flightsimer
Topic Author
Posts: 933
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:34 am

$100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:45 pm

Just in... 100 dollar fees were passed for the 2013 budget.

http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news...udesAviationUserFees_206179-1.html
Commercial Pilot- SEL, MEL, Instrument
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5303
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:49 pm

Quoting flightsimer (Thread starter):
Just in... 100 dollar fees were passed for the 2013 budget.

No budget for 2013 has been passed. This is simply a proposition in the President's budget.
 
John
Posts: 1253
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 1999 10:47 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:52 pm

It's about time. Commercial airlines are already taxed to the hilt. Private(corporate) aviation needs to pay it's fair share.
 
CZ346
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 2:57 pm

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:56 pm

Quoting John (Reply 2):

Do...you know..ANTHING about aviation and how it works? Or the politics behind this matter?

[Edited 2012-02-15 05:58:02]
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11029
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:15 pm

Quoting John (Reply 2):
Commercial airlines are already taxed to the hilt. Private(corporate) aviation needs to pay it's fair share.

in the US taxes and user fees are looked at by the politicians as two different things, even though in reality they are the same thing. Commerical Airlines do not pay a 'user fee' to fly in the national airspace. There is no reason why private, corporate, or anyone else needs to pay these 'fees' either.
 
flightsimer
Topic Author
Posts: 933
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:34 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:22 pm

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 1):

Ya you are right, it has not been passed by legislation yet. The first article i read was not the one I linked to and was misleading...

However, it is important enough to say it has been officially adopted by this administration. Hopefully legislation will still reject it.
Commercial Pilot- SEL, MEL, Instrument
 
MountainFlyer
Posts: 487
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 10:19 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:06 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 4):
Commerical Airlines do not pay a 'user fee' to fly in the national airspace.

No, but the passengers pay excise taxes. When you buy a ticket, there is a 7.5% federal excise tax tacked on among several other "fees" (segment charges, facilities fees, security fee). This has been part of the argument of airlines is that they are unfairly subsidizing the system through passenger taxes. However, corporate operators argue that they pay their fair share through fuel taxes.

To me this is just another political stunt. The $100 fee exempts piston planes, so it is largely targeting the corporate market. One of the current administrations pushes all along is to drive up taxes on corporate jet owners. Previously it was tried through elimination of some income tax credits, and now this is just a back door way of taxing them.

One thing that seems to be going largely unnoticed is that the same budget calls for an increase in the security fee that is tacked onto a passenger airline ticket. Currently it is $2.50, and if this budget passes, it will double to $5.00 and ultimately triple to $7.50 by 2018.
SA-227; B1900; Q200; Q400; CRJ-2,7,9; 717; 727-2; 737-3,4,5,7,8,9; 747-2; 757-2,3; 767-3,4; MD-90; A319, 320; DC-9; DC-1
 
mcdu
Posts: 929
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 5:23 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:25 pm

User fees for corporate aviation are needed. The airlines contribute greatly to the system the corps use for free. As a result the CEO in his global express has his usage paid by the current passengers for the airlines. Having them pay is the responsible thing to do. Also this does not affect "Joe Weekend Warrior" and his C172 playing pilot. The turbine limit moves the charges to the necessary parties. Therefore the GA group can continue to fly without paying. This is about business and the burden they place on the system paid for by the airlines. If I could levy the fee it would be layered based on AC type and amount of usage. Much like a landing fee at a major airport that the Bizjets already pay to use the airports facilities they should pay for airspace too.
 
71Zulu
Posts: 1624
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 12:42 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:29 pm

Quoting MountainFlyer (Reply 6):
The $100 fee exempts piston planes...

Even in flight school and 135 operations?
Clickable links only please!
 
cmf
Posts: 3120
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 11:22 pm

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:34 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 4):
in the US taxes and user fees are looked at by the politicians as two different things, even though in reality they are the same thing. Commerical Airlines do not pay a 'user fee' to fly in the national airspace. There is no reason why private, corporate, or anyone else needs to pay these 'fees' either.

Because there is an exemption for aviation in the no subsidizing mantra?   
Don’t repeat earlier generations mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
 
MountainFlyer
Posts: 487
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 10:19 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:37 pm

Quoting mcdu (Reply 7):
The airlines contribute greatly to the system the corps use for free.

