JohnRich 4 #1 September 19, 2011 News:Corporate Jets Face $100-a-Flight Fee in Obama Deficit Plan President Barack Obama’s administration proposed a $100 per-flight fee on corporate jets and other turbine-powered planes that use the U.S. air-traffic system. The fee is aimed at private aircraft, which currently don’t pay their fair share of costs of operating the aviation system, the administration said today. The Obama plan is aimed at pilots who fly under the supervision of air-traffic controllers. “Recreational piston aircraft” wouldn’t have to pay the fee, according to the proposal. It would also exempt aircraft operated by the military or other government agencies, air ambulances and any flight that doesn’t require air-traffic guidance.Full story: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-09-19/corporate-jets-face-100-a-flight-fee-in-obama-deficit-plan.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #2 September 19, 2011 It's about time these rich aircraft owners start paying their fair share. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #3 September 20, 2011 So, how many drop zones are in positive control airspace? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #4 September 20, 2011 I hope they raise jump ticket prices soon. Skydivers need to start paying their fair share for their Federally subsidized airports. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wolfriverjoe 1,523 #5 September 20, 2011 QuoteSo, how many drop zones are in positive control airspace? None. PCA is Class A and Class B. Class A is above 18000. Class B is the old TCA airspace. Wiki Clicky"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dks13827 3 #6 September 20, 2011 Quote I hope they raise jump ticket prices soon. Skydivers need to start paying their fair share for their Federally subsidized airports. Don't give them any new bad ideas... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #7 September 20, 2011 Quote Quote So, how many drop zones are in positive control airspace? None. Really? I'm confused. Then how much "per-flight Skydiving Tax" would be imposed? I mean, it's called the "Skydiving Tax" for a reason, right? ..... it is called the [initial caps on] "Skydiving Tax" [/initial caps off], isn't it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 348 #8 September 20, 2011 and the previous administration also proposed a 'per-flight' fee and it was shot down, as will this one. The FAA is well funded through fuel taxes. All the internal FAA audits and people admit that themselves, so there is little argument to generate 'extended' revenues and make it a profit base. The aviation lobby is far larger than any skydiving lobby and it is filled with rich people that donate lo of money to campaigns, so I expect this will die, or will be converted into a higher 'fuel tax' perhaps. But thanks for the 'sensationalistic' headline.......terribly accurate, edited to add: Skydive City burns about 80K gallons of Jet fuel and pays about $18000/year in taxes for that fuel. We also pay the City of Zephyrhills another $3200/year fuel tax as part fo our rent I would argue (successfully), as I have many times before that "I AM paying my share" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LyraM45 0 #9 September 20, 2011 QuoteSo, how many drop zones are in positive control airspace? I think this is kind of a stretch here.... I'm pretty sure what this all means is business jets (IE: G4/5, Citation, Galaxy, Global Express, etc, etc) operating 91 and especially 135 at high altitude sectors via IFR flight plan are going to be the ones taking the hit. Airlines operating on the same J routes pay federal taxes on each ticket sold. I a not sure exactly what the private business guys pay, and I guess that's what this is sorting out. I really doubt this means every skydiving load that takes off is going to get hit with this.Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #10 September 20, 2011 JR, when you blatantly and misleadingly click-bait your thread topics, it lowers your credibility.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #11 September 20, 2011 QuoteJR, when you blatantly and misleadingly click-bait your thread topics, it lowers your credibility. Since you give me no credibility in the first place, I don't care what you think. If you can't enjoy a good tongue-in-cheek sensationalistic thread title, I don't care what you think. And since it was "blatant", you should have recognized it for the tongue-in-cheek nature in which it was intended. I'll buy you a sense of humor for xmas, along with tk and amazon. My shopping list is getting rather long already, and it's still early. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #12 September 20, 2011 Quote Quote JR, when you blatantly and misleadingly click-bait your thread topics, it lowers your credibility. Since you give me no credibility in the first place, I don't care what you think. If you can't enjoy a good tongue-in-cheek sensationalistic thread title, I don't care what you think. And since it was "blatant", you should have recognized it for the tongue-in-cheek nature in which it was intended. I'll buy you a sense of humor for xmas, along with tk and amazon. My shopping list is getting rather long already, and it's still early. If its what YOU consider to be a sense of humour.... take me off THAT fucking list. I have no desire to aquire the sense of anything resembling that much cluelessness in my life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #13 September 20, 2011 QuoteI have no desire to aquire the sense of anything resembling that much cluelessness in my life. The fact that you feel the need to constantly insult other people is proof positive that you need that sense of humor more than anyone else. You're on Santa's list, and he'll check it twice! