Washington State HB-2711

Flyhound

Line Up and Wait
PoA Supporter
Joined
Jan 7, 2014
Messages
697
Location
Washington State
Display Name
Flyhound
Home Airfield
0S9
If you live outside of Washington State, this probably doesn't concern you - but the idea should trouble pilots everywhere. Marko Liias is a State Senator from District 21 in Snohomish County, Washington. That is home to both Paine field (KPAE) and Harvey Field (S43). Senator Liias is chair of the State Senate Transportation Committee, and the primary driver behind HB-2711. The purpose of this legislation is to provide additional support for Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) infrastructure in Washington State. The original version of the bill would have added a 10% excise tax on the purchase of airplanes costing over $500,000. Those funds would have provided the project funding for Senator Liias' SAF infrastructure projects. Wealthy individuals and corporations complained about how unfair this was - taxing them just because they are rich, so the bill was amended to remove the excise tax on planes costing over $500K and adding an extra annual excise tax on all aircraft, raising the registration fees on all aircraft in the state and raising the tax on all aviation fuel sales. That includes 100LL avgas even though planes that use avgas will never benefit from the improved SAF infrastructure. This is another case of removing financial burdens from individuals and corporations that have the most wealth and transferring the burden of a pet project to less fortunate pilots that will NEVER benefit from the project. The increased avgas fuel tax begins on November 1st, 2026. It is just mid October and Washington State already has the highest avgas prices in the country. Take a look at this avgas price map from a fake flight I planned from Puget Sound to Arkansas:
AVGAS-Prices.jpeg
The only airport shown in this picture with fuel prices higher than 100 LL prices than in Puget Sound is a lone airport on the coast of Maryland! Even California has lower avgas prices now, and the situation will get worse when the new taxes show up on November 1st. It seems our legislators wants Washington State to become exclusively for the uber rich. I've sent my concerns to AOPA, to my State Senator and Congressional Reps and to the State Chair of the legislative aviation caucus. I got crickets from everyone except my State House Rep. Even that response basically told me nothing could be done. I'm angry after working hard my whole life and to finally be able to fly in retirement and that privilege is slowly being taxed away from me. Grrrrrr. Any letters of complaint the collective horde could send to Senator Liias (email address above) would be greatly appreciated!
 
That sucks - reach out to AOPA, they might be able to escalate it.
 
That sucks - reach out to AOPA, they might be able to escalate it.
That would be interesting. AOPA has dropped the ball on a lot of things over the years, and rumor has it that it is affecting membership.

So they may just be smart enough to take on the task so they'll have something they can show to the members that they are fighting for the little guy and not just the corporate members as it has appeared over the years.
 
While this sucks, a 10% tax on aircraft over $500k could suck worse.​
 
um, bit of a tangent: those regional price inferences aren't accurate. 19 Oct 26, C TX and W TX area airports have self-serve over $7, full serve over almost $9. About neck and neck with Puget Sound prices right meow. Median income around here is a pittance compared to NW WA, and don't get me started on the topography premium y'all enjoy and pay for.

In short: it's tough all over.
1792453387031.png
 

Attachments

Well now don't I feel like a dumbass lol. oh well, my statement about the voters in this state still stands
 
Well now don't I feel like a dumbass lol. oh well, my statement about the voters in this state still stands
Sadly, the voters never got a chance to express their views. This was passed in the legislature as a pet project of State Senator Marko Liias and was never put before the voters.
 
That sucks - reach out to AOPA, they might be able to escalate it.
I did and AOPA just shrugged. They ran a strong campaign against the 10% excise tax on the sale of planes costing more than $500K because that would have impacted their big supporters. When the costs shifted to the average owner/pilot, that was OK.
 
I was hoping they'd learn after the latest fiasco, but seems like the wine club is still the top priority.
10% on planes over $500k is “real money”. Not that I like taxes, but I’d much rather pay a few more cents in fuel taxes and $20 in registration than hundreds of thousands….

Ideally, it would be neither…
 
um, bit of a tangent: those regional price inferences aren't accurate.
You missed the point hindsight2020. Prices are high everywhere and I get that. What bugs me is that prices will now go higher to support a product I CANNOT use in my airplane. All of the extra funds go to supporting SAF infrastructure in the state. SAF is bioderived jet fuel and you can't put that in an airplane that is powered by a gasoline burning engine. I'm willing to pay a premium for goods and services that even have an adjacent benefit for me. Having my taxes and fees raised for something I cannot benefit from is the egregious part here.
 
Sadly, the voters never got a chance to express their views.
I have to admit I sort of glossed over the "HB" in your original post and read the meat of your message. We never get to vote on HBs.

You can have some "say" if you call, but seems that falls on deaf ears unless they're concerned they're not going to be re-elected.
 
You missed the point hindsight2020. Prices are high everywhere and I get that. What bugs me is that prices will now go higher to support a product I CANNOT use in my airplane. All of the extra funds go to supporting SAF infrastructure in the state. SAF is bioderived jet fuel and you can't put that in an airplane that is powered by a gasoline burning engine. I'm willing to pay a premium for goods and services that even have an adjacent benefit for me. Having my taxes and fees raised for something I cannot benefit from is the egregious part here.
Oh I agree with your point. Mine was a tangent, and I disclosed it as such.
 
Back
Top