That's not entirely true. Corporate pays taxes on fuel. By that same logic, everyone who doesn't drive a commercial big rig or bus on the highway should pay a fee as well. I use as much fuel in my car in a year as a big rig does in a couple of days, therefore the big rig pays way more taxes than I do that goes into the highway fund, but I still get to use all the same roads they do. Is it fair? I don't know, but given that presumably the majority of aircraft using ATC are commercial airlines (does anyone have a statistic), it stands to reason they pay more.

Quoting 71Zulu (Reply 8):
Even in flight school and 135 operations?

From what I understand, yes; flight schools especially. If there were a $100 fee/flight for flight training, it would add probably 40% to the cost of flight training and effectively kill the flight training industry.

[Edited 2012-02-15 07:38:59]
SA-227; B1900; Q200; Q400; CRJ-2,7,9; 717; 727-2; 737-3,4,5,7,8,9; 747-2; 757-2,3; 767-3,4; MD-90; A319, 320; DC-9; DC-1
 
User avatar
airportugal310
Posts: 3224
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 12:49 pm

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:44 pm

Quoting MountainFlyer (Reply 6):
To me this is just another political stunt. The $100 fee exempts piston planes, so it is largely targeting the corporate market. One of the current administrations pushes all along is to drive up taxes on corporate jet owners. Previously it was tried through elimination of some income tax credits, and now this is just a back door way of taxing them.

Yup...pretty much sums that up.

Quoting mcdu (Reply 7):
The airlines contribute greatly to the system the corps use for free

Wrong.

Everyone here (wrongly) assumes that every business jet flight is Part 91, with the owner in tow and no one else aboard. A chartered flight is subject to Federal Excise Taxes (FET), and there are plenty of those happening everyday. It's not cheap either on several thousand's of dollars.

Maybe I missed something..feel free to correct
I sell airplanes and airplane accessories
 
RL757PVD
Posts: 2580
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 1999 2:47 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 4:05 pm

Quoting MountainFlyer (Reply 10):
From what I understand, yes; flight schools especially. If there were a $100 fee/flight for flight training, it would add probably 40% to the cost of flight training and effectively kill the flight training industry.

No, this is not true as piston airplanes are exempt fronm the user fee, otherwise it would not only kill the flight training industry but aviation as a whole as there would be no new pilots.

While piston aircraft are exept and an extra $100 to a high end business jet is nothing, its the middle ground people like the King Airs and PC-12s that will take a hit.

The way I see it the feee should be based on airspace:

Class A (Above 18,000 ft) and Class B (busiest) you have to pay the fee

Class C, D (C and D are towered, tracon and TRSA), E and G are free.

One thing this should help is reduce unecessary congestion in the shuffling of business jets that you see between HPN, TEB and MMU.
Experience is what you get when what you thought would work out didn't!
 
MountainFlyer
Posts: 487
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 10:19 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 4:16 pm

Quoting rl757pvd (Reply 12):

No, this is not true as piston airplanes are exempt fronm the user fee

That's what I was explaining if you follow the replies back.
SA-227; B1900; Q200; Q400; CRJ-2,7,9; 717; 727-2; 737-3,4,5,7,8,9; 747-2; 757-2,3; 767-3,4; MD-90; A319, 320; DC-9; DC-1
 
cha747
Posts: 756
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 1:07 pm

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 4:19 pm

I pay taxes to drive on the road....why not to fly in the air? If this fee reduces congestion in places like the NE corridor, I'm all for it. Unfortunately, I think that $100 per leg will just be a drop in the bucket for most of the people that this tax or fee is targeting. My hope is that the money REALLY DOES go to supporting our air traffic infrastructure so that our airspace is made more safe.
You land a million planes safely, then you have one little mid-air and you never hear the end of it - Pushing Tin
 
Mir
Posts: 19165
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 4:35 pm

Quoting cha747 (Reply 14):
I pay taxes to drive on the road....why not to fly in the air?

If you're suggesting that GA doesn't pay taxes, you're very much incorrect.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
C767P
Posts: 297
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 4:11 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 4:39 pm

Quoting flightsimer (Reply 5):
However, it is important enough to say it has been officially adopted by this administration.

That is nothing new…this administration has been the reason this has been brought up before.

