Just Bought A Plane? STAY OUT OF FLORIDA !

WJRFlyBoy wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/24og9o

Read about the bewildering details of a number of long-suffering
non-resident pilots who have been caught in the FL tax trap, (otherwise
known as the "Florida Landing Fee").

It starts like this... you buy a new or used aircraft and sign the bill
of sale... which starts "the clock." It is Florida's position that for
the next six months (possibly thereafter, though the burden of proof
reportedly changes at that point), the state has the right to exact the
requisite "Use Tax" (Sales Tax) for the fact you partook of the state's
services unless you can show an equivalent Use or Sales Tax receipt from
another state...

In other words, for those of you who may have bought a $500K Cessna,
Cirrus, Columbia, etc... unless you can prove that you paid the
equivalent use tax in another state, you owe the state of Florida some
$30K if you visited the state in the first six months of your ownership.
Mind you, if your sales/use tax bill comes from a state that exacts LESS
tax than Florida, the FL Department of Revenue still expects you to pony
up the difference... and if you're from a state that exacts a minimum
fee (like the few hundred dollars for owners in South Carolina), they
will bill you for the WHOLE difference... and its up to you to fight
them on it.

No kidding.


Reading the referenced story and linked articles, you would think the
author has a bigger axe to grind with Sun n Fun than the Florida sales
tax.

From the EAA website:

Sun 'n Fun Calls Reports of Florida Use Tax Inaccurate

March 21, 2008 — Recent reports of “use taxes” being levied on airplanes
owned by non-resident visitors to Florida are not accurate, according to
officials at Sun ’n Fun Fly-In at Lakeland, Florida, whose annual
aviation season kick-off takes place the week of April 8-13. Sun ’n Fun
has fielded numerous calls from concerned pilots and exhibitors worried
about the report and is looking to alleviate those concerns.

“I’ve talked with the General Counsel of the Florida Department of
Revenue and he assured me that, number 1, there will not be state tax
agents doing ramp checks, and that out-of-state pilots have nothing to
fear,” said John Burton, Sun ’n Fun president. The Florida DoR informed
Burton that the tax affects only those owners who have purchased their
airplane in another state (outside Florida) within the past six months,
but who have the aircraft titled and registered in Florida and have not
paid Florida sales tax on that airplane.

Sun ’n Fun received correspondence from Florida Department of Revenue
Executive Director Lisa Echeverri dated March 19, 2008, that includes
the statement: “Florida does not assess a use tax on non-resident
aircraft owners in every circumstance where an aircraft is brought to
Florida within the first six months.”

“It does not impact Sun ’n Fun exhibitors and aircraft dealers; it does
not impact aircraft owners who have owned their aircraft for more than
six months,” Burton said. “The idea of having somebody who has purchased
an airplane out of state and is not a resident of FL, getting charged a
use tax here is absolutely ludicrous.

“It’s a classic case of much ado about nothing.”

Pat Phillips, a member of the EAA Legal Advisory Council as well as Sun
’n Fun air show chairman and a fly-in director, is familiar with the
situation. “If somebody goes out of state and buys an airplane in a
state that charges no sales tax and brings it to Florida, and the
airplane is based in Florida, the buyer lives in Florida, and is using
the airplane in Florida, yes, he would owe a 6 percent use tax,” he said.

“Now, if a transient aircraft comes into Florida from a state where they
have not paid sales tax on the aircraft or are just visiting here, they
would have no obligation to pay a use tax in the state of Florida just
for using their airplane while visiting in the state,” he said. “And I
believe constitutionally that would be in conflict with the commerce
laws of the U.S.”

Phillips added, “If a person, willingly or innocently, avoids sales tax
by buying out of state but bases his aircraft in Florida and lives in
the state, then the use tax obligation may apply. But for a person who
simply flies down to Florida but lives in another state, he will not be
assessed a tax. It’s preposterous to even think the state would impose a
sales tax.”

When EAA’s Government Affairs department learned about the Florida use
tax story, it responded immediately by contacting its Legal Advisory
Council, which worked with Sun ’n Fun management to get official
clarification from the Florida Department of Revenue.

“This is a good example of how our staff, working with the council, was
able to get to the bottom of this story and help clarify this
situation,” said Earl Lawrence, EAA vice president of industry and
regulatory affairs. “Hopefully this will put to rest the concerns of
non-Florida residents who intend to fly into the state for Sun ’n Fun,
or any time, for that matter.”

On Sat, 22 Mar 2008 09:56:07 -0500, Charles Vincent
wrote:


Pat Phillips, a member of the EAA Legal Advisory Council as well as Sun
’n Fun air show chairman and a fly-in director, is familiar with the
situation. “If somebody goes out of state and buys an airplane in a
state that charges no sales tax and brings it to Florida, and the
airplane is based in Florida, the buyer lives in Florida, and is using
the airplane in Florida, yes, he would owe a 6 percent use tax,” he said.

