 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Trainnut01(at)aol.com
Guest
|
 Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2007 2:23 pm Post subject: Fuel Taxes |
 |
|
Once the FAA realizes that some people are using mo gas and flying without paying aviation fuel taxes they will be back before congress wanted to get the funds some other way. At the current time I can buy gas for my tractor without paying tax on it, but if I put it in my car I am required to report how much I used and send in the bucks. I have also been hearing rumors for the last several years that 100LL is on its way out. Should it be discontinued even the FAA will realize we're burning something else and what ever it is needs to be taxed. I think that if the FAA gets their fuel tax, we mo gas burners are only safe for a short time.
I am a member of both the EAA and AOPA and like others I will write letters and make phone calls as these two groups suggest. I don't have a problem with paying my fair share, I just don't like the ATA deciding what my fair share is.
CJ
do not archive
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL a26657x4311227241x4298082137/aol?redir=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eaol%2Ecom" target="_blank">AOL.com.
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics Zenith-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gig Giacona
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1416
Location: El Dorado Arkansas USA
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2007 2:54 pm Post subject: Re: Fuel Taxes |
|
|
You do realize there is already a 19.x cent tax on 100LL now? This plan increases the tax to 70 cents.
[quote="Trainnut01(at)aol.com"]Once the FAA realizes that some people are using mo gas and flying without paying aviation fuel taxes they will be back before congress wanted to get the funds some other way. At the current time I can buy gas for my tractor without paying tax on it, but if I put it in my car I am required to report how much I used and send in the bucks. I have also been hearing rumors for the last several years that 100LL is on its way out. Should it be discontinued even the FAA will realize we're burning something else and what ever it is needs to be taxed. I think that if the FAA gets their fuel tax, we mo gas burners are only safe for a short time.
I am a member of both the EAA and AOPA and like others I will write letters and make phone calls as these two groups suggest. I don't have a problem with paying my fair share, I just don't like the ATA deciding what my fair share is.
CJ
do not archive
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL a26657x4311227241x4298082137/aol?redir=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eaol%2Ecom" target="_blank">AOL.com.
| | - The Matronics Zenith-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List |
|
_________________
W.R. "Gig" Giacona
601XL Under Construction
See my progress at www.peoamerica.net/N601WR |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
p.mulwitz(at)worldnet.att
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2007 3:26 pm Post subject: Fuel Taxes |
|
|
Wow, this is getting way off topic - but I can't resist a few comments on the politics and economics of FAA funding.
First, I disagree that the FAA will change their position if they learn we are putting mogas into our little putt-putt airplanes. We just don't use that much gas. I think the target of the gas tax increase is the jet operators - both current biz-jets and the expected hoard of new very light jets. Those aircraft burn so much more fuel than our little recreational aircraft that they are the ones facing real money cost with the gas (and Jet fuel) tax increase.
Second, I think the real motive behind the FAA proposal is to divorce the FAA managers from congressional oversight. They don't like the idea that mere congressmen and senators can tell the ALMIGHTY FAA what they can and can't do. They hope by generating their own income in a business-like fashion with the higher fuel taxes and service fees they can become independent of all interference in their UNLIMITED POWER. That is always what politics is about - exercise of power.
While we feel threatened by the FAA move, I am confident the business aviation folks and members of congress will feel even more threatened. I don't expect this whole proposal to be adopted by congress. Still, I encourage everyone to write and call their representatives to express their horror over this rogue agency trying to take over the world and eliminate our freedom to fly. I actually wrote my representatives before the push by AOPA and EAA.
I'm afraid the only hope we all (all citizens) have for free and open use of America's skies is a brutal house cleaning of the FAA management. If I were Emperor of the Earth I would fire them all and start over from scratch. They never recovered any humility after Ronald Reagan fired the ATC controllers some 20 years ago.
(End of Rant and Rage)
Paul
XL fuselage
do not archive or tell the Gestapo about my opinions.
