Options
Plane Truth
· Wednesday, July 13, 2011
According to the White House website, President Obama enjoys the comfort and convenience of two "highly customized" Boeing 747s with "4,000 square feet of floor space on three levels," including " a medical suite," two galleys that "can feed 100 people at a time" and "an extensive suite for the President that features a large office, lavatory, and conference room" -- all at taxpayer expense. But as he proved at his press conference on Monday, where he once again inveighed against "these egregious loopholes that are benefiting corporate jet owners," Obama cannot stop complaining about other people's fancy airplanes.
After all, children's lives are at stake. "You go talk to your constituents," the president recalled telling Republican leaders last month, "and ask them are they willing to compromise their kids' safety so that some corporate jet owner continues to get a tax break. And I'm pretty sure what the answer would be." Me, too: "Huh?" There is a legitimate point here about the unfair, irrational complexity of the tax code, but it is buried beneath so much cheap demagoguery that getting to it may require a backhoe.
Obama objects to the fact that owners of corporate jets can write off the cost of their purchases over five years instead of the seven required for commercial aircraft. If this policy continues, he warned at a press conference two weeks ago, "it means that food inspection might be compromised," along with college scholarships, medical research, the National Weather Service and Medicare.
The revenue to be gained from a slower depreciation schedule for corporate jets, writes The Washington Post's Glenn Kessler, is "so small the White House could not even provide an estimate." Republican congressional staffers say it amounts to about $3 billion over a decade, or $300 million a year, which is 0.02 percent of this year's budget deficit. If Obama can fund food inspection, college scholarships, medical research, the National Weather Service and Medicare for that amount, he should have no trouble balancing the budget without raising taxes.
The whole point of Obama's rants against corporate jets, of course, is to shame Republicans into going along with tax increases by portraying them as fat cats' lapdogs, salivating at the thought of balancing the budget on the backs of uneducated, untreated food-poisoning victims who don't even know whether the sun will come out tomorrow because the government can't afford to pay for meteorologists anymore. Still, he's right that there's no reason to assume corporate aircraft degrade faster than commercial aircraft. For that matter, why pretend that planes fall apart after seven years, when they actually last for decades?
Congress wrote those depreciation schedules into law in 1986, leaving it to the Treasury Department to adjust them as appropriate. Two years later, Congress revoked that authority, presumably due to some well-placed lobbying.
Yet on three separate occasions, Obama himself has championed even faster depreciation for business aircraft in the name of stimulating the economy. The most recent law, signed by Obama in December, allows businesses to write off the entire cost of planes purchased between Sept. 8, 2010, and Dec. 31, 2011, in the first year.
Aircraft manufacturers, whose special treatment accounts for something like 0.03 percent of all tax breaks, are understandably dismayed at their quick transformation from engines of job creation into accomplices of corporate villains. Ed Bolen, president of the National Business Aviation Association, complains that "the president has inexplicably chosen to vilify and mischaracterize business aviation -- an industry that is critical for citizens, companies and communities across the U.S., and one that can play a central role in the economic recovery he says he wants to promote."
Everyone who benefits from a tax break has a justification for his. But if Obama were serious about tax reform, he would not only reject such special pleading, he would renounce the use of the tax code for economic and social engineering, which creates the "egregious loopholes" that suddenly bother him.
COPYRIGHT 2011 CREATORS.COM
Third-party content does not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Patriot Post.
Options
Subscribe
Howard Baker, Ronald Reagan's White House Chief of Staff, comments on The Patriot Post: "Thank you for your confidence in, and efforts to sustain the Reagan legacy." It's Right. It's Free. Subscribe now!