Quoting MountainFlyer (Reply 6):
The $100 fee exempts piston planes, so it is largely targeting the corporate market.

For how long? Because once $100 user fees are in place for everything non piston it is only a matter of time until they include piston planes.

If you own a jet, how is it fair that on a IFR day you have to wait for a 172 to depart who does not pay into the system? If they have to pay to talk to the same people a 172 would, it won’t take long to include all piston planes that talk to ATC.

Once that happens small GA is dead.
 
MountainFlyer
Posts: 487
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 10:19 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 4:49 pm

Quoting C767P (Reply 16):
For how long? Because once $100 user fees are in place for everything non piston it is only a matter of time until they include piston planes.

I agree.
SA-227; B1900; Q200; Q400; CRJ-2,7,9; 717; 727-2; 737-3,4,5,7,8,9; 747-2; 757-2,3; 767-3,4; MD-90; A319, 320; DC-9; DC-1
 
flightsimer
Topic Author
Posts: 933
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:34 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 5:49 pm

Quoting MountainFlyer (Reply 10):
From what I understand, yes; flight schools especially. If there were a $100 fee/flight for flight training, it would add probably 40% to the cost of flight training and effectively kill the flight training industry.

for me, it would actually be a 130% increase over what im paying. It would take my $78 dollar an hour (wet) 172 rentals to $178 a flight lasting an hour.
Commercial Pilot- SEL, MEL, Instrument
 
MountainFlyer
Posts: 487
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 10:19 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 6:12 pm

Quoting flightsimer (Reply 18):

$78/hr wet for a 172? Where are you flying? I want to rent there!   

Anyway, my 40% figure is a rough estimate figured on the total cost of flight training (aircraft rental, instruction, etc), plus the fact that when I taught, the average flight time during a lesson was probably closer to 1.5 hours, especially when you consider cross-country training. At our flight school we charged $110/hr wet for a 172 and $40/hr for instruction. I'm sure it has increased since I left three years ago. For a two-hour lesson including a 1.5 hour flight, that was about $245 per lesson. A $100 fee would be roughly 40% of that.

Thankfully at this point there is no proposed user fee for piston aircraft, although like C767P stated, if this passes it is only a matter of time.
SA-227; B1900; Q200; Q400; CRJ-2,7,9; 717; 727-2; 737-3,4,5,7,8,9; 747-2; 757-2,3; 767-3,4; MD-90; A319, 320; DC-9; DC-1
 
pilotpip
Posts: 2825
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 3:26 pm

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 6:28 pm

Quoting cha747 (Reply 14):
I pay taxes to drive on the road....

And GA pays taxes to fly. Aviation fuel taxes are significantly higher than road fuel taxes. Many airports also charge landing fees much like the tolls you pay to drive.

This is nothing more than political theatre as stated before. Pelosi can rant and rave all she wants about the "corporate fat cats" but she gets really quiet about the fact that she demanded a bigger aircraft (737) than previously provided to the speaker of the house (gulfstream) because she needed to cart around more people.

If the airline system were perfect, you wouldn't need GA. GA exists because it needs to. Many businesses use it for efficiency as well as cost and time savings. While there are a few using their global express to enjoy a vactation on some tropical island most corporate aircraft are utilized to get to meetings and conduct business in cities inaccessable from the airlines or to get closer to where they need to be.
DMI
 
atct
Posts: 2472
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2001 6:42 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 7:01 pm

Do I see resurgence of B-26, B-25, and Lockheed Lodestar business aircraft?   


atct
Trikes are for kids!
 
dfambro
Posts: 330
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 10:32 pm

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 7:05 pm

Quoting C767P (Reply 16):
it is only a matter of time until they include piston planes.
Quoting MountainFlyer (Reply 17):
I agree.
Quoting MountainFlyer (Reply 19):
like C767P stated, if this passes it is only a matter of time.

Since you all are so confident in predicting the future, maybe you could share some stock tips, too?

It's a common rant that "taxes only ever go up", but my tax rates are lower now than they were a decade ago. I'd be skeptical that this would be extended to GA in anything like this form.

We can all agree on this - user fees stink, when you're the user!
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 1189
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 7:09 pm

What do a typical business jets, say in the 4, 10, 25, 75 (or so) seats cost per hour to fly?
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
Rbgso
Posts: 291
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 11:15 pm

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 7:15 pm

Quoting frmrCapCadet (Reply 23):
What do a typical business jets, say in the 4, 10, 25, 75 (or so) seats cost per hour to fly?

