• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Eric Cantor and Private Jet Tax Breaks

GPS_Flex said:
You don’t know jack about what you are talking about.

I’ll leave it at that.
Click to expand...

Back at you. What qualifications do you have to speak about what you speak?

Mine: pilots license, aircraft mechanics license, 2 college degrees, 10+ years work in the aviation industry

Yours: ????
 
Last edited:
dontworrybehappy said:
The "private jet" Obama uses:

af1_d4c-122582-1_375X300.jpg
Click to expand...

nancy wants hers!

Pentagon Rejects Speaker Pelosi's Request for Military Aircraft - ABC News
 
GPS_Flex said:
You do realize that the Bush tax cuts became the Obama tax cuts when he signed them into law right?
Click to expand...

they're the bush/obama/clinton/boehner/mcconnell tax cuts

ie, if you're not aboard you're a splinter

of course, that was the december obama

the june obama is today in contention

obama vs obama: On debt and Libya, it's President Obama vs. Senator Obama - The Washington Post

the dude has no idea what he's doing

tax corporate jets...

get to work...

my daughters do their homework...

congress needs to LEAD

pathetic
 
dontworrybehappy said:
1. Obama Calls People Earning $250,000 a Year ‘Jet Owners’ - The Wealth Report - WSJ
2. I posted the cheapest new jet you could buy. I mean after all, does it really count if you buy a 40yo private jet?
3. The POTUS doesn't need a ****ing 747 to make some ****ing phone calls. And he sure the **** doesn't need two.
Click to expand...

And I'm sure you were bitching about Air Force One when Bush was in office, right?

Do you think the President should just fly coach on Southwest Airlines?

And the second one is a decoy for security purposes (I know because an in-law of mine is the pilot on it).
 
JohnWOlin said:
when the time was right they would revisit the 250k+ tax cuts
Click to expand...

LOL!

when the time is right...

it's 3 years since the party in power produced a budget in the united states senate---in times like these

hurryup harry can email budget chair kent conrad anytime he wants

i guess they're still waiting for that right time

what would sasha and malia say?

one thing, however, leadership is CERTAIN about---NO MORE ACCELERATED APPRECIATIONS FOR CORPORATE JETS!

no, in times like these leadership is adamant---BACK TO THE SEVEN YEAR SCHEDULE!

now there's some bold leadership fit for middle school vice president

maybe even treasurer

embarrassed yet?
 
Last edited:
bloomberg's take: Corporate Jet Tax Gets Six Obama Mentions, $3 Billion Estimate - Bloomberg

President Barack Obama’s proposal to end a tax break for corporate jet owners, a repeated refrain in his news conference yesterday, would achieve less than one-tenth of 1 percent of his target for reducing the federal deficit.

Such a change would put $3 billion into the Treasury over a decade, said two congressional aides familiar with the proposal. Democrats want to require companies that use jets for business purposes to write off the cost over seven years, instead of five years allowed under current law, said a congressional aide and a White House aide.

Obama mentioned the corporate jet break six times, criticizing Republicans’ unwillingness to include tax increases in legislation to raise the federal debt ceiling.
Click to expand...

on the other hand:

“We’re obviously very upset that our industry is being singled out for what we view as political purposes,” said Pete Bunce, president of the Washington-based General Aviation Manufacturers Association. The group’s members include subsidiaries of General Electric, Boeing and Textron.

Bunce noted that Obama was at an Alcoa plant in Bettendorf, Iowa on June 28 emphasizing the importance of the company’s products to airplane manufacturers.

Now, Bunce said, “He’s going after a segment of the aviation industry that uses Alcoa’s products. We’re just scratching our heads.”

Obama mentioned corporate jet owners along with oil companies and hedge fund managers as those who should pay more taxes, setting them in opposition to recipients of college scholarships and medical research grants who could lose benefits under Republican-sponsored budget cuts.

Previous administration proposals to encourage business investment have benefited the aircraft industry. Under the tax law that Congress passed in December 2010, companies purchasing new equipment -- including jets -- can deduct the entire cost of equipment purchases in the first year instead of taking depreciation deductions over time.

“It seems to me that the tax policy here is all over the map,” said Gary Horowitz, an attorney at Wiley Rein LLP in McLean, Virginia.
Click to expand...

obama has no idea what he's doing
 
dontworrybehappy said:
So Obama calls people who make 250G a year or more "private jet" people. Lets analyize this.

The cheapest "private jet" made today:

300px-Cessna_Citation_Mustang_N416CM.jpg


That jet costs 2.65 million dollars and holds a grand total of 4-5 people.

The "private jet" Obama uses:

af1_d4c-122582-1_375X300.jpg


And he doesn't use 1, he uses 2. And uses them on the taxpayer dime.

I think its about time for Obama to shut the **** up.
Click to expand...

All I have to say to the above post is, "the ignorance of some people".

Truly, 'nuf said. :doh
 
GPS_Flex said:
You do realize that the Bush tax cuts became the Obama tax cuts when he signed them into law right?
Click to expand...

President Obama extended what was already in effect; he didn't usher in a completely new set of taxes - cuts nor increases. Try again.

But regardless of what he did, your side pushed for them claiming that tax cuts would create jobs, that they'd stimulate job growth. Well?

Are you now saying his decision to extend them was wrong?
 
Last edited:
FilmFestGuy said:
And I'm sure you were bitching about Air Force One when Bush was in office, right?

Do you think the President should just fly coach on Southwest Airlines?

And the second one is a decoy for security purposes (I know because an in-law of mine is the pilot on it).
Click to expand...

