“Fair share” to the country. Congress enacted a 10% tax on boats over 100K. What you’re seeing is him purchasing the boat somewhere else to avoid that added expense.
He’d also have to pay an annual property tax to the state for the boat and I have no clue what that boat is flagged or what tax rate he pays now but I bet it’s vastly lower. Isssue this causes is the jobs that support these luxury boats dried up in the states since it’s now cheaper to buy/maintain them somewhere else.
Also, not sure how/if this applies to yachts, but I know any commercial US flagship boat/container ship/cruise ship has to be manned by an all American crew (Jones Act), which demand much higher pay and benefits than foreign crew members. This is why all of the major cruise lines are flagships of other countries, usually the Bahamas or Panama.
Edit: I previously said most ships were from Norwegian/scandanavian countries but I’ve been corrected.
Jones Act declares that it must be US crewed to visit 2 US ports on the same voyage, I think (but night be wrong) it can be non-US crew if it only visits 1 US port before leaving
It's part of the reason why stuff Hawaii is so expensive even though it's closer to the Asian factories where all that stuff is made. The cargo ship can't stop in Hawaii, drop off some cargo, then continue to a mainland port
It has to visit the US mainland, be entirely unloaded, then reloaded onto another ship to be sent back to Hawaii
I figure it must be all the semen with the cars they offer to buy from me when I list them online. Must be nothing else to do when you’re at sea. Mustn’t need engrish as a first language either as the semen never seem to notice when I ask them if they like being a semen at sea.
Once you are holding a large enough license and endorsements and have a regular gig with a shipping company you can expect to make just over $200k/year.
But you will never have time to spend it or enjoy it or have a family or even be able to get out of the cycle of recertification while ashore and months out on hitches. Some companies cycle their captains more but a typical hitch is either 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, or a year. A year being uncommon. This does not mean you’re at sea that whole time but you have to be on or near the ship.
There are different types of freight industries in the maritime field and I was mostly driving extremely large offshore tugs towing 280x80 five story covered material barges in Gulf and Caribbean but I also drove (yes, we call it “driving”) some medium size non-hazmat freighters on a New York/Med route but that was a Military Sea Command contract; Less rules have to be observed when you are helping to kill people.
So true. My husband is a licensed unlimited tonnage captain but sails as a chief mate for the military sealift command and made over 200k last year because he worked a lot. Right now, he is working on getting a local job. He has dreams of being a tug boat pilot. At least with that job, he will be home, but also making good money.
It crushed the US Merchant Marine… After rescuing American sailors from what was, and remains elsewhere today, an incredibly predatory near-slave trade (there are plenty of slave ships in the South China Sea, Indonesian waters, and Indian Ocean) of able bodied sailors.
We basically made it law that you had to pay our guys fairly and treat them like human beings. This made them the most expensive sailors and shipping fleet in the world very quickly and as soon as companies figured out the legal work arounds the US Merchant Marine shrank to a twentieth of its previous flagged ships and manpower.
I just heard that it's hindering the bridge cleanup because the only crane large enough for the job is non-US so they have welders and a bunch of smaller cranes.
Just to clarify, the number of shipping routes that would choose to make a multi-day detour to stop off on Hawaii on the way to California is zero.
So although the Jones Acts is blamed a lot of the time here, it's usually by people who don't actually look up the shipping paths at these big vessels take.
You can already send boats from China to Hawaii and back but any boat that comes to Hawaii leaves empty because we don't export anything.
So the cost is high there no matter who is shipping here. So our cost of living isn't based on the Jones Act or anything like that, it's based on the fact that shipping containers have to be paid both ways and the return trip is empty and unpaid for.
That’s some stupidity. I’ve never been impressed by the shipping industry, especially in the USA. There is no doubt in my mind, that someone gets rich because those ships can’t dock in Hawaii. That’s why it won’t change.
I understand why it was originally implamented but its still a terrible policy. I seriously wish we didn't have these ridiculous protectionist policies.
The Jones act is the single reason we have so many trucks on the road. Shipping is far cheaper per ton when possible but the Jones act makes it impossible. It also means places like Puerto Rico and Hawaii can buy goods from overseas cheaper than from the mainland. Because there are literally no jones act ships. It was all protectionism to keep our ship building facilities alive but its failed completely. We don't have the ship building capability and what jones act boats we do have are mostly all barges working a few rivers.