“Now, if a transient aircraft comes into Florida from a state where they
have not paid sales tax on the aircraft or are just visiting here, they
would have no obligation to pay a use tax in the state of Florida just
for using their airplane while visiting in the state,” he said. “And I
believe constitutionally that would be in conflict with the commerce
laws of the U.S.”

Phillips added, “If a person, willingly or innocently, avoids sales tax
by buying out of state but bases his aircraft in Florida and lives in
the state, then the use tax obligation may apply. But for a person who
simply flies down to Florida but lives in another state, he will not be
assessed a tax. It’s preposterous to even think the state would impose a
sales tax.”

So is the EAA lawyer going to go talk to the Florida DOR for the
Meridian owner who flew to VRB for training and got smacked with a
$100,000 tax bill because he flew to FL in an out-of-state based and
registered aircraft for a week to get training and then left? It's
not like the original areo-news article (and today's follow-up cover
responding to the EAA's above message) doesn't have documented cases
of people having to go to court for what he says is "preposterous to
even think" would happen.

On Sat, 22 Mar 2008 09:56:07 -0500, Charles Vincent wrote:

Reading the referenced story and linked articles, you would think the
author has a bigger axe to grind with Sun n Fun than the Florida sales
tax.

True, and apparently he has.

..
..
I wasn't aware that maniac had a cousin.

Jim



--
"If you think you can, or think you can't, you're right."
--Henry Ford

"WJRFlyBoy" wrote in message
...
http://tinyurl.com/24og9o

Read about the bewildering details of a number of long-suffering
non-resident pilots who have been caught in the FL tax trap, (otherwise
known as the "Florida Landing Fee").

On Mar 22, 1:15*am, WJRFlyBoy wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/24og9o

No kidding.

The article makes no sense. First it makes it sound like anyone flying
down to Florida may get charged this tax. Then it says vehicles that
are bought out-of-state but titled in Florida are charged. Well, the
same had been true in California for decades. If you put a CA address
in the FAA registry for the aircraft address you will automatically
get a tax bill. So the take-away of this article is that if you fly to
Sun-in-fun don't list your hotel address as the address where the
aircraft is registered.

-robbert

Hey folks, I thought you would all like to know that the story about the
Meridian and Cirrus owners getting hit with Florida state sales or use
tax for allegedly doing nothing more than stopping there is actually A
REPEAT FROM MAY 2007! Here's the original story (NOTE THE ARTICLE DATE):

http://www.aero-news.net/news/genav....4039&Dynamic=1

Okay - now - why is the story being rehashed at just this time? Any of
you students of life care to raise a hand and give an answer? ;-)

Oh yeah - and my suspicion that the Piper Meridian was actually a sale
of a new aircraft from a Florida based company (and therefore reasonably
subject to Florida sales tax) is hinted at by these quotes from that
article:

"... Piper is reportedly NOT pleased about the Meridian tax bill noted
above ... We have a feeling that Piper CEO Jim Bass may have a few
things to say, as a result of these recent events, since anyone taking
delivery at a Florida Piper plant may find themselves with a tax bill,
even if they leave the state right away and never darken the state's
borders again."

So basically the article all but admits the buyer of that ~$1.9M Piper
Meridian[1] took delivery in Florida. No wonder someone well heeled
enough to afford that kind of plane didn't try very hard to contest the
6% sales tax (~$114,000).

[1] http://www.newpiper.com/aircraft/mer...ifications.asp

In article ,
Jim Logajan wrote:
Hey folks, I thought you would all like to know that the story about the
Meridian and Cirrus owners getting hit with Florida state sales or use
tax for allegedly doing nothing more than stopping there is actually A
REPEAT FROM MAY 2007!

So what?

--
-Ed Falk,
http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/

(Edward A. Falk) wrote:
In article ,
Jim Logajan wrote:
Hey folks, I thought you would all like to know that the story about the
Meridian and Cirrus owners getting hit with Florida state sales or use
tax for allegedly doing nothing more than stopping there is actually A
REPEAT FROM MAY 2007!

So what?

You elided the essential bits of my post and left that? Why?

On 2008-03-25, Jim Logajan wrote:
Okay - now - why is the story being rehashed at just this time? Any of
you students of life care to raise a hand and give an answer? ;-)

Would you Zoom-bashers (and I'm not contesting whether you're right to do so
or not!) PLEASE explain why AOPA is raising the same concerns, if the whole
thing is just a Zoom vendetta?

Zoom Campbell may well be a kook. Phil Boyer is not.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)

"Jay Maynard" wrote in message
...
On 2008-03-25, Jim Logajan wrote:
Okay - now - why is the story being rehashed at just this time? Any of
you students of life care to raise a hand and give an answer? ;-)

Would you Zoom-bashers (and I'm not contesting whether you're right to do
so
or not!) PLEASE explain why AOPA is raising the same concerns, if the
whole
thing is just a Zoom vendetta?


I suspect Phil Boyer is actually doing something about it, rather than
printing re-runs.