Industry Associations Send Open Letter To House Speaker John Boehner

As the deadline for raising the debt ceiling looms just after AirVenture, the associations that represent GA have come together to jointly send an open letter to Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) to express their collective opposition to proposed aviation user fees. It's a battle that frankly was considered won only a few months ago, but as the government looks for revenue enhancement that are politically palatable to the general public, GA is once again in the crosshairs.

 
Speaker John Boehner (R-OH)

The nation’s leading general aviation organizations have sent a joint letter to all members of the U.S. House and Senate, urging them to abandon a proposal to charge a $25 “departure fee” on both airline and general aviation flights.

In the letter, the presidents of the EAA, GAMA, HAI, NATA, NBAA, and AOPA tell the legislators, “Our community is deeply concerned about reports suggesting that current negotiations to raise the debt ceiling are giving rise to a resoundingly discredited approach to raising revenues from our industry—user fees.”

The entire general aviation industry believes that the current fuel excise tax system is the most efficient and effective way for general aviation to contribute to the aviation trust fund. Experience elsewhere in the world, on the other hand, demonstrates that user fees cripple general aviation, doing irreparable harm to a vital economic driver.
 
“It is time for everyone to take a collective deep breath and make certain that changes are not made on the fly that hurt general aviation’s economic recovery,” said GAMA’s President and CEO Pete Bunce. “User fees have crippled general aviation in Europe and the last thing we want to see in the U.S. is user fees growing the federal bureaucracy.”

Pete Bunce

"Bad ideas, like bad pennies, have a habit of turning up again and again in Washington,” said AOPA President and CEO Craig L. Fuller. “User fees are a bad idea that hurts an entire industry, the economy, and the nation. They simply make no sense. Time and again we've seen that they stifle aviation and compromise safety."

“GA already pays its fair share and then some for the small segment of the national airspace system that it uses,” said Rod Hightower, EAA President/CEO. “A user fee system will not only create an expensive and unnecessary federal bureaucracy, but also instantly hinder the growth of general aviation and drive more job losses in our country.”

“Now is not the time to revisit the bad idea of user fees,” said Matthew S. Zucaro, president of HAI. “Such a detrimental initiative will only result in a debilitating effect on the helicopter community. Helicopters perform missions on a daily basis for the greater good of society—such as emergency medical transport, aerial firefighting, law enforcement, search and rescue, disaster relief, national security, and counterterrorism. Helicopter operators already pay more than their fair share when one considers their minimal impact on the ATC infrastructure. Enough is enough.”

“Instead of embracing the economic growth and jobs this great industry provides to the U.S., the President continues to vilify our community,” stated NATA President & CEO James K. Coyne. “It’s time for this Administration to cease any and all consideration of a user fee system for a general aviation community that is still recovering from the recession.”

“As policymakers have thoroughly reviewed the idea of user fees in recent years, the general aviation community has consistently said that we should not try to adopt foreign-style user fees, but should instead build upon the time-tested and proven fuel-tax system,” said NBAA President and CEO Ed Bolen. “This pay-at-the-pump mechanism is the best – and should remain the exclusive – means for the industry to meet its tax obligations.”

In their letter, the leaders conclude, “We urge you not to create an expensive new federal collection bureaucracy that will need to be funded on the backs of general aviation operators in the name of deficit reduction. It is a nonsensical and self-defeating approach."

“For general aviation, fuel taxes work – user fees do not. There has to be a way for our industry to pay at the pump rather than creating a new federal collection bureaucracy. Please do not destroy a great national asset and critical industry."

The full text of the letter follows:

Dear Speaker Boehner:

Our community is deeply concerned about reports suggesting that current negotiations to raise the debt ceiling are giving rise to a resoundingly discredited approach to raising revenues from our industry—user fees. Over the past 5 years, both chambers of Congress have carefully considered new aviation user fees and overwhelmingly rejected them. We see no reason to override the will of committee and other congressional policymakers in the context of debt ceiling negotiations.

General Aviation is enormously important to the United States. We employ 1.2 million workers and generate $150 billion in economic activity. We generate economic development in thousands of U.S. communities with little or no airline service. We help businesses of all sizes to be more efficient and productive. Additionally, we perform missions on a daily basis for the greater good of society, such as emergency medical transport, aerial firefighting, law enforcement, search & rescue, disaster relief, national security and counterterrorism. Currently, general aviation contributes to the federal government through an effective system of fuel taxes.

While no industry enjoys paying taxes, we strongly believe that a general aviation fuel tax represents the best way for our industry to contribute revenues to the federal government and support its efforts to enhance our air transportation system. The general aviation community has worked with Congress to build on this proven and efficient approach to revenues as part of the FAA Reauthorization debate, particularly to enhance the acceleration of the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen). Our support for the fuel tax mechanism stands in stark contrast to our opposition to foreign-style user fees. User fees have absolutely devastated general aviation in other parts of the world, and in the United States, they would only serve to create a new federal collection bureaucracy of billing agents, auditors and collection officials to harass small businesses and others. In contrast, with the fuel tax, the government is prepaid for its services, and the operators are not saddled with new and onerous administrative burdens. Additionally, the fuel tax is far preferable to a ?fee? because the fuel tax is set by the Congress and is not subject to annual increases deemed desirable by a federal bureaucracy.

We urge you not to create an expensive new federal collection bureaucracy that will need to be funded on the backs of general aviation operators in the name of deficit reduction. It is a nonsensical and self-defeating approach. For general aviation, fuel taxes work – user fees do not. There has to be a way for our industry to pay at the pump rather than creating a new federal collection bureaucracy. Please do not destroy a great national asset and critical industry.

FMI: http://johnboehner.house.gov