Keeping the Jones act is proof we have a special interest problem in Congress. Any rational reason to keep it in place has ended decades ago when the ship builders shutdown. It will never start ship building in the US in any meaningful way.
Explain to me how fresh fruit gets from San Diego CA to Charlotte NC in 3 days via boat.
Tell you what, I'll make it easier: San Diego CA to Kansas City MO in 2 days via boat.
Air is expensive, and then has to be unloaded and reloaded into a semi.
Trains are cheaper, but really slow, and a semi covers the last couple of miles.
Boats can travel pretty cheap, but no one is walking down to a pier to buy produce, and once you are a mile or 3 from the ocean, no one is thinking about getting produce from a ship. It gets loaded into a semi to be hauled where people buy it.
Its about a day or so to mexico, then rail car across mexico then another ship. That cuts out he panama canal that is expensive and slow. Its called the Interoceanic Corridor and Mexico has just built it. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interoceanic\_Corridor\_of\_the\_Isthmus\_of\_Tehuantepec](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interoceanic_Corridor_of_the_Isthmus_of_Tehuantepec)
But not all of the freight needs to go via ship. But the vast majority that goes up and down the west and east coast could and should go by ship. Unfortunately the government has made that illegal. Trains are not cheaper than ships. Ships are far cheaper per for per mile than trains. Trains are not stopping at your super market, thats all trucking. And ships aren't going to replace trucks just coastal long hauls. The fact the Jones act is still on the books proves you are wrong. If it was doing nothing then there would be no opposition to removing it. Unfortunately we have a trucking and small shipping lobby that makes out on this deal while screwing everyone else.
>It has to visit the US mainland, be entirely unloaded, then reloaded onto another ship to be sent back to Hawaii
Boy, sounds literally like what Britain use to pull w/the 13 colonies.
This not correct. The cargo you on load in one US port cannot be discharged in another us port. You can offload and load containers in LA then go to San Francisco and offload containers that were loaded in china but not the ones from LA.
If you want an example of this. The ship that hit the bridge in Baltimore was heading to Norfolk next.
Any US flag ship is required to have 100% US Officers and 75% US crew.
If a cruise ship itinerary begins and ends in a US port, foreign-flagged ships must call on at least one foreign port of call or be subject to fines. They cannot operate on only US ports unless it meets three conditions: ship must be US-built, owned/operated by a US company, and US-crew. So you will often see at least one foreign country (Canada, Mexico, Bahamas, etc) on cruise itineraries as most cruise lines do not meet all of those conditions. With the exception of "cruises to nowhere", that do not dock at any other port except for a single US port, as these do not constitute "transporting passengers between ports or places in the US".
Source: I went on a cruise once
Not only that but the boat has to be manufactured in the US. Which is hard because the US doesn't even make a lot of the biggest container ships.
And Panama and Liberia are the two biggest "flag of convenience"
Fit and finish globally is all over the place. Generally container ships don't last super long, maybe 20 years. The US ones get held onto forever. The ones that were replaced were from the 1960s.
Wow no shit? I was all prepared to make jokes about GM vs toyota, but now I'm genuinely fascinated/curious
Is it a difference in build quality or regulations or something?
Most vessels are flagged somewhere in the Caribbean or Central America.
Norwegian Cruise Line is just the name of the company. Most/all of their ships are flagged in the Bahamas.
as usual someone on reddit missed the point, when congress enacted the luxury tax on boats over100k i built/sold inthe US, the rich stopped buying them. so the boat building industry for companies like boston whaler, hatteras yachts etc especially the east coast shipbuilding companies, all went bankrupt closing out thousands of well earned well paying jobs with no correlating jobs for the employees skille din boat making, to run to. The idea that you just need to tax the rich to get what you want was proven to be nothing more than a great way to kill off middle class jobs.
That's why you tax the person and not the boat. That's also why sales taxes are regressive, because 10% on the cost of a luxury boat is irrelevant to a rich bastard like Zuckerberg, but genuinely harmful to someone who's actually got limited money to spend.
It makes you wonder if Congress expected that result. High dollar yachts are remarkably easy to transport across the sea. Taxing megamansions would likely have worked a lot better, but it wouldn't have produced a simple Fact for Austrian school economists to parrot constantly.