At 02:21 PM 2/28/2007, you wrote:
| Quote: | Once the FAA realizes that some people are using mo gas and flying without paying aviation fuel taxes they will be back before congress wanted to get the funds some other way. At the current time I can buy gas for my tractor without paying tax on it, but if I put it in my car I am required to report how much I used and send in the bucks. I have also been hearing rumors for the last several years that 100LL is on its way out. Should it be discontinued even the FAA will realize we're burning something else and what ever it is needs to be taxed. I think that if the FAA gets their fuel tax, we mo gas burners are only safe for a short time.
I am a member of both the EAA and AOPA and like others I will write letters and make phone calls as these two groups suggest. I don't have a problem with paying my fair share, I just don't like the ATA deciding what my fair share is.
CJ
do not archive
|
- [quote][b]
| | - The Matronics Zenith-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ashontz
Joined: 27 Dec 2006
Posts: 723
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:52 am Post subject: Re: Fuel Taxes |
|
|
[quote="p.mulwitz(at)worldnet.att"]Wow, this is getting way off topic - but I can't resist a few comments on the politics and economics of FAA funding.
First, I disagree that the FAA will change their position if they learn we are putting mogas into our little putt-putt airplanes. We just don't use that much gas. I think the target of the gas tax increase is the jet operators - both current biz-jets and the expected hoard of new very light jets. Those aircraft burn so much more fuel than our little recreational aircraft that they are the ones facing real money cost with the gas (and Jet fuel) tax increase.
Second, I think the real motive behind the FAA proposal is to divorce the FAA managers from congressional oversight. They don't like the idea that mere congressmen and senators can tell the ALMIGHTY FAA what they can and can't do. They hope by generating their own income in a business-like fashion with the higher fuel taxes and service fees they can become independent of all interference in their UNLIMITED POWER. That is always what politics is about - exercise of power.
While we feel threatened by the FAA move, I am confident the business aviation folks and members of congress will feel even more threatened. I don't expect this whole proposal to be adopted by congress. Still, I encourage everyone to write and call their representatives to express their horror over this rogue agency trying to take over the world and eliminate our freedom to fly. I actually wrote my representatives before the push by AOPA and EAA.
I'm afraid the only hope we all (all citizens) have for free and open use of America's skies is a brutal house cleaning of the FAA management. If I were Emperor of the Earth I would fire them all and start over from scratch. They never recovered any humility after Ronald Reagan fired the ATC controllers some 20 years ago.
(End of Rant and Rage)
Paul
XL fuselage
do not archive or tell the Gestapo about my opinions.
At 02:21 PM 2/28/2007, you wrote:
| Quote: | Once the FAA realizes that some people are using mo gas and flying without paying aviation fuel taxes they will be back before congress wanted to get the funds some other way. At the current time I can buy gas for my tractor without paying tax on it, but if I put it in my car I am required to report how much I used and send in the bucks. I have also been hearing rumors for the last several years that 100LL is on its way out. Should it be discontinued even the FAA will realize we're burning something else and what ever it is needs to be taxed. I think that if the FAA gets their fuel tax, we mo gas burners are only safe for a short time.
I am a member of both the EAA and AOPA and like others I will write letters and make phone calls as these two groups suggest. I don't have a problem with paying my fair share, I just don't like the ATA deciding what my fair share is.
CJ
do not archive
|
-
THe airlines are the ones using the ATC system the most too. How many people here really plan to file IFR flight plans on a regular basis and fly from JFK in New York to Dulles. Probably not too many.
Besides, how the hell would they ever know where you got the mogas from. Be nice of the EAA helped setup mogas stations at small airports.
I remember back in about 1994 regular unleaded was about $1.10, but 100LL was over $2/gallon. And at the time I heard that the nearly 100% difference in price was really due to taxes that went to run ATC facilities. So now that regular unleaded is $2.30, by those numbers 100L should be about $5.00/gal. I have no idea what it is now though.
| | - The Matronics Zenith-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
321PT
Joined: 23 May 2006
Posts: 40
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 12:06 pm Post subject: Fuel Taxes |
|
|
You mean the FAA will become the another IRS? Great! I'm sure they will be just as helpful and make things just as simple as the IRS does for all of us!!!
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics Zenith-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Zenith-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