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mirage62 0 #14 September 20, 2011 Quote Skydive City burns about 80K gallons of Jet fuel and pays about $18000/year in taxes for that fuel. We also pay the City of Zephyrhills another $3200/year fuel tax as part fo our rent I would argue (successfully), as I have many times before that "I AM paying my share" Not to thread hijack but isn't that like saying the top tax payers are paying there fare share? Z-hills make lots of money off the airport and the tiny amount you pay isn't really that much. For the good of the rest of the community certainly z-hills could pay just a little bit more...as in YOUR FARE SHAREKevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #15 September 20, 2011 QuoteSkydive City burns about 80K gallons of Jet fuel and pays about $18000/year in taxes for that fuel. We also pay the City of Zephyrhills another $3200/year fuel tax as part fo our rent I would argue (successfully), as I have many times before that "I AM paying my share" News quotes: "National statistics show millionaires by and large are paying taxes at a much higher rate than middle-class families." "Millionaires -- who make up a fraction of a percent of all taxpayers -- contributed more than 20 percent of total federal income tax revenue." "The top 1 percent of American taxpayers paid 38 percent of collections for personal federal income tax." Source: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/20/irs-data-show-most-millionaires-pay-taxes-at-higher-rate-than-middle-class/.com/politics/2011/09/19/obama-yields-to-liberal-outcry-on-entitlement-reform/ So, when Obama calls for raising taxes on the rich, you're okay with them responding by saying; "I AM paying my share", and agree with them that they don't deserve to be taxed even more? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #16 September 20, 2011 Quote I would argue (successfully), as I have many times before that "I AM paying my share" Why are you arguing that you are paying your fair share? If they raise your fuel costs, rent, utilities, insurance and challenge your "Independent Contractor" status with packers and instructors, you can just pass the costs along to the jumpers. No big deal. right? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #17 September 20, 2011 Value Added Tax is the way to go; Just like Ron Paul says. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #18 September 20, 2011 QuoteQuoteSo, how many drop zones are in positive control airspace? I think this is kind of a stretch here.... I'm pretty sure what this all means is business jets (IE: G4/5, Citation, Galaxy, Global Express, etc, etc) operating 91 and especially 135 at high altitude sectors via IFR flight plan are going to be the ones taking the hit. Airlines operating on the same J routes pay federal taxes on each ticket sold. I a not sure exactly what the private business guys pay, and I guess that's what this is sorting out. I really doubt this means every skydiving load that takes off is going to get hit with this. have you ever done formation loads that go to 18000? how about places like mile high and Moab that consistantly go to 17000 - 18000 msl Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chutem 0 #19 September 20, 2011 QuoteQuoteSo, how many drop zones are in positive control airspace? None. PCA is Class A and Class B. Class A is above 18000. Class B is the old TCA airspace. Wiki Clicky Does it say positive controlled airspace or just controlled airspace? Maybe I misread, but I think they are going after more than class A and B. James Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chutem 0 #20 September 20, 2011 http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/jointcommitteereport.pdf See page 22 and 23 for the actuall wording that only says controlled airspace. James Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chutem 0 #21 September 20, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteSo, how many drop zones are in positive control airspace? None. PCA is Class A and Class B. Class A is above 18000. Class B is the old TCA airspace. Wiki Clicky Per the wiki clicky controlled airspace is class A-E. How many dropzones are in controlled aispace? James Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 4 #22 September 20, 2011 Quotehttp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/jointcommitteereport.pdf See page 22 and 23 for the actuall wording that only says controlled airspace. James Which is the VAST majority of the CONUS airspace. There's very little uncontrolled airspace above 800 ft.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chutem 0 #23 September 20, 2011 QuoteQuotehttp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/jointcommitteereport.pdf See page 22 and 23 for the actuall wording that only says controlled airspace. James Which is the VAST majority of the CONUS airspace. There's very little uncontrolled airspace above 800 ft. Sounds like a $100 per flight skydiving tax. James Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wayneflorida 0 #24 September 20, 2011 Quotehttp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/jointcommitteereport.pdf See page 22 and 23 for the actuall wording that only says controlled airspace. James I copied the referenced pages. More equitably share payments for air traffic services. Roughly two-thirds of the air traffic control system’s current costs are financed by aviation excise taxes. Most of the tax revenue is collected from commercial aviation through ticket taxes, segment fees, international head taxes, and fuel taxes. General aviation users currently pay a fuel tax, but this revenue does not cover their fair-share-use of air traffic services. All flights that use controlled air space require a similar level of air traffic services. However, commercial and general aviation can pay very different aviation fees for those same air traffic services. For exMANDATORY SAVINGS 23 ample, a large commercial aircraft would pay between $1,300 to $2,000 in taxes for a flight from Los Angles to San Francisco while a corporate jet flying the same route and using the same Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) air traffic services would pay about $60 in taxes. To reduce the deficit and more equitably share the cost of air traffic services across the aviation user community, the Administration proposes to establish a new mandatory surcharge for air traffic services. This proposal would create a $100 per flight fee, payable to the FAA, by aviation operators who fly in controlled airspace. Military aircraft, public aircraft, recreational piston aircraft, air ambulances, aircraft operating outside of controlled airspace, and Canada-to-Canada flights would be exempted. The revenues generated by the surcharge would be deposited into the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. This fee would generate an estimated $11 billion over 10 years. Assuming the enactment of the fee, total charges collected from aviation users would finance roughly three fourths of airport investments and air traffic control system costs. