Tax-Free Yachts.

[DirtyMartini]

Closing the loophole would lead to a huge market in tax-free black market yachts. Being exempt from government safety regulations and produced by inferior Mexican labor, these would be floating deathtraps and a hazard to maritime navigation. Also, the yacht mafia would overrun our beach communities, sporting Jolly Roger ascots, drunk on power and Grey Goose. I'd say that's a sloophole we can't afford to close.

Plus, 26 million? That's like one years interest on junior's trust fund. How plebeian.

[Dinner]

BTW the tax exemption covers "buyers of yachts, airplanes and recreational vehicles". Way easy to get $2 billion a year out of all those sales. Every ATV, every jetsky, every dirt motor bike, ever boat, every giant yacht, every snow mobile, and every airplane sold.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-yacht20feb20,1,954235.story

[Kuciwalker]

Ah, now I see how it's going to make up that $2 billion.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Oerdin
BTW the tax exemption covers "buyers of yachts, airplanes and recreational vehicles". Way easy to get $2 billion a year out of all those sales. Every ATV, every jetsky, every dirt motor bike, ever boat, every giant yacht, and every airplane sold.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...1,954235.story

You do realize this is the exact same article word for word that Zk posted and it says nothing of the sort wrt "buyers of airplanes and recreational vehicles," right?

[Kontiki]

Originally posted by Oerdin
BTW the tax exemption covers "buyers of yachts, airplanes and recreational vehicles". Way easy to get $2 billion a year out of all those sales. Every ATV, every jetsky, every dirt motor bike, ever boat, every giant yacht, every snow mobile, and every airplane sold.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...1,954235.story

Where the hell do you get that information from? It's certainly not in your link, and every other source I've seen says closing the loophole will provide approximately $26 million in revenue. One would presume they're already taking into account the various items covered by the loophole into that figure.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
You do realize this is the exact same article word for word that Zk posted and it says nothing of the sort wrt "buyers of airplanes and recreational vehicles," right?

Sorry wrong LA Times Opinion piece.

"Tax breaks for residents who buy a yacht, plane or RVs out of state are unconscionable in a budget crisis."

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-budget19feb19,0,7355011.story

[Kontiki]

Perhaps this is what Oerdin meant to link to:

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-cap18feb18,1,3533042.column?page=1&ctrack=2&cset=true

SACRAMENTO — When you've got Republicans who won't even close a tax loophole for yacht buyers, there isn't much hope of honestly solving California's budget mess.

How can anyone take seriously lawmakers who insist on protecting a "sloophole," as Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez calls it? Why should anyone regard them as anything but rigid ideologues, unwilling to compromise even as the state tumbles toward bankruptcy?

Shamefully, the longest, most intense debates in each legislative house over a $7-billion deficit-reduction package Friday concerned whether to continue allowing purchasers of yachts, RVs and airplanes to avoid the California sales and use tax. They do that by taking delivery out of state and parking the toy there for 90 days. The bill that Republicans blocked in the Assembly would have required the plaything to be stashed outside California for at least a year.

Oregon doesn't impose a sales tax, but offers temporary moorings that are popular with rich California boat buyers.

There was a more logical debate in both houses over whether to cut the already miserly medical provider fees for treating poor patients who are covered by Medi-Cal, California's version of Medicaid. This state right now has the lowest Medicaid reimbursement rates in the nation. And the Legislature voted to slash them 10% starting July 1.

Lawmakers of both parties winced.

Republican Assemblyman Rick Keene of Chico called it "a bad move," warning that rural hospitals, patient transportation firms and pharmacies "will be going out of business," denying poor people access to care.

"Thank you for your Democratic speech," Nuñez told him.

In the Senate, Republican Sam Aanestad of Grass Valley -- a dentist -- said he already had stopped serving Medi-Cal patients because of low rates. Under the new cost-cutting, he said, "there'll be hundreds of doctors dropping out of the program. I predict it's going to lead to the demise of the Medi-Cal program as we know it."

Aanestad added: "It's also an unfair action. We're not reducing salaries of teachers or prison guards or highway patrolmen. But this is easy, because these [providers] don't have a [union] contract."

Democratic Sen. Sheila Kuehl of Santa Monica responded that when Republicans won't consider raising taxes, they can't be too picky about what spending to cut.

A few Republicans also objected to postponing the appointment of new judges in their districts.

Nobody seemed to cringe, however, before delaying meager cost of living increases for 1.3 million impoverished aged, blind and disabled from June until October. Welfare moms also had their scheduled July benefit hikes put off until October.

