Welcome to Taxachusetts $1,000 Landing Fee Proposed For Massachusetts Private Aircraft

[Bill-Higdon]

$1,000 Landing Fee Proposed For Massachusetts Private Aircraft - AVweb

The Massachusetts senator representing Cape Cod will undoubtedly hear from his well-heeled constituents over his proposed bill to charge a $1,000 fee for every landing of private, corporate and charter aircraft in the state. Julian Cyr, one of 37 (of 40) Democrats in the state Senate, has filed...

www.avweb.com

 

[Pops]

Should have a "stupid test" for anyone running for a political office.

 

[D Hillberg]

"Hangin's too good fer these varments"

 

[Hephaestus]

So the massachusetts elite are sick of waiting for GA planes to GTFO of their way? If you're not flying a corporate jet - be gone? "Climate change!"

 

[Yellowhammer]

Will never happen.

 

[cluttonfred]

That sounds like grandstanding to get some media coverage, not an actual realistic proposal. I also suspect he's going to inundated with complaints from every FBO in the state.

 

[mcrae0104]

Guess they don't want people to come spend money there. Oh well.

 

[narfi]

Should have a "stupid test" for anyone running for a political office.

They do.
It is pretty effective as well, very seldom will an intelligent(in terms of commen sense) person get through......

 

[gtae07]

That sounds like grandstanding to get some media coverage, not an actual realistic proposal. I also suspect he's going to inundated with complaints from every FBO in the state.

You're most likely right. But stupid ideas like these tend to spread--and perhaps the next iteration championed by a couple of states is a more "reasonable" fee of "only" $5 or $10 or $20. See Canada's proposed "luxury tax" on airplanes. How long before a couple of US states try that?

 

[Bill-Higdon]

Should have a "stupid test" for anyone running for a political office.

All Public offices need that

 

[patrickrio]

More often than not, smart politicians ( definition: smart are the ones who get themselves elected or re elected, NOT necessarily the ones who would do the most good..) make stupid statements or create a stupid bill with no hope of passing just to get votes. Can be a great vote getter, you do almost nothing and change almost nothing and thus can be blamed for nothing really, but you get more votes.

It needs to be outrageous to get publicity.

I see no chance of this actually passing, so this bill is either one of the vote getting type, or this really is just a stupid politician (stupid: one who does **** that doesn't get them re elected....)

It is my opinion though, that if this makes you mad OR your green innards feel warm and glowey, you have been played for publicity.... which was the goal.

 

[bmcj]

You're most likely right. But stupid ideas like these tend to spread--and perhaps the next iteration championed by a couple of states is a more "reasonable" fee of "only" $5 or $10 or $20. See Canada's proposed "luxury tax" on airplanes. How long before a couple of US states try that?

Let’s tack a rider on that bill to charge drivers a $1,000 daily road access fee. That should garner some resistance and public outcry.

 

[Daleandee]

Should have a "stupid test" for anyone running for a political office.

There is a very large difference between ignorance and stupidity. You are correct sir that this is stupidity.

Ignorance occurs when a person does not know better. Stupidity happens when a person does know better and persists is doing something absolutely bone headed & foolish.

Seems to be a requirement for most politicians ...

 

[Victor Bravo]

Step 1) You introduce a huge, loud, and ridiculous new proposal that gets everyone angry, and creates a huge storm of publicity.

Step 2) Your opponents expend all their money, power, effort, time, and resources on fighting against it. With the Climate Mafia bankrolling the operation, you can just sit back and watch the fireworks fly.

Step 3) You magnanimously come to the negotiating table, and give your opponents a big victory, by scaling back your $1000 landing fee request to "only" 10% of the original proposal.

Step 4) With their resources expended, the opponents begrudgingly have to accept your proposal, and they can at least show the public "how hard we fought for your rights!"

Step 5) You sit back and collect $100 for every landing in the State for a while, and you take credit for adding millions of dollars to the State's treasury.

Step 6) You quietly write something in to the new rules that allows your political contributors and any corporations who you want to do you a favor an exemption to the fees.