I'm going to say approx. $2,500-$4,000/hr for a biz jet. The 75 seater you ask about is probably a BBC (or Airbus equivalent). That is probably $8,000+/hr. Just a guess on my part.
 
Mir
Posts: 19165
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 7:22 pm

Quoting dfambro (Reply 22):
It's a common rant that "taxes only ever go up", but my tax rates are lower now than they were a decade ago.

This isn't a tax, it's a user fee. How many user fees have ever gone down?

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
blueflyer
Posts: 3762
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 4:17 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 8:36 pm

Quoting MountainFlyer (Reply 10):
the big rig pays way more taxes than I do that goes into the highway fund, but I still get to use all the same roads they do.

But roads would be built far differently (read cheaply) and would need far less repairs if they didn't have to accommodate the weight of rigs that can be as much as 16 times the average car! So if trucks cause higher construction and repair costs than your average car does, it seems perfectly appropriate, at least to me, that their cost (tax/user fee/whatever) per mile be higher than yours.

It is by exactly the same logic that some airport fees are based on MTOW. Building and maintaining a runway for 747s and A380s is a totally different affair than one for a C172.

Quoting C767P (Reply 16):
For how long? Because once $100 user fees are in place for everything non piston it is only a matter of time until they include piston planes.

That is fear mongering at its best. The old "oh don't let them tax me because it might be you next" argument that is never supported by any evidence. Problem is, the trucking industry has tried it for years and years to try and avoid some of the taxes they pay now (an average truck pays about 30 times more than an average car), and for years and years and years, there's been no evidence whatsoever that anyone tried to tax private cars at the same rate as trucks.

If an extra $100 makes the difference between taking off in a Lear and mothballing it, then that Lear should have been sold years ago.
Democracy 2016: 3 million California votes < 100,000 Midwest votes.
 
MountainFlyer
Posts: 487
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 10:19 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 9:01 pm

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 26):

But roads would be built far differently (read cheaply) and would need far less repairs if they didn't have to accommodate the weight of rigs that can be as much as 16 times the average car! So if trucks cause higher construction and repair costs than your average car does, it seems perfectly appropriate, at least to me, that their cost (tax/user fee/whatever) per mile be higher than yours.

It is by exactly the same logic that some airport fees are based on MTOW. Building and maintaining a runway for 747s and A380s is a totally different affair than one for a C172.

You just made my argument for me. Despite the fact they are built to handle big rigs, you and I get to enjoy the same roads that they do, yet we pay far less in fuel taxes to do so. By that same exact logic, GA gets to use an ATC system that primarily is made to handle the volumes of commercial airline traffic. GA does pay a price for it too. As someone mentioned earlier, commercial charter operations are subject to excise taxes, and fuel taxes for GA are somewhere close to five times higher than fuel taxes paid by airlines (in cents per gallon).

Airport fees really are a bit of a different story. Generally large, busy airports (Class B and even some Class C) discourage small GA aircraft through the use of heavy landing or ramp fees already, but they are levied by the airport authority.



Quoting blueflyer (Reply 26):
That is fear mongering at its best. The old "oh don't let them tax me because it might be you next" argument that is never supported by any evidence.

Perhaps, but keep in mind the airline lobby is what started the push for user fees years ago, and they are much larger than the GA lobby. In fact, the airline lobby is already complaining about the current budget (see link below) because it also raises the security fee from $2.50 to $5.00 and ultimately $7.50 (which they don't pay anyway). As long as GA is *perceived* to be getting a free ride "on backs of airline customers" you can bet the airline lobby will push for more user fees. Much more extensive user fees already exist around the world, so what would stop it from happening here?

http://www.sacbee.com/2012/02/13/426...rlines-for-america-says-white.html



Also, your example of the trucking industry's push for lower taxes is just more evidence that this is political theater. The vast majority of Americans drive cars and use the highways. It would be political suicide to push for favorable tax situation for trucks vs cars because there are far far more people driving cars than trucks. In the aviation situation, however, for the most part the general public does not care if GA gets hit with this because relatively so few people are really connected with GA, but beyond that this move is again *perceived* as making the rich (the "rich jet owners") pay their fair share. All you have to do is count the number of dollars or votes on either side of the argument and there's your answer.



