What an annual....

In a previous article, "Steve Foley" said:
"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...


Which part of "$50/year" are you having trouble understanding?


Where are you getting $50/year.

From the post that the person I was responding to was responding to. I
confess I didn't verify his figure, and now that I've looked at the FAA
site I see it's wrong.

I read $0.70/gallon additional tax. $50/year
means I can only fly seven yours a year.

Read it again. That's 70 cents per gallon TOTAL, not additional.

Sec 901. Modifications to Tax on Aviation Fuel. Subsection (a)(1) sets the
tax rate for aviation gasoline to be 70.0 cents per gallon starting on the
transition date.

What is is now, about 20 cents? So yeah, it will be more expensive than
it has been. What isn't?

There is certainly nothing in there about this "$30 per weather briefing
and $50 per ILS" bull****. On the contrary, it says

Sec. 201. Fees.
...
"General avaition aircraft will continue to pay a fuel tax and will
not be subject ot a fee for services, except if the operation is
through terminal airpace for a large hub airport, in which case the
operation may be subject to the fee established for services provided
in such airspace."

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_polic...l_Analysis.pdf


--
Paul Tomblin http://blog.xcski.com/
I would like to shake the hand of the man who first decided that e-mail
clients should run arbitrary programs. Then I'd like to stir, blend and
puree his hand. -- J. D. Baldwin

On Feb 15, 4:46 pm, (Paul Tomblin) wrote:
[snip]
There is certainly nothing in there about this "$30 per weather briefing
and $50 per ILS" bull****. On the contrary, it says

Now, now Paul. Take a deep breath, no need to get testy. I fully
realize that there is nothing in the current FAA proposal with these
fees. If you must know, I am referring to the potential as described
by AOPA where they used a sample set of various fees from a user-fee-
based European system.

A bit dramatic? Maybe. Bull****? Maybe not but we shall see.

Marco

A 250% increase in the tax is substantial. The increase per gallon
would be around 15% - also significant.

I suppose you have the means to not worry about these increases and
that's a good thing but many pilots don't. Those kind of costs will
definitely put a damper on how many hours pilots can fly. Would taxes
at those levels also impact autofuel users?

Dave


Paul Tomblin wrote:
Read it again. That's 70 cents per gallon TOTAL, not additional.

Sec 901. Modifications to Tax on Aviation Fuel. Subsection (a)(1) sets the
tax rate for aviation gasoline to be 70.0 cents per gallon starting on the
transition date.

What is is now, about 20 cents? So yeah, it will be more expensive than
it has been. What isn't?

Paul Tomblin wrote:


There is certainly nothing in there about this "$30 per weather briefing
and $50 per ILS" bull****. On the contrary, it says

Sec. 201. Fees.
...
"General avaition aircraft will continue to pay a fuel tax and will
not be subject ot a fee for services, except if the operation is
through terminal airpace for a large hub airport, in which case the
operation may be subject to the fee established for services provided
in such airspace."

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_polic...l_Analysis.pdf


Not yet anyway. Of course those of us who fly in the Northeast or I
suppose southern California are going to get nailed with the "except if
the operation is through terminal airpace for a large hub airport, in
which case the operation may be subject to the fee established for
services provided in such airspace." just about any time we fly. I hate
to think what this will do to organizations like Angelflight. Some 90%
of the Angelflights I've flown have been into or out of Boston Logan.

On 2/15/2007 7:57:12 PM, Ray Andraka wrote:

Some 90%
of the Angelflights I've flown have been into or out of Boston Logan.

I would sincerely hope that if a user fee model is put in place that Angel
Flights would be exempt. I, too, do the majority of my AF flights into and
out of Logan.

--
Peter

Peter R. wrote:

On 2/15/2007 7:57:12 PM, Ray Andraka wrote:


Some 90%
of the Angelflights I've flown have been into or out of Boston Logan.


I would sincerely hope that if a user fee model is put in place that Angel
Flights would be exempt. I, too, do the majority of my AF flights into and
out of Logan.


If they are exempt, I bet it will be a rebate that you need to do a
bunch of paperwork to recover, not a waiver of the fee in the first place.