I was on a flight to Brazil as Barack Obama and Mitt Romney squared off in their first presidential debate in Denver last week, and so I missed the live airing of the event. But as soon as I arrived in Sao Jose dos Campos to meet with executives at Embraer (mostly to talk about the new Legacy 500 business jet before its first flight), the debate was the top topic on everybody’s mind.
The reaction by Ernie Edwards, president of Embraer Executive Jets, seemed to be a mix of frustration and mild bemusement. He was clearly upset by what the president had said, but not surprised. When I was able to watch the debate on YouTube later that day, I had a similar reaction. The frustrating part, for me, was that the president had avoided making any headline-grabbing observations about business aviation in quite a while, and now here he was choosing the first presidential debate to go back on the attack.
In a scathing open letter after the debate, NBAA president and CEO Ed Bolen echoed the sentiments of the entire business aviation industry with this critique of Obama’s remarks: “Your comments seemed to illustrate a complete lack of understanding about the importance of business aviation in the U.S., and appear to be at odds with your stated interest in promoting job growth, stimulating exports, driving economic recovery and restoring America to its first-place position in manufacturing.”
It’s a great line, and I’m glad NBAA went on the record and said it. But I also know that Barack Obama certainly doesn’t suffer from “a complete lack of understanding” about the value of business aviation. He flies aboard Air Force One, the greatest business jet ever conceived. He has been an eager and active user of business aviation since before he started campaigning for the highest political office – and he will continue to be after he leaves the White House. To put it plainly, Barack Obama understands what an incredible tool a business jet can be.
Let’s look at what the president said during the debate: “Why wouldn’t we eliminate tax breaks for corporate jets? My attitude is if you got a corporate jet, you can probably afford to pay full freight, not get a special break for it.”
Ah, the pre-packaged, carefully crafted debate sound bite, two memorable lines delivered, in this case, in the president’s inimitably folksy way. (For the record, Romney was guilty of much the same thing in the debate as he deftly channled his inner Ronald Reagan and professed his love for Big Bird.) Obama's criticism was a wholly populist message designed to score points with his base. For the president, corporate jets are probably the easiest target on the planet. Of course he’s going to go after them.
The bigger question is, does the president really believe his own message? Does he really think that by attacking business aviation, eliminating tax incentives and imposing user fees on corporate jet flights that he will be helping the country?
The answer is, yes he does. Whether you agree or not, it’s a cornerstone of his worldview – as candidate Barack Obama said himself four years ago, on Oct. 13, 2008, speaking to “Joe Sixpack” at an election rally: “I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”
Since then, Obama’s message and ideas about the direction of the country haven’t changed one iota. There was nothing new in what the president said about corporate jets during last week’s debate – and so there’s really no reason for outrage. What we heard from the president's podium in Denver was merely more of the same.
All Comments
And, Obama's administration including Michele, Reid and Pelosi when she was Speaker have been big users of private jet transportation to all parts of the world. It sounds like only government leaders deserve private jet transportation. They get their rides paid for in full by the taxpayers. Corporate jets get paid for by shareholders and get minimal tax benefits, especially when compare to the full load Obama charges to the taxpayers.
It is no different than Obama slamming Big Oil for government subsidies. Oil Depletion allowances and deductions are not corporate welfare.
Both the Business Aviation industry and Big Oil need to explain the validity of their tax deductions and credits.
More wealth distribution talk to appeal to the 47% and more. Problem is, it never works- socialism, that is. But it sure can buy votes!
Time to vote this phony out and start repairing our country, not a second too soon.
No.
No, I am not going to come to the defense of jet owners and operators.
I won’t write letters for the NBAA or AOPA on this issue, and I won’t give a single dime to either organization’s PAC to help corporations and wealthy individuals pay fewer taxes.
The hypocrisy in arguments for tax breaks for jets knows no bounds. Here is my favorite… ‘the President’s disparaging remarks in the wake of the automakers use of their business jets when going to Congress for a bailout, caused the smoking hole that became jet aircraft sales.’ While in the next breath they claim that these jets are ‘serious business tools’ that make money for the companies that use them.
So let me understand…. These tools are vital to companies’ bottom lines and yet a little public scrutiny made the companies sell off their jets and run from them in droves? That’s the argument?
I call ‘bullshit’ on that logic. There is no way that a vital, revenue earning tool would be sold off because automakers embarrassed themselves. Business jets are largely toys, perqs, vanities, and luxury vehicles and THAT’S why companies sold them off and stopped buying new units.
Oh, and the crappy economy created by the failed economic policies of deregulation, vulture capitalism, and tax policies that brought us to a point where US corporations enjoy the lowest tax rates ever, and among the lowest effective tax rates in the industrialized world.
The economically and politically powerful have titled the game horrifying in their favor and are not paying their fair share of taxes. They enjoy the benefits of this wonderful country while expecting other people to ***pay*** for those benefits the US has to offer.
I stand with the President on this one, and so should all Americans committed to a fair tax policy that gives the middle class a chance to purse the American dream.
Bottom line: if a business jet is truly an important tool for a company, they can afford to pay the taxes on the item rather than pushing that obligation onto middle earning Americans.