On another note, someone asked earlier, but does anyone have any clarification on how this would affect Part 135 operations? I can't seem to find anywhere that defines who would pay and who wouldn't. For example, would all Part 121 and Part 135 operators be exempt? If not, how would that work with so many small Part 135 cargo operators with lots of piston aircraft?

[Edited 2012-02-15 13:32:30]
SA-227; B1900; Q200; Q400; CRJ-2,7,9; 717; 727-2; 737-3,4,5,7,8,9; 747-2; 757-2,3; 767-3,4; MD-90; A319, 320; DC-9; DC-1
 
xdlx
Posts: 699
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 12:29 pm

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 9:30 pm

Quoting atct (Reply 21):

Bring back the connies....!
 
flightsimer
Topic Author
Posts: 933
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:34 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 9:54 pm

Quoting MountainFlyer (Reply 19):

$78/hr wet for a 172? Where are you flying? I want to rent there!

Beaver County Community College and Moore Aviation. Due to being an in-state resident, i recieve a 40% discount on my flying rentals while flying through my college. All out of state residents pay full price. Instruction is not included but is only $30/hr. The discount is used for private, instrument, commercial, multi, CFI, CFII and MEI certificates/ratings.

At the FBO i fly at (all wet):

C172R or Warrior 3: $130/hr
Cessna T182T: $190/hr
Piper Arrow: $170
Piper Seminole: $290/hr
Commercial Pilot- SEL, MEL, Instrument
 
C767P
Posts: 297
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 4:11 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 10:25 pm

Quoting dfambro (Reply 22):
Since you all are so confident in predicting the future, maybe you could share some stock tips, too?

Buy low, sell high!

It is that reason that AOPA pushes so hard against user fees. Small GA does not have many supporters. Those who live around small GA airports think it is a danger to them and they hate the noise. And as I mentioned before, if you operate a prop or jet and pay the user fee, why is it ok for a piston to use the same system and not have to pay? Honestly, small GA puts more stress on the system in places compared to corporate travel…doing multiple approaches, dealing with students learning what to do…they can use up a lot of resources of ATC. It is an easy argument for those paying the fee to make.

Quoting blueflyer (Reply 26):
The old "oh don't let them tax me because it might be you next" argument that is never supported by any evidence.

I like the freedom we enjoy in this country. Adding on a flat $100 fee to everyone (when it gets to that point) would not hurt the G550 operator, however it puts an end to the 172 flight someone would have taken.

If they must bring in more money and want to do it by charging those using services, find a way to do it based on how much use there is. Three approaches by a 172 in 45 minutes is more use compared to one approach and an easy one hour flight or four our flight where no approach is done – does it matter if it was a Cessna 172 or Citation?
 
oflanigan
Posts: 187
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 3:22 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 10:39 pm

Anyone who really believes user fees are a good thing, and the current system of fuel and ticket taxes is bad and not sustainable for the future must not really care about aviation as much as they pretend to. Liking airplanes and understanding the funding for the NAS are two separate things. Just because its a corporate jet or a C172 and not a big cool new shiny Commercial Jet doesn't mean they don't pay a share that works to fund the system for the future. User fees are bad and if it starts at $100 just wait until they do a legitimate cost analysis. You'll be begging for the old way.

Just my opinion of course.
 
0newair0
Posts: 316
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 12:21 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Wed Feb 15, 2012 11:24 pm

Quoting flightsimer (Reply 5):
However, it is important enough to say it has been officially adopted by this administration. Hopefully legislation will still reject it.

User fees have always been adopted by the Obama Administration and the user fees have always gotten thrown out of any budget passed. This year will be no different.

While we're on politics, all of his other proposed tax increases will not go through (over lots of dead republican bodies...some of which are obese) and the deficit will soar passed the Obama Administration projections.... which is also expecting the economy to grow at an insane rate of around 4%. (God, I wish it would...)

No part of the Obama Administration budget will ever see the floor of the house or senate so we can all go back to discussing whether or not pivot bins are better than shelf bins!  
That's not how this works! That's not how any of this works!
 
oflanigan
Posts: 187
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 3:22 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Thu Feb 16, 2012 12:07 am

Quoting 0NEWAIR0 (Reply 32):

No part of the Obama Administration budget will ever see the floor of the house or senate so we can all go back to discussing whether or not pivot bins are better than shelf bins!