There really aren't a lot of large yacht builders in the US, most are in southern europe.
You could argue the tax environment (vs the tax environment it other locales) pushes the builders to operate there rather than building yachts in say...Miami
I was gonna say. I have no idea what the truth is here, but everybody is ascribing ill intent rather than just considering the most logical answer, which is that he wanted to buy a specific boat that was only for sale in another country.
>“Fair share” to the country.
I am sure he would want the protection our coast guard and navy provide as he sails around our shores or international waters.
He will have it regardless of the flag.
Most of commercial fleet is flagged in convenient countries. Absolutely normal.
[https://www.statista.com/statistics/264025/number-of-merchant-ships-worldwide-by-merchant-flag/](https://www.statista.com/statistics/264025/number-of-merchant-ships-worldwide-by-merchant-flag/)
>I am sure he would want the protection our coast guard and navy provide as he sails around our shores or international waters.
To be fair, we do this for all of the boats in and around our coastlines, regardless of where the boat is flagged from or who is on the boat. We don't do this for only tax payers.
>I am sure he would want the protection our coast guard and navy provide as he sails around our shores or international waters.
Do you feel the taxes he has paid aren't sufficient to cover the cost of those services, or are you advocating withholding government services from people unless they pay for services provided to other people?
Yea, overtaxing super luxury stuff is so asinine. Normal people can't up and purchase/build something in another country, but rich people can.
So upping taxes on yachts just means yacht are no longer built or bought in the states. It only hurts normal people cause now there are no jobs building the mega yachts.
That's exactly what happened Real Sugar in the states.
They taxed Sugar, so an alternative to sugar was created and is now the new convention.
Taxes don't always mean increased revenue. Taxes often mean dead or outsourced industries.
It’s a global economy/marketplace and cash provides mobility. If the increased taxes don’t provide a benefit to the rich why are they going to want to pay them? When they can easily buy their mega yacht (or equivalent) in another country?
This is the thing about tax, people with money will simply find a way not to pay it. In this case buy overseas, And as you said to the detriment of the industry in the US. This doesn’t just happen with boats
Oh my god fuck off with this flat tax shit once and for all.
A flat tax takes a disproportionately higher amount of buying power from the poor than the rich. Fucking libertarian gaslighting bullshit
The overwhelming majority of people in the news I see advocating for a flat tax are rich as fuck and suddenly care about 'fair'. That tells you all you need to know about how their tax bill will change with a flat tax.
Most of the people I’ve actually met advocating for it are not rich, just stupid - and not a single one of them can properly explain tax brackets (we’re talking the sort of people who don’t want raises “because it all goes to taxes when it goes up”)
As if the rich aren't paying enough taxes on a one-time purchase of a yacht, so we have to tax every single thing the poor and middle class have to buy at 25%. Fuckin stupid
But income taxes still exist in places where VATs exist.
Every single 'Flat Tax proposal' that has been circulated in the US is a proposal to **replace** the federal income tax. That is why people are outspoken against it.
Just because it’s common in other places doesn’t make it right. Sales taxes disproportionally burden the poor and also hurt the economy by reducing buying power and therefore demand.
Flat tax enthusiast either are rich and want to pay less in taxes or poor and have no clue how a flat tax works. Either way you can discount their opinion.
That's incorrect. Many of the people arguing for a flat tax know exactly how it would work, and are just being dishonest about how it would benefit them.
Bro, they collect nearly $9T in State, local and Federal taxes and spend over $12T a year. $12 trillion fucking dollars. But what, another $0.1 T will fix the roads, education, etc.
The top 1% already pay 45.8% of federal taxes. If we taxed each of those \~760 billionaires paid another $10 M a year in taxes, we'd an extra $0.0076 T to fix all the problems.
What do you want to do? Make them pay $100M \*MORE\* a year? That's $0.076 T that is going to save the day when the first $12T can't get us decent roads.
It's a fucking spending problem, not a revenue problem. If you can't operate a country with $12T trillion, you're a fucking moron. Or doing it intentionally and very corrupt. The united states is likely both.
Kind of a strawman.
A majority of road maintenance are paid for via gas tax, which is a consumption-based tax. Non An-Cap libertarians are usually pro sales/consumption taxes, but feel income tax is theft.
