If I had to sum up the benefits of business jets in just one word, I might pick “convenience.” According to Wikipedia, “convenient procedures, products and services are those intended to increase ease in accessibility, save resources (such as time, effort and energy) and decrease frustration.”
When President Obama criticized tax breaks for owners of corporate jets during the first debate with contender Mitt Romney on October 3, the reaction from the business aviation community was swift. Obama was referring to the allowable accelerated depreciation for capital goods, which ironically is part of a bill that he signed in 2010, HR 4853, the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance and Job Creation Act.
Aerospace Industries Association (AIA) president and CEO Marion Blakey said she jumped out of her chair this week when she heard President Obama say, during the final televised debate between U.S. presidential candidates, that sequestration “will not happen.” She said that the AIA is calling on the Obama Administration and Congress to star
Virtually every industry and profession in America enjoys the backing of an association and its lobbyists. And it doesn’t matter whether those lobbyists represent funeral directors, textile manufacturers, dairy farmers or dental consultants.
NBAA president and CEO Ed Bolen, JSSI chairman Lou Seno and former Cessna chief Jack Pelton separately weighed in on President Obama’s remarks about “corporate jets” during the televised presidential debate last week. “Why wouldn’t we eliminate tax breaks for corporate jets?” Obama asked. “My attitude is if you got a corporate jet, you can probably afford to pay full freight, not get a special break for it.”
NBAA president and CEO Ed Bolen condemned “disparaging” remarks about business aviation by President Obama in a presidential debate last night with Republican nominee Mitt Romney. During the debate, Obama called to eliminate some corporate tax breaks, saying in part, “Why wouldn’t we eliminate tax cuts for corporate jets? If you have a corporate jet, you can probably afford to pay full freight, not get a special break.” According to Bolen, “The President’s comments completely mischaracterized the businesses and groups that depend on a [corporate] airplane.”
The long-simmering dispute over Europe’s emissions trading scheme (ETS) heated up after a U.S. Senate committee advanced legislation that would empower the secretary of transportation to prohibit American airlines from participating in the carbon cap-and-trade construct.
Members of both houses of Congress have sent letters to President Obama decrying his advocacy of a $100-per-flight user fee on turbine-powered aircraft that fly in “controlled airspace” in his proposed Fiscal Year 2013 federal budget.
In a March 12 letter, 28 senators told the President that bipartisan passage of the comprehensive, multi-year FAA reauthorization bill was possible “in part because it did not assess new user fees on general aviation (GA).
The U.S. should file a formal complaint under the treaty that created the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to gain relief from Europe’s unpopular emissions trading scheme (ETS) for aircraft, representatives of the aviation industry told sympathetic lawmakers March 28 in Washington, D.C.
NBAA thanked a bipartisan group of 28 U.S. senators yesterday for sending a letter to President Obama opposing the $100-per-flight user fee proposed in his Fiscal Year 2013 budget. The senators’ letter emphasized, “We believe the per-gallon tax assessed on aviation gasoline and jet fuel is the most efficient and effective way to generate revenue from aviation users.” A bipartisan group of 195 House members also recently sent a letter to President Obama opposing user fees.