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tkhayes 348 #25 September 20, 2011 Quote...could pay just a little bit more.... Yes we could. And skydivers could always 'pay a little more' for jumps, and gear, and everything else, and the food and the beer. But that is not really the point I was making. The point is that the FAA is already well funded. Future projects, like NextGen, are nothing more than imaginary concepts so far, and they want us to start paying for something that has yet to be invented. I used the same argument in lease negotiations with the City. They said it cost a million bucks to pave a runway (which lasts 20 years) and that we were the only user, so we should pay more. I already pay fuel taxes, and a usage tax, and rent, totaling about $50K/year. ($1M over 20 years) My argument is/was that if they want more revenue, then find more tenants and users for the airport. I AM paying my share. The fact that they cannot find more tenants is not really my problem. If they want me to pay for the million dollar runway then fine, I will OWN it, not rent it. And the fact that they cannot find a way to tax everyone who lands there to help generate revenue is not my problem either - oh but wait - they DO in fact tax everyone who lands there, through fuel taxes. Again, i rest my case. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next Page 1 of 6 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
quade 4 #22 September 20, 2011 Quotehttp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/jointcommitteereport.pdf See page 22 and 23 for the actuall wording that only says controlled airspace. James Which is the VAST majority of the CONUS airspace. There's very little uncontrolled airspace above 800 ft.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chutem 0 #23 September 20, 2011 QuoteQuotehttp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/jointcommitteereport.pdf See page 22 and 23 for the actuall wording that only says controlled airspace. James Which is the VAST majority of the CONUS airspace. There's very little uncontrolled airspace above 800 ft. Sounds like a $100 per flight skydiving tax. James Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wayneflorida 0 #24 September 20, 2011 Quotehttp://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/jointcommitteereport.pdf See page 22 and 23 for the actuall wording that only says controlled airspace. James I copied the referenced pages. More equitably share payments for air traffic services. Roughly two-thirds of the air traffic control system’s current costs are financed by aviation excise taxes. Most of the tax revenue is collected from commercial aviation through ticket taxes, segment fees, international head taxes, and fuel taxes. General aviation users currently pay a fuel tax, but this revenue does not cover their fair-share-use of air traffic services. All flights that use controlled air space require a similar level of air traffic services. However, commercial and general aviation can pay very different aviation fees for those same air traffic services. For exMANDATORY SAVINGS 23 ample, a large commercial aircraft would pay between $1,300 to $2,000 in taxes for a flight from Los Angles to San Francisco while a corporate jet flying the same route and using the same Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) air traffic services would pay about $60 in taxes. To reduce the deficit and more equitably share the cost of air traffic services across the aviation user community, the Administration proposes to establish a new mandatory surcharge for air traffic services. This proposal would create a $100 per flight fee, payable to the FAA, by aviation operators who fly in controlled airspace. Military aircraft, public aircraft, recreational piston aircraft, air ambulances, aircraft operating outside of controlled airspace, and Canada-to-Canada flights would be exempted. The revenues generated by the surcharge would be deposited into the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. This fee would generate an estimated $11 billion over 10 years. Assuming the enactment of the fee, total charges collected from aviation users would finance roughly three fourths of airport investments and air traffic control system costs. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 348 #25 September 20, 2011 Quote...could pay just a little bit more.... Yes we could. And skydivers could always 'pay a little more' for jumps, and gear, and everything else, and the food and the beer. But that is not really the point I was making. The point is that the FAA is already well funded. Future projects, like NextGen, are nothing more than imaginary concepts so far, and they want us to start paying for something that has yet to be invented. I used the same argument in lease negotiations with the City. They said it cost a million bucks to pave a runway (which lasts 20 years) and that we were the only user, so we should pay more. I already pay fuel taxes, and a usage tax, and rent, totaling about $50K/year. ($1M over 20 years) My argument is/was that if they want more revenue, then find more tenants and users for the airport. I AM paying my share. The fact that they cannot find more tenants is not really my problem. If they want me to pay for the million dollar runway then fine, I will OWN it, not rent it. And the fact that they cannot find a way to tax everyone who lands there to help generate revenue is not my problem either - oh but wait - they DO in fact tax everyone who lands there, through fuel taxes. Again, i rest my case. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