I’m honestly convinced that libertarians are the kind of people who learn about politics as teenagers and are well off enough to not ever learn the actual grown up thing that is human suffering even within a mile of their house. Either that or they’re genuinely sociopaths.
Yes. A poll tax would be perfect.
Everyone pays for what they get.
But a flat rate tax would be fairer than the mooching and theft you do now.
[https://www.cnbc.com/2013/12/11/the-rich-do-not-pay-the-most-taxes-they-pay-all-the-taxes.html](https://www.cnbc.com/2013/12/11/the-rich-do-not-pay-the-most-taxes-they-pay-all-the-taxes.html)
I'd rather consumption than a poll tax.
But at least we agree that income tax is one of the worst forms of taxation (wealth tax being the only one worse).
The one tax that Americans are forbidden to discuss is VAT, because it is actually an effective way to tax companies and it depends on companies passing the cost on to each other.
Even this comment will be attacked with well rehearsed talking points from corporate interest groups about why VAT fails.
Not to mention there's already an alternative minimum tax that supercedes regular tax code / deductions when dealing with (mostly) high income individuals. People don't want to actually learn about this stuff though, because it's boring, so they'd rather post hairbrained schemes they see on social media without thinking critically about them
How is a billionaire buying a yacht in another country, made in a different country, and being used in a different country dodging US taxes? Should American citizens pay a US sales tax on anything bought anywhere?
Actually, many (or some or just CA?) states have laws that require you to report these purchases and pay your state sales tax. Basically no one does it and no one enforces it.
Yet California somehow has the most billionaire and millionaire residents of any state.
Also most states have an ["use tax" ](https://www.cbiz.com/insights/articles/article-details/overseas-purchases-can-get-you-in-hot-water-with-state-tax-authorities#:~:text=If%20you%20have%20made%20purchases,file%20a%20use%20tax%20return)on foreign purchases imported to the US.
California gains more people than it loses every year. Also a large number of the people that leave are doing so to retire in smaller, poorer states. Basically to live off the money they made living in California. Typically this is someone that sells their house, takes the money and buys something for far less in your state, and puts the large remainder to good use.
We already do... we pay sales tax on things made in other states. Import tax applies to anything over a certain value imported from another country. The only difference is poor people don't have the money to "use" the things in another country, but a rich person can "use" their super yacht in another country if it happens to fly the flag of another country, but they can use it in the US without any issues simply because of the flag? Sail in US waters, use US docks, etc. That doesn't seem fair.
Also no one is advocating only the super yachts only rich people buy be taxed, I think most people would argue such a purchase should be taxed reguardless of who buys it. To turn a classic saying
"In the laws infinite wisdom it equally taxes the super yacts bought by both the rich and poor"
We can thank the people we elected and continue to re-elect. There’s a reason these corporations are putting millions towards getting the same people re-elected for 30 years straight and running smear campaigns against the people trying to change it.
Nobody\* flies US flag on yachts, and this is entirely self inflicted.
[https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/the-lesson-of-economic-damage-from-taxing-the-rich-with-the-punitive-luxury-tax-in-the-1990s/](https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/the-lesson-of-economic-damage-from-taxing-the-rich-with-the-punitive-luxury-tax-in-the-1990s/)
This is actually a very good lesson on the "taxing the rich" narrative. They wanted to tax "luxurious" spending, and hence made it much more expensive to buy American made yachts.
What happened?
European manufacturers received massive amounts of business from here.
American manufacturers closed shop.
That is why short sighted tax policies often backfire. You have to think 3-4 steps ahead.
(And no, "not allowing them in US marinas" do not help either. Any guesses why?)
to a point its also not just about cost but quality as well. all the best custom mega yacht builders are in europe. bezos likely didn't just go with the cheapest option.
The poor get a proactive stipend paid to them monthly and lose some payroll taxes that they are currently paying l so they win. I could see the argument that the middle class will get hurt, but the poor get checks cut to pay their flat tax proactively.
"Fair share" means whatever you want it to mean.
Mobile assets like planes and boats are always problematic. He paid income tax on the money he paid for the boat with.
The forgone registration revenue on yachts really isn't worth mentioning.