@firstflightmike--do you understand business at all? Any fee or tax assessed on a business is passed along to the consumer. A business is going to strive for the most profit they can. Therefore, a new or higher tax is simply added to the product sale price. Are you advocating that I should pay more for XYZ product because you think it is fair for the government to take more to distribute to someone else? Give me a break--life isn't fair and frankly I am getting sick of hearing this type of justification for more government taxes. How about we get just as passionate about shutting down government spending instead.
Look, a corporation is a private entity that will do what it wants, how it wants. If we as consumers do not like their ethics or way of doing business, then for crying out loud-stop spending your money with them. If enough people do this, they will go out of business. But to use the argument that someone should pay their fair share? Come on, my six year old has articulated a better argument for something than this.
I don't understand how corporate Jet owners can fall into the 47% that need a handout. Its why the country has such a high deficit when the big income earners expect a tax cut for everything.
Its basic economic principle that one day you have to pay that debt back through higher taxes.
After reading the comments above I can't help but make one brief observation: There are a lot of people who are very jealous of others' success. It's that simple. I am not a wealthy person myself... I live month-to-month. But why should I shake my fist at every private jet that flies overhead? Why should I or you feel anger that someone else has achieved huge financial success when I have not? Seriously people... you are NOT a victim if another person can afford more toys than you. The "fair share" concept is selfish, irrational, and unproductive. Please, please quit whining about how others "have it too easy" and just work harder to make yourself more successful.
And @flyright, I am shocked and frightened that you might actually think the national debt is a result of rich people and corporations getting 'tax cuts'. If I were to give you $100 and then you go out and spent $1000, is it MY fault you are now $900 in debt? How would that make sense at all? Regardless of how much I, you, or any business/individual pays in taxes, the government has a responsibility to spend less than it brings in. Not borrow from China and squeeze more out of its citizens...
The corporate jet market is a small one at best. Pumping billions into subsidies for it won't make a significant impact to the aviation industry if the demand is no longer there.
My god, do any of you really believe even half of this pompous crap? Let me clue you in on something: the "job-creators" in this country touting the economic benefits of their corporate jets do create wealth...for themselves...and jobs as an expendable by-product. If this is the cornerstone of GA in this country, then we have built upon sand. We will be gone with the next tide.
Two anecdotal "for-instances": I once flew an owner in his Premier from Ontario, CA, to LAX so he and his simpering wife could make the red-eye to Chicago. We held on the tarmac for over 30 minutes for a clearance. The total flight took well over an hour, in which time he could've hired a limo and made it on time. (One hopes he uses better sense in the business that created the wealth that bought him the airplane.) I never heard whether they made the flight...and frankly I couldn't care less. I told my co-pilot that I would've been happy to drive them to LAX in my own car for half what they probably wrote off on their taxes for that boondoggle. "Let them eat cake," indeed!
A few months later, I stood on the ramp at Las Vegas, surrounded by nearly a billion-dollars-worth of heavy iron, watching Challenger 600's departing with maybe 2 golfers on board. I'm pretty sure they weren't there to create jobs for the middle class, except maybe for their caddies. (And please don't bore me with the conjecture that they might have closed a billion-dollar deal on the golf course.) Any jobs they created fell from their pockets as they pulled their ill-gotten gains from their pockets. It sickened me, by the way, to see how my once-professional colleagues fell all over themselves (and each other) for tips--which they euphemistically referred to as "love," as in "did you get any 'love' today?" I never took a tip, and I never starved for the lack of it. When it becomes acceptable to toss an extra "50" at my doctor, or my dentist, or my lawyer (altho' I've paid them plenty up front), I'll reconsider...maybe. Until then, why should I degrade myself and my profession for the "love" of a whore?
Until then I say, let the "Sun Kings" pay their taxes like everyone else, and at the same rate as the rest of us--including the enormous sums they earn from investments (taxed at sometimes less than half the rate the rest of us pay). GA survival--especially for the little guy who spends his love on his little 2-seater--means absolutely nothing to either side of this debate. To paraphrase the original author of "class warfare": "The rich ye will always have among thee." And they can well afford to pay full-freight. They lose more than that in their pile carpets at night when they pull off their trousers.
We're on our own. This election is about a lot more than whether or not Cessna gets to build its next Citation. And anyone who thinks the proud new owner of that Citation cares a fig for the worker that put him/her there needs a lot more "love" than will ever fall from their pockets, believe me.
So tired of hearing of this wealth distribution "bull", just ask yourself, the last 30 years, how have the rich done compared to everyone else? Way too well!!! The system does need adjusted, and not the direction towards the jet set. That's almost as bad as hearing them say “the job creators". Like an earlier poster said, yea what falls out of their pockets does create a few jobs, mostly in third world countries at slave wages. This article just sounds like a rich brat that doesn't get his way every time. waaah wahh waaaaaah. When most Americans drive to work, or entertain, or eat, the money they spend was all taxable, but somehow these wealthy and for the most part lazy people need a tax break so they can spend enormous amounts of money furiously? Not in my book.