I second the motion.
 
ThirtyEcho
Posts: 1409
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2002 1:21 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Thu Feb 16, 2012 2:14 am

If this brings back the Howard 500 to the business fleet, it is all worthwhile. Most incredible sounding airplane in the world.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13878
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Thu Feb 16, 2012 2:27 am

Quoting flightsimer (Reply 5):
However, it is important enough to say it has been officially adopted by this administration. Hopefully legislation will still reject it.

It's part of his Chavez-like second term campaigning. It's no accident that no budget has been passed since he took office allowing him to fund whatever he wants with temporary measures and borrowing, and during this year, his organization orchestrates the "occupy" lie, then proposes a fake budget full of taxes against "the rich" and false claims of deficit reduction and tax breaks for the rest.

I'm sure they've calculated exactly how many voters will be pissed off about each measure, and how many will be energized, and figure that 53% of the voters (who think they are the 99%) will approve of taking money from the 1% (actually 47%).

Sadly, the flight school student is now part of the 1%...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
catiii
Posts: 2476
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 1:18 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Thu Feb 16, 2012 4:04 am

Fortunately the President's party, which controls the Senate, unanimously rejected his budget proposal last year and has not passed a budget in over 1000 days. Given that record in the Senate, this isn't going anywhere. And even if it is adopted, it isn't binding without legislation then implementing the user fee/tax.
 
captainstefan
Posts: 338
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 7:53 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Thu Feb 16, 2012 5:45 am

Quoting pilotpip (Reply 20):
she gets really quiet about the fact that she demanded a bigger aircraft (737) than previously provided to the speaker of the house (gulfstream) because she needed to cart around more people.

And I'm sure the Senators and Representatives will balk at passing the bill when they discover that it will directly cause their flights to cost more.
Long Live the Tulip!
 
KELPkid
Posts: 5247
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:33 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Thu Feb 16, 2012 6:09 am

Never mind the fact that, up until now, ATC was funded by not only the passenger tax excise fee, but the federal aviation fuel tax (which is paid by ALL users!)  
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
 
boilerla
Posts: 365
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 5:30 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Thu Feb 16, 2012 9:18 am

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but the bill that funded the FAA also included provisions to pay for NextGen (ATC). To the tune of $11.4 billion. That's largely what this usage fee is supposed to help pay for.

Forgive the ignorance, but what's wrong with an increased tax to pay for something that the government needs to pay for?

Airlines won't pay for NextGen until the FAA ponies up its portion of the bill.
FAA can't pay right now. It doesn't have $12 billion laying around in the couch cushions.
Congress won't pay until the "budget hawks" (that suddenly appeared after going into remission during the Bush administration) find a way to pay for it.

So fine, complain about the usage fee--but then where, praytell, should the money come from to pay for it? Higher fuel taxes? Then everyone can complain about airfare going up, the airlines can loudly complain it's Washington's fault you can't visit Aunt Ida this summer, and suddenly the new tax disappears before it's passed under a pile of airline lobbyists and outcries from Aunt Ida's nieces and nephews.

Maybe Congress should just let the FAA have a partial shutdown again that costs $30 million a day so they can slash $12 million a year from the budget. That helped balance the budget, right? /sarcasm.
 
0newair0
Posts: 316
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 12:21 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Thu Feb 16, 2012 1:42 pm

Quoting boilerla (Reply 39):
but then where, praytell, should the money come from to pay for it?

We could cut (or make cuts in) the Department of Education... or the Department of Energy or... (I could go on...)

The air transportation system is a NATIONAL transportation system that benefits every citizen in this country either directly, indirectly or both. The wealth of some of the users of the national air transportation system should not be used to create a new tax. It would be similar to taxing every luxury car $100 every time the car was driven. 'Cause someone has to help the government pay for NexGen (new) roads, street signs, and lights, and those little reflectors on the road that cost $5 each (yes, EACH!).
That's not how this works! That's not how any of this works!
 
flybyguy
Posts: 1415
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 12:52 pm

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Thu Feb 16, 2012 2:18 pm

Quoting rl757pvd (Reply 12):
While piston aircraft are exept and an extra $100 to a high end business jet is nothing, its the middle ground people like the King Airs and PC-12s that will take a hit.