The Right Opinion
- Jonah Goldberg: Big Business Gets the Hollywood Treatment
- Charles Krauthammer: The Joy of Winning
- Arnold Ahlert: Catholics vs. Obama
- Michael Reagan: White House Website Gone Wild
- Ken Blackwell: I'll Have Another
- Jeff Jacoby: The Peace Process Battered Israel's Reputation
- Victor Davis Hanson: The Bad/Good Idea of Removing Assad
- Michael Barone: Cocooned Liberals Are Unprepared for Political Debate
- R. Emmett Tyrrell: The Great Debate
- Cal Thomas: The Media's Religion Deficit
- Larry Elder: Why Jeremiah Wright Matters -- Still
- Ben Shapiro: First, They Came for Cory Booker
Grassroots Commentary
Policy and Analysis
- Heritage Foundation Insider
- Heritage Foundation Research
- American Enterprise Institute
- Center for Strategic and International Studies
- The Cato Institute
- Hoover Institution
- National Rifle Association
- Ludwig von Mises Institute
- Citizens Against Government Waste
- National Center for Policy Analysis
- The Heartland Institute
Our Mission
"The Patriot's mission is to advocate for Essential Liberty, the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and to promote free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values. Our objective is to provide Patriots across our nation with a touchstone of First Principles through brief, informative and entertaining analyses of relevant news, policy and opinion from reputable research, advocacy and media organizations, so they may better support and defend those Principles, and enlist others to join our ranks." —Mark Alexander, Publisher
The Patriot Post is not sustained by any political, special interest or parent organization, and we accept no advertising. Our mission and operations are funded entirely by the voluntary financial support of Patriots like you!
























PDK
Good job Jacob. Of the numerous themes precipatating Obamas angst and rant against private jets, something that has becoming out of him periodically since day one, my first perception is Obamas elitism, his God like elitism. How it is so wrong for a capitalist to have what he has earned in the free market, while it is so right for him, the socialist, to have it because he was elected, therefor has made it, and so he deserves it, is one of the fundamental phenomenons of immaturity, and immaturity itself is the hallmark of liberalism.
Periodically we hear about his wife, the First Lady, galavanting across the globe, more for special self serving treats than for official American related purposess, all at tremendous taxpayer exspence, but not a peep out of the God like elititist on compromised government services to the American citizenry. I suppose they, and of course she, deserve it. Well they have made it, they have been elected.
I remember something about four liberals, Barac, Michele, Kerry, and Pelosi taking four separate hugh aircraft rides to Europe, to honor themselves at the same global warming pow wow, all of course at super hugh cost to the American taxpayer. But not a twitch over all the government services for the American citizenry being compromised because of that. Well those four liberals have made it, they have all been elected, it is owed to them now, they desevre it.
It seems to me, all socialist are really in it for themselves. They are losers in the real world, but wish to ride the winners big horse, so they back door their way to the top through the con game of socialism. In a democracy that con game of socialism is sold to the voting prospectus via the social justice route. I will take from he who has earned, give to he who has not, for the sake of justice.
Americas Founding Fathers, chose to stand up to the Kings tyranny, tyranny being the violation of the citizens unaleinable rights in general, and the citizens money specifically, and risked life and limb to end said tyranny. Now the Kings tyranny has returned to America, this time emenating from the liberals, their socialism, and of coarse their head spokesperson, Barac Obama.
Will the madness end, or shall America submit to the tyranny centuries after America was originally liberated from tyranny. Barac obviously hopes for the latter, he intends to run again. Democracy, it can be the back door pass of socialist tyranny, or the house cleaning removeal of socialist tyranny. 2012 is coming. Thank you.
Posted July 13, 2011 at 7:01:14 PM
Abu Nudnik
I can see why commercial airlines are able to write off jet purchases as capital costs but the only reason to allow private corporations to do so is to stimulate sales for manufacturers. Is this a proper job of government? to provide corporate welfare? Why not eliminate the write-off entirely?
It won't scratch the surface of the debt but it will counter Obama's move. Then what? At what point will "just stop spending" kick in? We should be negotiating a lowering, not a raising of the debt ceiling.
Posted July 14, 2011 at 11:59:42 AM