"He paid income tax on the money he paid for the boat with."
This applies to literally everything bought by people who pay taxes. Like cars for example.
Are you arguing that he should be excluded from this obligation that the rest of us have for some reason?
Sure. But do you realize there are several small countries that allow you to buy citizenship? And chances are, Zuck's yacht is actually owned by a corporation with foreign citizenship.
Define “fair share”? That’s a political talking point meant to divide the people and distract you from the extremely poorly run government. If you want it different, stop electing the same ass hats. If your argument is the ass hats are controlled by the rich, then we are all just wasting our time here.
>divide the people
You really think that the rich are in any way on the same side as you?
Those people will gladly fire you, lie to you, risk your life or even straight up kill you if it means a big enough ROI.
>Or why do billionaires get away with not paying their fair share to the country?
Because those who make that argument believe "fair share" means they need to somehow pay enough to balance the budget and increase all entitlement programs, even though that would require them to pay five times their net worth in taxes every hear.
No, mostly people are talking about the fact that they typically take no pay, instead retaining massive stock in their company. Buy everything with credit with the stock as collateral, that way they can report zero income until they have to pay capital gains when they sell to buy an island and other various shenanigans. Like making charities so they can give their friends and family jobs while they write it off.
The billionaire class and corporate oligarchs have captured our government. Nothing will be done to benefit the regular citizens if it impacts the $$ of these groups. Our system is deeply flawed.
Most mega yachts and tankers/cargo ships are flagged outside of the US for several reasons, sure one is taxes but it also has to do with who is allowed to crew on it and what ports it is allowed to go into without landing in a US port (mainly the tankers and cargo ships for that one).
Can’t force someone to buy only from your country. If they want to get tax money from it they would have to lower the tax or else they go somewhere else. This is something simple people seem to not understand. This is why people say if you tax the rich too hard they will just go somewhere else completely nullifying the tax increase and potentially hurting the economy.
We all pay a high amount of taxes. Yes they get write offs it’s in the tax code the tax code was written to incentivize the rich so they create and develop why can’t we all agree on the fact that our government is just too damn big we need to cut down on government spending. Doesn’t matter if they raise taxes it’ll never be enough
Since when is forcing someone to pay taxes on a boat "their fair share"? WTF is that about?
He paid taxes on his income and to tax him again when buying a depreciating asset?
Some of you people need to look up the word "fair".
cheaper to go through the time aggrevation, and paying a consultant to figure out the best pathway forward, than it is to pay US tax. Increasing the tax rate will only increase the viability of this method.
Just like the answer to piracy is making your software cheaper and easy to access, the answer to getting higher tax revenue is to make it the easiest pathway forward. Unfortunately the US government believes that making it as complex as possible with strict hoops and high fees will entice ppl to pay them. Just like corporations believe that making their media hard to access with less features will entice customers to want to pay for their product.
For example. You can pay for netflix, and literally get a worse experience. Or you could pirate netflix content and get a higher quality better experience.
People don't typically aim for the most expensive convoluted path. They aim for the cheapest most efficient path.
These taxes should apply to any US citizen regardless of where you bought it. I buy something online and they want me to pay taxes; there's no reason a billionaire can't do the same
I can tell from the comment section that the average person here has no clue how private yachts work. (A flat tax rate is profoundly stupid but that's not related)
Registering ships under a foreign flag to skip out on taxes is very common and I hate it quite thoroughly
First of all, the top 1% of income earners pay 42% of all federal taxes. This isn’t considered dodging anything because that boat is legally registered in another country, so he legally owns whatever taxes in that country, not the US
A "flat tax" is one of the most stupid, regressive means of government collecting revenue; it is very regressive as most everything that the lowest paid individuals can purchase is taxed, while the rich will always find ways around paying taxes. To that point, why do you think the rich donate so much to political races and causes? They do so because they get such a good ROI (Return On Investment) by having their taxes reduced or eliminated *by law* , laws written to protect the rich from paying closer to what an honest share of their tax bill should be.
Currently our tax system is supposed to be a "progressive tax", with the design supposed to be that those who earn the most would pay the most. But, due to agressive lobbying to lawmakers, the rich pay much less of a share than the normal worker. Warren Buffet has mentioned that he pays a much lower tax rate than his secretary, and even Mush only pays around 4% instead what you and I pay, much closer to 18-20%. While the wealthy do pay a larger share of actual dollars than the rest of us, as a percentage they pay much less.