IMHO if one can afford to purchase and operate a $2 million turbine aircraft, one should be able to pay a $100 user fee fairly easily. No biggie.
"Are you a pretender... or a thoroughbred?!" - Professor Matt Miller
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 6770
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Thu Feb 16, 2012 2:38 pm

Quoting flybyguy (Reply 41):
IMHO if one can afford to purchase and operate a $2 million turbine aircraft, one should be able to pay a $100 user fee fairly easily. No biggie.

How about if anyone can afford to purchase a car, insurance and gas to drive on the roads they should be able to pay a $5.00 charge towards a clean environment whenever they drive, no biggie.

My point is that principle is principle and some can claim all things are relative, if the principle that you are looking at is $2 million and $100.00 then is that not relative to everyone who can afford a car paying a simple $5.00 per day, between the cost of gas, insurance and repairs $5.00 per day is $1,800.00 per anum and that is IFyou drive 365 days.

Personally, I think for some and me the issue is not the cost of the fee but the reasons for it, by that I mean all the reasons, there is a lot of wastage all over and that seems to be addressed by taxing folks rather than attempting to correct the problems, its all about what's easy.

A silver lining in this may very well be a resurgence of the turbo prop market, business houses will swicth a/c type if they discover that it is more expensive to operate jets, the primary adjustment will be in time, weighing the cost of time and cost has always been done so nothing new.
 
ytz
Posts: 3048
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Thu Feb 16, 2012 2:41 pm

The US (and many other jurisdictions) is in the mess it is, because every single American has some reason why they shouldn't be taxed. Yet, they all want cadillac services.

Yes, it sucks that GA might get hit. But from a societal perspective, user fees are the only fair way to apportion costs. You pay for what you use.

Here in Canada, we've had aviation user fees (albeit not for GA) for awhile (Air Traffic Security Charge, NAVCAN fee, Airport Improvement Fees as high as $20, etc.) It's certainly held back growth. But it hasn't killed it. As much as I hate these fees, and in the Canadian context, there is an argument for reduction (because the fees are used to raise general revenue indirectly), it is still the only fair way. Why should somebody who doesn't fly pay for Nav Canada's ops or for the operations of the airport or aviation security?

Quoting 0NEWAIR0 (Reply 40):
The wealth of some of the users of the national air transportation system should not be used to create a new tax. It would be similar to taxing every luxury car $100 every time the car was driven.

While not per drive, there's lots of jurisdictions where there are luxury vehicle taxes. Interestingly enough, the US is probably the only place where private jet owners get a tax break instead. Perhaps the Republicans should have let Obama repeal that tax break, instead of compelling him to slap on a per departure fee?
 
ytz
Posts: 3048
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Thu Feb 16, 2012 3:42 pm

Quoting par13del (Reply 42):
How about if anyone can afford to purchase a car, insurance and gas to drive on the roads they should be able to pay a $5.00 charge towards a clean environment whenever they drive, no biggie.

My point is that principle is principle and some can claim all things are relative, if the principle that you are looking at is $2 million and $100.00 then is that not relative to everyone who can afford a car paying a simple $5.00 per day, between the cost of gas, insurance and repairs $5.00 per day is $1,800.00 per anum and that is IFyou drive 365 days.

There are places in the US where you'd spend at least $5 in tolls commuting to work everyday. It's not a far-fetched idea by any stretch of the imagination.

Quoting par13del (Reply 42):
A silver lining in this may very well be a resurgence of the turbo prop market, business houses will swicth a/c type if they discover that it is more expensive to operate jets, the primary adjustment will be in time, weighing the cost of time and cost has always been done so nothing new.

And all this analysis might well show that $100 per trip is peanuts for CEO's whose average pay rates in the thousands per hour.

My cousin's husband is an accountant. They live on Vancouver Island. He has clients in Vancouver who would rather pay for him to take a float plane shuttle into Vancouver at 4-5 times the fare of the 2 hour ferry. Why? Because his firm will bill the clients for the two hours he is on the boat.

