• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

Connecticut Tax going for the jugular!

cafi19

MEMBER
NWA
Our turn! :-(

AOPA

Connecticut governor’s tax bills take aim at GA

Tax proposals could devastate business, AOPA warns
By AOPA ePublishing staff

Two proposed bills in Connecticut—a hefty annual tax on aircraft owners and the elimination of the sales tax exemption for labor on repairs on small aircraft—could devastate the state’s aviation industry and drive business to
neighboring states, AOPA is warning lawmakers.

Gov. Dannel P. Malloy proposed the legislation as part of an effort to close a
budget gap of about $3.2 billion to $3.5 billion. AOPA has joined with other
aviation organizations to explain to legislators and senior administration officials
that the proposals will harm Connecticut businesses and the state’s aviation
industry.

“Given the low aviation tax environment of the region and the small size of the
state, these twin tax increases are likely to cause a mass migration of aircraft out
of the state , and a huge loss of aviation business activity,” said AOPA Vice
President of Airports and State Advocacy Greg Pecoraro. “The impact of this
literal flight of aviation from Connecticut will result in an almost immediate net loss
in revenue to the state, which will only worsen its fiscal situation.”

Currently, aircraft based in Connecticut are required to pay a yearly aircraft
registration fee. HB 6387 would impose a 2-percent tax on the first 70 percent of
the assessed value of all aircraft based in the state every year, resulting in a
significantly higher tax liability for based aircraft. No states in the region currently
impose a personal property tax on aircraft, and no other state in the nation
charges both a registration fee and a personal property tax.

In addition, SB 1007 would essentially eliminate Connecticut’s current sales tax exemption for general aviation aircraft repair services: It would remove the exemption from the state’s 6-percent sales tax on repair services for aircraft with a maximum certificated takeoff weight of less than 6,000 pounds. (The exemption would remain in place for larger aircraft repair services and for aircraft repair or replacement parts.) More than 100 repair stations are located in
Connecticut.

“For its size, Connecticut has a large number of private aircraft and a huge aviation services industry,” Pecoraro said. “If these tax changes are enacted, the loss of competitiveness with neighboring states that have more favorable tax policies would be devastating—in terms of business, revenue, and, certainly, jobs.”

General aviation contributes $2.4 billion to the Connecticut economy. AOPA members in Connecticut should be on the lookout for Action Alerts from the association that will be targeted to different legislators at key points in the legislative process.
 
Hey Laura,
Up here in Tax Free New Hampshire I can make room for your Smith Cub in the hangar. I do not think without wings and an engine the Ct. Gov could consider it a plane or maybe he could...... Remember what we say in New Hampshire....
Live Free and Fly!:)
J
 
I don't get you people. Do you not feel you should pay your fair share? You rich people who can afford to fly should feel some responsibility to your fellow citiczens. Spread the wealth, it will make for a more balanced state, culturally diverse and many untold benefits. Just joking. lol. Vote em out.
 
He isn't thinking. We can get to any state border from here in the middle in an hour by car. Can you imagine how fast those planes will leave the state and how short a time it will take them by air to go somewhere else for their services?? YIKES!

cafi
 
Last edited:
Laura, I hope Ohio doesn't get wind of that. We only pay $15/ seat every year for our planes.
 
Why not put a 2% tax on automobiles? Then everyone would pay.

What other service industries are exempt from sales tax? I can understand the sales tax being equal for autos and aircraft, but why a penalty tax on the planes???
 
There's a novel concept! Dont' spend what you don't have.

Don't just assume that the rest of us can pick up the tab....because right now....it's likely we cant!

cafi
 
Ah, Texas actually backed off on their aviation tax on aircraft. Services (any service) don't charge tax if labor is kept separate from parts. Probably some aviation minded law makers here as well.
 
Lawmakers everywhere are looking at sections of their state budgets that don't carry their own load without looking at any of the benefits as a way to offset huge losses in revenue (For municipal and state government if you're economy is not growing you're backing up) from not only the un or underemployed but also from investment interest rates being in the tank (3 years ago I was managing a bond program with 400 million that was yield restricted at 3.76%, today we get .6%) as more and more pension funds and other restricted funds can't carry their internal load and require subsidy to be solvent.

Here in Oklahoma we are sales tax free in Tulsa and Oklahoma Counties for anything aviation related (got to love those heavy maintenance bases and their surrounding resources but at the same time our local goverments would be solvent if they charged sales tax on this industry alone) and we don't pay sales tax on labor (for anything) and my "antique" (30 years and older) Super Cub is a $10 annual registration although we do pay excise tax on the proven sales price at the time of registration. Locally they make up for some of this by having a fuel flowage surcharge of $.10-.13 per gallon which I don't hate because I'm benefiting from the restricted use of those funds. What I hate and I often go out of my way to combat is ridiculous fuel overcharge at the FBO's... why do I automatically save .40 per gallon because I use my AirBP card vs. having them bill me monthly like they have for 5 years?

(Kem, this in NOT aimed at you)

It's really easy to say "cut government waste" find me a politician that says "increase government waste" and I'll listen because:

A. That person has a sense of humor is not just pandering.
B. Most politicians wouldn't know real waste if it bit them in the arse. Take for instance the Jr. Senator from Oklahoma (tha paper calls him "Dr. No") who is the poster child for tea-baggers everywhere because he rails on ear marks but they turn their head when he votes time and time again for those monster Omnibus spending bills where the real waste and pork is buried in social programs, EPA and the Millitary (want to cut waste pay fair goverment wages for a fair durration leading to a fair retirement... and that's not 20 years)... funny thing all earmarks even the canceled bridge to Sara Palin's back yard only account for less than 2% of the entire Federal spending so tell me they’re looking in the right place.
C. If he/she/it can increase it they have identified it:
D. That person is a realist and knows that no matter what they accomplish in office, no matter what cause they champion THEY will create waste!



