Fox News Tells 'Corporate Jet Owners Are The Real Victims' Side of Story

Fox News Tells ‘Corporate Jet Owners Are The Real Victims’ Side of Story

Wingnuts • July 2011 • Views: 1,241

During the President’s anger bear speech yesterday when he yelled at Congress to fix the stupid debt ceiling already, Obama proposed ending tax breaks for corporate jet owners as a means of raising revenue instead of cutting from programs that make sure children do not starve. Automatically, this means that Fox News must do a story on the plight of victimized corporate jet owners, who are just the latest group of voiceless Americans thrown under the bus by giant ogre Nobama. Who really needs those $3 billion a year more than those corporate jet owners, those people who are singlehandedly keeping the economic recovery afloat with their tax break from 2008?

See wonkette for the fox news article and premium-grade snark.

Recent Pages by iceweasel:
Witches, Satanism, and an Exorcism: A Tour Through the Rightwing Psyche Gateway Pundit Doesn't Understand What Words Mean Monday Morning Lockdown Literature Schadenfreude: One Trump Moment--Watch Ted Cruz Issues Statement, Blames the Bitches

Jump to bottom

7 comments

watching you tiny alien kittens are Mon, Jul 4, 2011 8:10:54am

I keep thinking of that scene from "The Jerk" where the private plane owner tearfully begs for money from Steve Martin to redo his plane interior because his leather seats are cracked.

Buck Mon, Jul 4, 2011 9:37:07am

The tax break was actually given to them by the Obama Administration. He is the one who proposed and passed it in the first place.

It is the law of unintended consequences. In 2009 Obama and Democrats felt that the tax breaks would be paid for by the jobs the industry would create and keep.

KingKenrod Mon, Jul 4, 2011 12:34:12pm

The Fox article doesn't say anything about the rich being victims - Wonkette's reading comprehension has never been very good.

The Fox article points out - as has been shown many times in the past - that taxes on luxury items inevitably hurt the manufacturers more than the rich while not raising much revenue in the process.

For instance, the luxury taxes on yachts about 20 years ago:

http://www.nytimes.com/1992/02/07/business/falling-tax-would-lift-all-yachts.html

jvic Mon, Jul 4, 2011 1:17:18pm

1. re: #3 KingKenrod

The Fox article doesn't say anything about the rich being victims...

Indeed. Aviation unions are among those protesting.

2. Meh. Who doesn't make a blooper now and then?

3. Nevertheless, leaving bona fide entrepreneurs out of the reckoning, I agree that the typical American CEO is grotesquely overpaid. Increasing taxes on that CEO lets the government profit from the overpayment. I'd rather find constructive ways to end it.

goddamnedfrank Mon, Jul 4, 2011 1:25:28pm

re: #2 Buck

The tax break was actually given to them by the Obama Administration. He is the one who proposed and passed it in the first place.

It is the law of unintended consequences. In 2009 Obama and Democrats felt that the tax breaks would be paid for by the jobs the industry would create and keep.

The tax break was inserted by the republicans via amendment to the stimulus bill, then the vast majority of them voted against the bill, Obama never proposed it. He signed the bill into law because vetoing it over that Republican addition wasn't worth it.

Dancing along the light of day Mon, Jul 4, 2011 3:57:31pm

LOL! "premium grade snark"!

RogueOne Tue, Jul 5, 2011 5:48:13am

re: #5 goddamnedfrank

The tax break was inserted by the republicans via amendment to the stimulus bill, then the vast majority of them voted against the bill, Obama never proposed it. He signed the bill into law because vetoing it over that Republican addition wasn't worth it.

That's a weird defense and quite a bit different than the administrations take:

No, The American Recovery And Reinvestment Act Did Not Create The Tax Preference For Corporate Jets
[Link: thinkprogress.org...]

The source of the confusion is that congress passed a “bonus depreciation” law in 2008 as an economic stimulus measure, and ARRA continued it. This depreciation is a broad (albeit temporary) provision that includes to a wide range of capital goods including both commercial and corporate aircraft. By contrast, the tax break at issue in the negotiations is a 1987 provision of the tax code that allows corporate jets to be depreciated over a five-year period rather than the seven-year period required for commercial aviation.

The current tax break is ok but the one from '87 under Reagan is evil. Gotta keep the talking points straight.

Auto

This page has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!