Save the contract towers

ATN_Pilot said:
The airlines pay $12 billion per year into the Trust Fund. All of general aviation pays only $200 million. That's indefensible.
Click to expand...
Why? The vast majority of passengers spend money on airline travel, not GA. Airlines are also by far the biggest users of ATC services, and the primary airports they use consume most of the AIP funds.

GA paid $284 million in fuel taxes in 2010. Airlines paid $375 million in fuel taxes. I think the airlines got a pretty good deal, as they use much more fuel than GA.

Passenger excise taxes were $9.5 billion in 2010 . Which is a lot, but the airlines also have about $140 billion in revenue. Which is about 7.5% tax - seems pretty fair for passengers, as the vast majority of the benefit goes to them - large airports are far more costly, and have far better services, and much higher staffing costs, etc.

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/apl/aatf/media/AATF Fact Sheet.pdf

If ATC costs are really that much higher because they are providing services to GA, increasing the fuel tax by a few cents would be a far more cost effective way to address that imbalance.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
Therefore, number of operations is the best metric.
Click to expand...

Typical GA day for me is 20 flights, generating $30 each in revenue, not talking to ATC. Are those each "operations?" Should they be taxed more? If I make a safety announcement on an approach freq, should that be taxed (ATC had to listen to it)?
 
If you want to raise gas taxes on GA without raising them on the airlines, I have no argument with that. Be it user fees or gas taxes, GA needs to pay more. I don't care how you get there.

But your argument about the tax burden being fair is still ridiculous. No one can argue with a straight face that the airlines should pay 98.4% of the Trust Fund while using only a tiny fraction of the airports that the Fund maintains.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
But your argument about the tax burden being fair is still ridiculous. No one can argue with a straight face that the airlines should pay 98.4% of the Trust Fund while using only a tiny fraction of the airports that the Fund maintains.
Click to expand...

Cargo operations pay more than 1.6% in fuel and excise taxes for the trust fund, so I don't know if that is true.

With a straight face, you are going to say that a fence around KZPH (that we don't even want) costs as much as a runway at JFK?
 
I believe the $12 billion number includes Part 121 cargo operators like UPS and FedEx.

With a straight face, I'll tell you that the airlines neither need nor want KZPH, so the idea that they have to fund even one penny of it while GA only pays 1.6% of the Trust Fund is crazy.
 
dumb-kid-bangs-head-on-table-o.gif
 
Why do these threads just keep running around in circles? It's very clear there are few pull the ladder up types here that want to do anything they can to benefit themselves over the common good. Just let fools be fools and move on
 
ATN_Pilot said:
With a straight face, I'll tell you that the airlines neither need nor want KZPH, so the idea that they have to fund even one penny of it while GA only pays 1.6% of the Trust Fund is crazy.
Click to expand...

Great, I'd rather move my operation to KTPA - I'm sure airlines would prefer that. I see a ton of 135 air carrier traffic at the fuel pumps, clearly they don't hate the airport that much. The military uses that field too, far far more often than private jets do.

But by the same logic, Regional Airlines should be paying a higher tax too. They consume more ATC resources with more frequent flights, and they pass less in taxes with their smaller capacity.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
Why do these threads just keep running around in circles? It's very clear there are few pull the ladder up types here that want to do anything they can to benefit themselves over the common good. Just let fools be fools and move on
Click to expand...
Because all of the arguments are bad, and everyone should feel bad.
 
ATN Pilot, do you have any number that show how much of that 12 Billion is from Part 135 operations?
 
Beep said:
ATN Pilot, do you have any number that show how much of that 12 Billion is from Part 135 operations?
Click to expand...


I don't know where to find those numbers, but in 2008 - 3.2 million hours 135 * (I estimate $3,000/hour average flight hour cost) * 7.5% = $720 million. Plus fuel taxes.

For purposes of calculating the excise tax, crew expenses, per diem, parking, landing fees, etc - are all taxed at 7.5% as well. And 135 is a tiny minority of the operations at primary airports. I think they pay their fair share.
 
TFaudree_ERAU said:
I hope, as a fellow corporate pilot, that you're being facetious. Please tell me you're being facetious. Please...
Click to expand...


I'm being serious. Eliminate all fuel taxes, and charge a use fee. I honestly think it would save money for guys like you and I and end up with airlines actually paying their fair share. They use the bulk of the system, and pay into it the least on a per flight basis. Granted, it's off the cuff, but I really think it would save money for GA. Am I not seeing something you are?
 
mshunter said:
I'm being serious. Eliminate all fuel taxes, and charge a use fee. I honestly think it would save money for guys like you and I and end up with airlines actually paying their fair share. They use the bulk of the system, and pay into it the least on a per flight basis. Granted, it's off the cuff, but I really think it would save money for GA. Am I not seeing something you are?
Click to expand...

I'd be fine with that, assuming airline & military flights were subject to the same fees.

But I'm sure it would just open a new can of worms of one type of operation trying to screw over another, and besides, it is in the interests of everyone for everyone to use ATC services for separation.
 
We should charge users of the system by the: Number of operations, seats, engines, tires, gross weight, fuel consumed, CO2 emitted, radio transmission, number of controllers contacted, altitude, speed, distance or time. What. Ever.

Pick one and you'll gore someone else's ox, and there are clearly a lot of oxen in this thread.
 
Or we could just do what I've always advocated: get rid of every nickel and dime tax and replace all government revenue with straight income taxes. No more cigarette taxes, no more gas tax, no more ticket tax, just progressive income taxes.
 
Can you imagine how much inefficiency would be introduced by tracking per service billing.

I can see a GIANT FAA accounting office being added to track, bill, and handle appeals for incorrect services. What do we track for billing, flight plans filed? FAA radio contact? Instrument approaches executed? How many times radar gets a return on your mode S code? What about the negative implications of people simply skipping use of billed services... this is a huge can of smelly stinky rotten worms.

Fuel taxes are the most fair and simplest to account for. Small airplanes generally use little resources and cause very little wear on facilities. Big airplanes generally require advanced facilities and use ATC services for their entire flight.

The simple fact is, we wouldn't need any use-based fees if the government cleaned up the real waste, like our absurd debt service, military, and social welfare program expenses. The entire FAA system is not even a dot of ink on the balance sheet. It's insignificant, nothing, miniscule. The very idea of "cutting the FAA" to "save money" is ridiculous. You could literally close the FAA completely down and it'd make no effective difference to the federal budget. Again, this is all politics, stuff for people to get all pissed off and divisive over. Stuff to make political parties war over. Dont play their game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top