Enough rant, I deal with this every day and may write a book one of these days.

OC

Ps.
green-quote-icon.png
Don't tax me; don't tax thee; tax that fellow behind the tree.
green-quote-reverse.png





"
 
Last edited:
3 years ago I was managing a bond program with 400 million that was yield restricted at 3.76%, today we get .6%) as more and more pension funds and other restricted funds can't carry their internal load and require subsidy to be solvent.
That's pretty interesting---I learned something new.
 
So Laura.. What is the predominate political party in your state that seeks to ruin the aviation business there and interfere with your pursuit of happiness??
 
Cut spending...

Great idea. Reality thought: Aviation is one of the most subsidized transportation segments in the US.

I don't mind paying for what I get, but when I have to pay for crossing the border, and announce on email ahead of time (autos don't), pay a fuel flow fee more than autos, and then get taxed on top of that, it is to the point that we are beyond 'fair'.

Think about luxury tax: we pay tax on our income, then pay sales tax on what we buy, then pay tax on the item we bought with after tax money and paid sales tax on...

How about we eliminate welfare, make a 3% flat tax on all individuals- no deductions for anything, and cut the IRS by 3/4. (are we off to rants?)
 
Well, lets attempt to get this thread moved to R & R.
(It's a tough job, but someone has to do it.)
O.C.
Before you write your book you might want to do some research on "the canceled bridge to Sara Palins back yard." If you are referring to "The Bridge to Nowhere", it was to be located in Ketchikan. Palin lived in Wasilla.
That bridge, connected the city of Ketchikan to the island which has the airport. They presently use a boat to access the airport. Do you use Federal funded hiways to access the City airport where your at?
PS- I'm not in favor of ear marks either.
My 10 year old neighbor kid was visiting, he read your last post. He asked me what you meant when you said "poster child for tea-baggers." I told him I didn't know, I would ask you. Would you like to explain the term "tea-bagger" for him please?
Thank you
 
Last edited:
TJ,
I understand what you mean by the bridge to nowhere and yes I do not know the entire story but here in Boston we did get the connector to the Airport. The tunnel the other tunnel and the new bridge that leaves the tunnel ( why we needed to connect a tunnel to a bridge I have no idea...I guess we needed all trade unions working) This monumental public works project began known as the " The Big Dig" with a hefty federal funding and a 5-6 Billion dollar price tag. Through corruption lack of adequate oversight and just plain old out of control it grew to an 18 Billion dollar project and we kindly referred to it as " The Big Pig" delivered 2-3 years late. Now the mass turnpike and any old bridge has had hefty increases to offset the shortfall. Folks in the other part of the state using the turnpike over a 100 miles from Boston and the other airport get to pay for this at no benefit. The original bridge and tunnel that went to the airport had their tolls basically doubled to $4 for both that are in excess of 50 years old for and was paid for long ago by my father.

You know maybe a little Palinism would not have hurt here as now we need to pay for this pig forever. By the way you would think paying union wages and overtime out the gazoo it would have been perfect....No it leaks and an over head panel fell and killled a person in a car. So a teaparty in Boston Again would not be a bad thing.
John
 
Actually T.J., there were two "bridges to nowhere", the one in Ketchikan to Gravina Island, and the second was across Knik arm to Pt. No Name or thereabouts...

Funny thing is, if you did the math on the cost of the ferry vs. bridge for Ketchikan, a bridge would pay for itself in about 7-10 years. The bridge over Knik arm sounds fool hardy, but Anchorage is busting at the seams and needs room to grow...

You are correct, most cities have federal funding to pay for roads so the citizens can travel to airports and such, but we here need to be saved from ourselves!
 
George,
You may not want what you wish for. Never believe the open ended first bid and the feds do not pick up the entire tab. Where are you or are you up late?....Early
J
 
...Anchorage is busting at the seams and needs room to grow...

Busting at the seams? According to the 2010 Census data, there are around 670K people in AK, which equates to 1.1 persons per square mile. Mass by comparison has 810 people per square mile....

Seems like they might be able to expand a little... 153 people per square mile in Anchorage. 12,164 per square mile in Boston....

Census Quick Facts Page: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/index.html

sj
 
So busting at the seams in Anchorage is a lot different than Boston? How many people per square mile in New York City?
 
Thanks TJ. Every time I hear that "bridge to nowhere" line I remember the trip I took with my sailboat to alaska and "hanging" around Ketchikan for a few days. Before I had ever heard of the bridge project I wondered why a bridge didn't exist to the airport when the town was a sliver of land on the shore backed up to a mountain range with truly no room to expand. Not that I wanted to pay for it but I could sure see the benefit to the local population. Shut down a few "six passenger mile per gallon" public transportation, highly polluting busses, elsewhere and build the bridge if you have to. Would have been a much better expenditure of public funds. Bridges are infrastructure, Busses are not.
 
Thanks oldcrowe for giving me an idea for a new bumper sticker: "No senator, I am not now nor have I ever been a member of the tea party"
Funny what comes around, goes around. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...
 
Back
Top