Actually, these people will be lucky to receive any kind of benefit boosts in the foreseeable future. By the Legislature's calculation, there's still a $7.5-billion hole to fill for the next fiscal year. And that's just the latest depressing figure. The hole is expected to grow even larger Wednesday, when nonpartisan Legislative Analyst Elizabeth G. Hill delivers worse news about the state's declining tax revenue.

Closing the yacht tax loophole would provide mere nickels and dimes: $26 million in the current and next fiscal years.

You can argue over the amount -- and lawmakers did -- but the dollars are less pertinent than the principle.

"It's pretty hard to consider cutting people's medical care without also cutting other people's yacht tax loophole," declared Assembly Budget Committee Chairman John Laird (D-Santa Cruz).

But the committee vice chairman, Republican Roger Niello of Sacramento County, rose to protect the tax break. "I do not believe -- and our [Republican] caucus does not believe -- that raising taxes is an appropriate way to solve our budget problems," he asserted, looking a little uneasy.

In the Senate, Republican Tom McClintock of Thousand Oaks agreed with Democrats that "this is not a tax increase." The loophole, he said, has been "a way to avoid paying the California sales tax. It's tax avoidance, no question." But he still opposed closing it because, the senator insisted, that would hurt California boat-builders and the economy.

The loophole previously had been plugged, but was restored during last summer's protracted budget negotiations by sailboat skipper Dick Ackerman of Irvine, the Senate Republican leader. Closing it again would result in "a severe economic impact," he cautioned. There'd be layoffs of boat craftsmen.

Democrats didn't buy it.

The loophole is a "subsidy for those who are very fortunate to own yachts, planes -- God bless 'em, already," said Sen. Gil Cedillo (D-Los Angeles). But the subsidy needs to end. "I miss Gov. Wilson," Cedillo added. "I respected his courage to confront head-on the challenges of this state."

In 1991, Republican Gov. Pete Wilson raised taxes a record $7 billion and cut spending a like amount to fill a giant deficit.

Today, Cedillo said, "the real crisis is a crisis of leadership."

That was a shot at Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. It's unfortunate how little influence the Republican governor has with GOP lawmakers. Blame that largely on his failure to help them more politically, especially in raising campaign money.

Schwarzenegger, I suspect, would be willing to consider a temporary tax increase to balance the books if there was any hope of coaxing Republicans to follow his lead.

It was the governor who suggested closing the yacht tax loophole. But only three Senate Republicans voted for it, barely enough to pass the measure. In the Assembly, however, just two Republicans voted for the bill, and it fell nine short of receiving the necessary two-thirds majority.

Nuñez will push for another vote Tuesday.

Politically, Democrats would love for Republicans to continue carrying water for tax-dodging, multimillionaire yachtsmen. But for public policy, it would leave budget negotiators dead in the water.

[Dinner]

Also the Republican governor proposed closing the sloophole since he said he'd rather close tax loopholes then cut education and health care.

[Dinner]

That's just the yacht loophole what if you repeal the whole exemption including air planes, RVs, and recreational vehicles?

Claiming these measure, proposed by the Republican governor, is just nickles and dimes is a lie. He's talking about just the tax on yachts while the law covers a lot more then just yachts.

[Dinner]

Shamefully, the longest, most intense debates in each legislative house over a $7-billion deficit-reduction package Friday concerned whether to continue allowing purchasers of yachts, RVs and airplanes to avoid the California sales and use tax. They do that by taking delivery out of state and parking the toy there for 90 days. The bill that Republicans blocked in the Assembly would have required the plaything to be stashed outside California for at least a year.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-cap18feb18,1,3533042.column?ctrack=1&cset=true

Elizabeth G. Hill, the Republican shill Kontiki quoted, is a lying piece of ****. Even worse then your average whore politician.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Sorry wrong LA Times Opinion piece.

An opinion piece? Is that really the best you can do? Really? That's a little sad considering all the news (Remember what that is?) sources only mention yachts and say it would only bring in 26 million.

[Kuciwalker]

Shamefully, the longest, most intense debates in each legislative house over a $7-billion deficit-reduction package Friday concerned whether to continue allowing purchasers of yachts, RVs and airplanes to avoid the California sales and use tax. They do that by taking delivery out of state and parking the toy there for 90 days. The bill that Republicans blocked in the Assembly would have required the plaything to be stashed outside California for at least a year.

This isn't a loophole at all, IMO. If I buy anything else out-of-state I don't have to pay sales tax on it, why would these be different?

[Kontiki]

So editorials are only rallying against the lack of tax on yachts, but not airplanes and RVs (I'm guessing you don't know what RVs are, maybe you should look it up)? I'd also love to see something that shows things like ATVs, dirtbikes and jetskis are exempt. I'm quite sure they're not.

[Kidlicious]

Just make a tax on property bought out of state.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Just make a tax on property bought out of state.

That's illegal, genius.