 

[blane.c]

$1,000 Landing Fee Proposed For Massachusetts Private Aircraft - AVweb

The Massachusetts senator representing Cape Cod will undoubtedly hear from his well-heeled constituents over his proposed bill to charge a $1,000 fee for every landing of private, corporate and charter aircraft in the state. Julian Cyr, one of 37 (of 40) Democrats in the state Senate, has filed...

www.avweb.com

Viva la Revolution!

 

[patrickrio]

Step 1) You introduce a huge, loud, and ridiculous new proposal that gets everyone angry, and creates a huge storm of publicity.

Step 2) Your opponents expend all their money, power, effort, time, and resources on fighting against it. With the Climate Mafia bankrolling the operation, you can just sit back and watch the fireworks fly.

Step 3) You magnanimously come to the negotiating table, and give your opponents a big victory, by scaling back your $1000 landing fee request to "only" 10% of the original proposal.

Step 4) With their resources expended, the opponents begrudgingly have to accept your proposal, and they can at least show the public "how hard we fought for your rights!"

Step 5) You sit back and collect $100 for every landing in the State for a while, and you take credit for adding millions of dollars to the State's treasury.

Step 6) You quietly write something in to the new rules that allows your political contributors and any corporations who you want to do you a favor an exemption to the fees.

If a politician is really smart and lucky they accomplish this 6 step process. I think 99.9% or more of the time, a politician is just hoping to get enough hype so they show up on voters media radar and get name recognition come voting time.

If said politician can get voters to associate the politician with issues important to their voters it is just gravy... even if the politician actually accomplished absolutely nothing. Often it is actually better to accomplish nothing, because then the politician can keep riling people up and blaming someone else for nothing happening and never has to act. This politician only wins if nightly news in his hometown shows a bunch of irate private pilots gnashing their teeth in front of the cameras. Ignoring is the best path of action in my opinion. A visible fight only prolongs the visibility and time before he needs another issue to hype. The more time it is visible, the more chance bad changes can occur.

Also this particular issue is just not enough of a money maker for a government to do it for finance reasons. It's the issue we have for anything we want from the government in aviation too... private pilots are basically a rounding error monetarily when compared to everything else in government. It is unfortunate, but about the only times we matter to most politicians are when we make noise landing and taking off, and when the airport would be more valuable as a strip mall, condos and a business park.

In this case being a rounding error probably protects us. Not worth the effort of actual action financially. In tax issues, smarter heads will prevail and figure out a larger group of fatter geese to steal golden eggs from. Giving the politician a visible fight is the only way this issue could become important enough politically for actual action to occur. Don't let anyone you know get filmed for this.

 

[trimtab]

My plane gets 11-14 mpg. A car.wod have to get up to 15-18 mpg to match efficiency point to point.

Could change the bill to charge all those thirsty Massachusetts SUV's 1000 bucks a tankful of taxes to be fair, at least. There are likely 50k to 100k of them around. Should be easy to raise a lot of cash, shouldn't it? /S

 

[Daleandee]

At the risk of getting too political ... "we have the government we deserve!"

Late edit: Perhaps I should clarify that the people that are in our government are the one we voted in and continue to vote into office. So maybe the stupid ones are us ... the voters. But I have never met anyone that voted for a stupid politician before ...

 

[Hephaestus]

That sounds like grandstanding to get some media coverage, not an actual realistic proposal. I also suspect he's going to inundated with complaints from every FBO in the state.

In Massachusetts - They know where their bread is buttered... The FBOs don't give a crap about your 30gals of 100LL, its the 3000+lbs of JetA market they serve.

And that JetA buyers are those same people who support politicians; the same ones cursing because they've gotta wait for the peasants in their "old jalopies" delaying them for their avocado toast brunch at the country club.

My personal belief anyway.

 

[Rhino]

Should have a "stupid test" for anyone running for a political office.

The media too. Housing costs would sure go down in DC. There wouldn't be too many people left. Hold on while I ponder if that's a positive or a negative.....................