Did you see where I put "And for the record, I've been against two jumbo jets for one man since Nixon in the 707's? So to answer your question, yes. I was bitching. It was a waste then, it's a waste now.

dontworrybehappy said:
And just for the record, I've thought two jumbo jets for one man was excessive since Nixon on his 707's.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
OhIsee.Then said:
I don't know if this tax break was extended. It is very easy to add an extension to any bill. Note, again it appears that this tax break was pushed for by a Republican. If I was in Obama's position I would have accepted it to get the rest of my stimulus package passed.
Click to expand...

Oh, I'm not being critical of this particular tax break. I'm just confused as to when they started and when they expired, if they expired at all per the article. And if they had already expired, what exactly is the President referring to here? Basically, I'm just looking for clarification on the matter.
 
3 weeks ago wapo's factchecker gave obama 3 pinocchios for his "misrepresentations" concerning the auto "rescue"

President Obama's phony accounting on the auto industry bailout - The Fact Checker - The Washington Post

note how the slasher since then has dropped the auto bailout stump pitch

today, wapo's factchecker is back at it:

The Pinocchio Test

We realize the symbolic value of things like corporate jets, particularly when Republicans appear to be refusing to accept even a single dollar of additional revenue, but Obama is misleading when he suggests that closing this loophole would make much of a dent in the federal budget. He also should make clear that he would like to raise taxes on people making more than $250,000, rather than just “millionaires and billionaires.”

The president’s claim of an “unprecedented” effort to trim federal regulations is laughable. And it would be nice to hear Obama acknowledge for once that, until a few months ago, his administration was eager to do business with Gaddafi.

Rating: Two Pinocchios
Click to expand...

The missing facts in President Obama's news conference - The Fact Checker - The Washington Post

i'm afraid your press corps is completely onto this poser on pennsylvania ave

party on, progressives
 
dontworrybehappy said:
Hey, it's your president's words, not mine.
Click to expand...

Ummm...okay, but you do realize that Air Force One, Two as well as the Presidential Marine helos are all federally mandated aircraft, right? Kinda like the Secret Service...you don't just remove their expenditures from the tax code. (Well, they're not part of the tax code, but ignorance of a matter hasn't seemed to stop some people from erroneously bumping their gums.)
 
Bigfoot 88 said:
More pandering to the "I envy the rich" crowd.

This will kill the private jet industry just like this pandering killed the yacht industry in the early 90's.

And for what? To punish those evil rich people.
Click to expand...

Oh, stop with the over-hyped anxiety and fear-factor already. Per the article, the private jet industry was already taking a hit before Obama took office. The corporate jet tax break was initiated in an effort to spur job growth in this industry, to incentivise corporations to purchase private jets. But if you'd bothered to read the article you'd know the reason for the lag in purchases; corporations only purchase private jets when their old one is beyond repair and it's not economically feasable to keep repairing them. Has nothing to do with the elimination of the corporate jet tax whatsoever.

Bottom line: If companies don't find it economically sound to buy another corporate jet, they're not going to buy them - period! Whether they have a tax break on the purchase or not.
 
Last edited:
Objective Voice said:
Ummm...okay, but you do realize that Air Force One, Two as well as the Presidential Marine helos are all federally mandated aircraft, right? Kinda like the Secret Service...you don't just remove their expenditures from the tax code. (Well, they're not part of the tax code, but ignorance of a matter hasn't seemed to stop some people from erroneously bumping their gums.)
Click to expand...

Federal mandates don't mean that you can't make cuts when necessary.

Medicare and caid and SS are all mandates, and those things are under the gun. If you don't think an operating cost of 20g's an hour to fly around one man and his onterage is excessive, you really ARE a liberal.
 
Horowitz and other attorneys who advise companies on airline purchases said the proposed change would affect business decisions about when to buy aircraft. The change could cause companies to delay purchases or buy smaller planes than they would have purchased otherwise.

The difference in depreciation schedules is a longstanding feature of the tax code.

“I’ve been doing this for a long time and that’s been in the code as long as I can remember,” said Harry Ekblom, a partner at Sullivan & Worcester LLP in Boston.

As part of the 1986 overhaul of the tax code, Congress incorporated the depreciation schedules into the new law and gave the Treasury Department the ability to change the “class life” of assets that would “reasonably reflect the anticipated useful life,” according to the law.

That portion of the law was scheduled to take effect in 1992. Congress repealed it in 1988, preventing the Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service from changing the rules.
Click to expand...

Corporate Jet Tax Gets Six Obama Mentions, Nicks Deficit - Bloomberg
 
The Prof said:
the bill passed with ZERO republicans in assent in the house and TWO (snowe and collins) upstairs
Click to expand...

Yup, you now understand how things work. Some Republicans got what they wanted w/o having to vote for it. Thanks for quoting me with your accuracy.
 
OhIsee.Then said:
Yup, you now understand how things work. Some Republicans got what they wanted w/o having to vote for it. Thanks for quoting me with your accuracy.
Click to expand...

So let me see if I have your liberal thinking down here ..

The house was in control of democrats … the senate was in control of democrats … the sitting president was a democrat .. and you are sitting there blaming a republican for this jet thingy ??? So they didn't need his vote .. yet gave into his demand for such a tax break ??


Sounds like it's right out of the liberal mantra book … it's never our fault .. blame someone else.
 
Last edited:
I want to see a 10% tax on all Presidential and Congressional perks, to including the cost of Air Force one, any fuel used in any car other than the official Limo, all postage used by Congress, all lunches paid for by Lobbyists, and a monthly fee for special parking, a fee for use of the Capital Gym per visit, and each office need to have electric meters put in place and the cost of electricity show be taxed and payable by the Person occupying the office.

Next time Obama want's to fly a Pizza Cook in from Texas he would have to pay 100% of the cost.

This would raise a lottle money and reduce a dew cost and maybe some corruption along the way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom