Is AOPA Forgetting about the little guy?

"C J Campbell" wrote in message ...


Even cash can cause a problem. A janitor won hundreds of thousands of
dollars playing blackjack in Vegas on New Year's Eve, but by morning he had
lost it all. The IRS came after him for his 'gambling income.' The janitor
asserted that he could take his gambling losses against his income. The IRS
agreed, but you can only take your gambling losses against your winnings
that same year. Since his losses came after midnight, he could only take
them against his winnings, if any, of the following year. This case was so
disastrous that casinos are now required to withhold a percentage of your
winnings for tax purposes.

I have my doubts about that story. First, if it had been
all in one sitting (not cashed in or out), it wouldn't even be declared as income.
The money is considered "won" when it is constructively transferred to the
winner. Since you are expected to turn in your chips when you leave the
casino, their accumulation on the table is not considered constructively paid.


I doubt this one event caused the withholding requirements. A single million dollar
winner wouldn't be an issue. What is an issue are the aggregate millions of gamblers
who can't be trusted to pay their taxes on the winnings in a timely fashion. Particularly
onerous are the "backup withholding" requirements from gamblers who might not
have ever declared their winnings to the IRS.

Don't forget about state income taxes, local property taxes where assessed,
and sales tax yup in most states...

I don't enter contests so it's not a problem... But for me, with the winning
of something being considered to be the last dollars earned for the year, it
is taxed at the top rate, add on property and sales tax, and it costs me
almost as much as if I went out and purchased it... Not worth it to me since
if I intended to purchase I would structure the deal to be for business and
create a tax reduction....
denny
"Ron Natalie" wrote in message Americans get taxed on
material prizes as well as cash?

If memory serves, their was a Tripacer followed by a Bonanza followed by
aWaco followed by a Twin Commanche. If they are going to do a different
plane every year what would you have them give away? They don't give away
airplanes to provide members with airplanes, they do it to provide a subject
for a series of articles. It would be tough to make ten articles from a
Cub.

They used to have two versions of Pillot, one of which was called Turbine
Pilot which had one or two additional articles. They decided it would be
easier to give everybody the same magazine, so now everybody gets what used
to be Turbine Pilot. The magazine has everything it always had but, in
addition, it has the one or two turbine focused articles, so you are
complaining about recieving MORE magazine for your money.

Personally, I would like to see more articles about long flying "adventures"
like flying around the world or through Alaska/Patagonia/Siberia or perhaps
to the tip of South America. I think that AOPAs main purpose is to provide
general aviation a voice in government and they do that fairly well.

Mike
MU-2



"James Blakely" wrote in
message ...
Is it just me, or is it that AOPA is starting to ignore the Spam-can
pilot?
I've been a member for about 5 years now and each year, the airplane they
give away becomes more impractical. They claim the Waco is worth $200k
but
it is a day VFR only aircraft. How useful is that? Now, next year, they
are giving away a twin. What percentage of pilots have a ME ticket? How
many could get insurance?

It is not just the airplanes either. I used to think that the AOPApilot
magazine was one of the best. Now, almost half of it is dedicated to
turbine operations. I do not see a turbine in my future at all.

It really seems to me like AOPA is moving away from the weekend pilot and
moving toward the semi-professional pilot. It seems to me that they are
just supporting part 91 operations just because that is where most
professional pilots get their start.

So, what do you think?

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message link.net...
If memory serves, their was a Tripacer followed by a Bonanza followed by
aWaco followed by a Twin Commanche.

Before that if memory serves me right it was a 206, a (new) 172, a restored 172.

I suspect highly that the selection is driven a lot by what they can get donated.

Ron Natalie wrote:

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message link.net...
If memory serves, their was a Tripacer followed by a Bonanza followed by
aWaco followed by a Twin Commanche.

Before that if memory serves me right it was a 206, a (new) 172, a restored 172.

The "good as new 172", the "better than new 172", the new 172, the "flying SUV"
(206), the Tripacer (plus some cash to pay the tax bill), the Bonanza, and now
the WACO.

George Patterson
Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is
"Hummmmm... That's interesting...."

James Blakely wrote:

Is it just me, or is it that AOPA is starting to ignore the Spam-can pilot?
I've been a member for about 5 years now and each year, the airplane they
give away becomes more impractical. They claim the Waco is worth $200k but
it is a day VFR only aircraft. How useful is that? Now, next year, they
are giving away a twin. What percentage of pilots have a ME ticket? How
many could get insurance?

It is not just the airplanes either. I used to think that the AOPApilot
magazine was one of the best. Now, almost half of it is dedicated to
turbine operations. I do not see a turbine in my future at all.

It really seems to me like AOPA is moving away from the weekend pilot and
moving toward the semi-professional pilot. It seems to me that they are
just supporting part 91 operations just because that is where most
professional pilots get their start.

So, what do you think?



I disagree. AOPA Pilot is like any enthusiast's magazine, it has a mix
of articles on things ranging from practical to dreamworld.

I also get Flying Magazine, and it's even MORE weighted toward turbine
and expensive planes. I like to see articles for SpamCan pilots like me
but I also like the variety too so I can see how the other half lives.

The magazine that is closer to the SpamCan journal you want is Private
Pilot, which while kind of cool has the lowest quality editing and
writing that I have ever seen.

There just aren't that many models of spam cans out there, you couldn't
sustain a magazine for long writing about nothing but flying Cessna
172s and Piper Warriors!

I also get Car and Driver, they run articles on normal cars all the way
up to supercars. They also get letters to the editor from people
griping that they should not review Ferarris since most readers can't
afford them.

Whatever.

I can't afford a turbine, but I like reading about them.

A Waco isn't a bad choice for the 100th anniversary.

Lots of Twins are owned by partnerships of experienced spam can pilots,
especially pilots that enjoy working in the hangar on weekends (the twin has
twice as much to fix, oh boy!). One local partnership has a car mechanic
that easily works on the plan 5 times as much as he flies it.

If you want to win a 172, buy something from Sporty's. People who can't
afford the taxes on the Waco are not much better off with a 172 costing
3/4ths the amount. Since it will be sold by these types of winners, the
more valuable the better.

I really like that they give away renovated planes, because most members fly
older planes. Most of us dream about spending a planes value in mods, but
aren't rich enough to through that kind of money around.

A completely renovated Twin will not likely be valued nearly as much as it
is worth to the winner (twin prices are depressed due to the cost of
operations). I hope the winner sells half to a partner, and uses the money
to pay the taxes, and get the training to fly it!

AOPA is doing a great job in trying times, I am surprised they have time to
put out such a great mag.








"James Blakely" wrote in
message ...
Is it just me, or is it that AOPA is starting to ignore the Spam-can
pilot?
I've been a member for about 5 years now and each year, the airplane they
give away becomes more impractical. They claim the Waco is worth $200k
but
it is a day VFR only aircraft. How useful is that? Now, next year, they
are giving away a twin. What percentage of pilots have a ME ticket? How
many could get insurance?

It is not just the airplanes either. I used to think that the AOPApilot
magazine was one of the best. Now, almost half of it is dedicated to
turbine operations. I do not see a turbine in my future at all.

It really seems to me like AOPA is moving away from the weekend pilot and
moving toward the semi-professional pilot. It seems to me that they are
just supporting part 91 operations just because that is where most
professional pilots get their start.

So, what do you think?

"Paul Folbrecht" wrote in message
link.net...
| Who was this? (Mob history used to be a bit of an interest of mine.)
|
|
| Some organized crime figures have attempted to claim that their
percentage
| is actually 'gifts' from their underlings, but that never worked. Now
they
| either launder their money through legitimate businesses or, as in one
| notorious case, declare it all as miscellaneous income and pay the
taxes. It
| would have been fun if he had tried to itemize his business expenses:
| "payments to Senators and Congressmen, $3 million," etc.

I don't remember his name, but he was supposed to have been the head of the
Mafia in New Jersey during the 1960s. More likely he was head of some
family, rather than head of the Mafia in all New Jersey. The story was told
me in 1973 by my income tax professor at the University of Washington, so it
could well be the CPA equivalent of an urban legend. But I like it anyway.

Dude wrote:



If you want to win a 172, buy something from Sporty's. People who can't
afford the taxes on the Waco are not much better off with a 172 costing
3/4ths the amount. Since it will be sold by these types of winners, the
more valuable the better.

Every plane AOPA and Sporty's has given away has been sold by the winner
within a few months of winning it. That 206 SUV that AOPA gave away a
few years ago was here in Montana, flown in by the guy who bought it
from the winner. Nice looking plane.

On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 01:30:24 GMT, Newps wrote:

If you want to win a 172, buy something from Sporty's. People who can't
afford the taxes on the Waco are not much better off with a 172 costing
3/4ths the amount. Since it will be sold by these types of winners, the
more valuable the better.

Every plane AOPA and Sporty's has given away has been sold by the winner
within a few months of winning it.

Not necessarily that quickly. Margaret Puckette, a rec.aviation denizen
who won the first AOPA giveaway (an Archer) kept hers for several years,
getting her IFR, Commercial, and CFI on the way (she won the plane a week
after getting her Private). She eventually sold it to buy a 152 to
instruct in, but it was after a number years and a divorce.

She took out a loan to pay the taxes, using the airplane itself as
collateral.

Ron Wanttaja