You can bet that most companies will do the math and quickly figure out that their multi-million dollar executives or senior employees (companies often use private aircraft to shuttle teams or experts around) are worth far more than the $100 per departure. This will increase companies' costs to be sure. But curtail aviation? I'm not so sure. If you are worthy enough to have access to a private jet, you are probably worth far more than the $200 per round trip that such a tax/fee would charge.
 
0newair0
Posts: 316
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 12:21 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Thu Feb 16, 2012 5:26 pm

Quoting ytz (Reply 43):
While not per drive, there's lots of jurisdictions where there are luxury vehicle taxes. Interestingly enough, the US is probably the only place where private jet owners get a tax break instead. Perhaps the Republicans should have let Obama repeal that tax break, instead of compelling him to slap on a per departure fee?

First of, President Obama reauthorized the accelerated depreciation (tax break) for corporate jets in his 2009 stimulus package. This tax break is a good thing because it encourages the purchasing of large manufactured goods (AKA: Airplanes). If Obama really wants to repeal that tax break he is either admitting that there were items in the stimulus package that did not stimulate the economy or he is admitting that he's simply trying to get as much money as he can from "the rich" without regard for his policy's effects on the economy.

Back to cars... If the luxury vehicle tax is not per drive and does not go towards transportation system improvement, I don't think it really fits the argument. For all we know the luxury tax income could go straight to paying for politicians haircuts.

Quoting ytz (Reply 44):
There are places in the US where you'd spend at least $5 in tolls commuting to work everyday. It's not a far-fetched idea by any stretch of the imagination.

I have a great example of how this can get out of hand. In one particular city in the US there is a large toll highway that was built and a toll (new tax) was added to specifically pay off the loans/bonds used to build the new highway (similar to user fees paying specifically for NexGen) and the government said that the toll would end once the highway was paid for. In 2011 the highway was paid off and the toll was not removed. Now, with $42 million in excess toll reserves (surplus from the tax), the toll is being extended to 2020 to pay for a new project involving the highway that is expected to cost $20 million... still leaving about $20 million in excess cash from the toll that was meant to pay for the highway it's on and nothing more.
That's not how this works! That's not how any of this works!
 
737tanker
Posts: 281
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2005 2:47 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Thu Feb 16, 2012 6:05 pm

For those who say it is on $100 you do realize it is $100 for every flight of all turbine aircraft. That includes not only business aircraft, but charter aircraft, and the airlines. For an airline like WN that $100 per flight would mean over $1M per year!
 
blueflyer
Posts: 3762
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 4:17 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Thu Feb 16, 2012 6:54 pm

I'm still waiting to read about a single operator that will park their planes if the fee is implemented. What is the CEO going to do instead? Fly First Class? Sure.

The time value of $100 is peanuts for people who already fly private jets.

Quoting par13del (Reply 42):
if the principle that you are looking at is $2 million and $100.00 then is that not relative to everyone who can afford a car paying a simple $5.00 per day

Nope, it's not. Paying $1.50 per day is (assuming a $30,000 car). Less than I spend in tolls, or Starbucks, per day. At $5 per day, you're driving a $100,000 car, if you want to keep things relative, and you certainly can afford the $5.

Quoting 737tanker (Reply 46):
For an airline like WN that $100 per flight would mean over $1M per year!

And again, I can't imagine that Southwest's customers would decide to take the bus or stay home because they have to pay an extra $100 to charter a 737 to go play Farmville U at some Bowl somewhere.
Democracy 2016: 3 million California votes < 100,000 Midwest votes.
 
N62NA
Posts: 4071
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 1:05 am

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Thu Feb 16, 2012 7:04 pm

Quoting pilotpip (Reply 20):
Pelosi can rant and rave all she wants about the "corporate fat cats" but she gets really quiet about the fact that she demanded a bigger aircraft (737) than previously provided to the speaker of the house (gulfstream) because she needed to cart around more people.

Actually, she demanded (and got) a 757.
How come I can't upload an avatar photo to my profile?
 
Goldenshield
Posts: 5017
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 3:45 pm

RE: $100 User Fees Passed

Thu Feb 16, 2012 7:49 pm

Quoting rl757pvd (Reply 12):
While piston aircraft are exept and an extra $100 to a high end business jet is nothing, its the middle ground people like the King Airs and PC-12s that will take a hit.

As well as gliders, baloons, among others...
Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos