. I know this view is unpopular here....waiting for the negative reps. to flood in.... Just please read my post first.