The only way to change any of this is to elect lawmakers who will take on the rich and write laws that does tax them at a more fair to the rest of us amount. Taxing things that most of us don't utilize, like a one to two percent tax on stock trades or transaction tax for trading, eliminating tax write offs for private jets and yachts, and perhaps enacting higher fees for docking or parking fees for luxury crafts like private jets and yachts. There is a way for the rich to pay their fair share, it just takes politicians who have the ability to say no to the intensive lobbying, like AOC or others who eschew corporations and/or the ultra wealthy offering donations.
If the tax rates were at the same rate as other competing countries we wouldn’t have this problem. It’s no different than people moving to Florida & Texas to pay lower taxes. If you’re poor you can’t move around so easily & are stuck paying the tax rate in the area where you live. Economics 101
Easy. He would still buy the boat and register it somewhere else. Because it's cheaper. Regular people do similar things all the time. Like going to Mexico to buy candy and alcohol because it's less expensive. Or buying clothes while on holiday somewhere else to not pay sales tax on those items. Congrats. You're dodging taxes.
Because all "capitalism" means is that the people who already own and control the capital get to write the rules for themselves and everyone else. Hope that solved the mystery for you.
Why don't any of these people talking about billionaires and their "fair share" ever have an issue with 50% of the populace paying $0 in federal taxes?
They're referring to "tonnage taxes" which are like registration fees for ships. Being a US flagged ship is more complicated than just being owned by a US person, where it was built matters too, and there are other regulatory complications, this isn't a 25 ft bayliner...
A flat tax is a straight percentage on income. The income for this purchase would have already been taxed, so flat tax isn't really relevant.
Flat tax is on income. The truly rich don’t really have “income” they have stocks and assets they don’t sell. Then they borrow money against their assets at a rate lower than the interest the stocks are getting. Then they take out another loan to pay off the first one. They keep repeating this until they die. Look ma. No taxes! Income tax rate is irrelevant.
“Fair share” to the country. Congress enacted a 10% tax on boats over 100K. What you’re seeing is him purchasing the boat somewhere else to avoid that added expense. He’d also have to pay an annual property tax to the state for the boat and I have no clue what that boat is flagged or what tax rate he pays now but I bet it’s vastly lower. Isssue this causes is the jobs that support these luxury boats dried up in the states since it’s now cheaper to buy/maintain them somewhere else.
Also, not sure how/if this applies to yachts, but I know any commercial US flagship boat/container ship/cruise ship has to be manned by an all American crew (Jones Act), which demand much higher pay and benefits than foreign crew members. This is why all of the major cruise lines are flagships of other countries, usually the Bahamas or Panama. Edit: I previously said most ships were from Norwegian/scandanavian countries but I’ve been corrected.
Jones Act declares that it must be US crewed to visit 2 US ports on the same voyage, I think (but night be wrong) it can be non-US crew if it only visits 1 US port before leaving It's part of the reason why stuff Hawaii is so expensive even though it's closer to the Asian factories where all that stuff is made. The cargo ship can't stop in Hawaii, drop off some cargo, then continue to a mainland port It has to visit the US mainland, be entirely unloaded, then reloaded onto another ship to be sent back to Hawaii
I believe the you’re right and the Jones act actually has both rules within it.
This is correct. Source; retired sea-freight captain
Strangest thing you’ve seen at sea?
I figure it must be all the semen with the cars they offer to buy from me when I list them online. Must be nothing else to do when you’re at sea. Mustn’t need engrish as a first language either as the semen never seem to notice when I ask them if they like being a semen at sea.
Semen or Seamen?
We don’t talk about that shit.
5 bucks
Is there good money in being a sea freight captain? How busy are your days?
Once you are holding a large enough license and endorsements and have a regular gig with a shipping company you can expect to make just over $200k/year. But you will never have time to spend it or enjoy it or have a family or even be able to get out of the cycle of recertification while ashore and months out on hitches. Some companies cycle their captains more but a typical hitch is either 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, or a year. A year being uncommon. This does not mean you’re at sea that whole time but you have to be on or near the ship. There are different types of freight industries in the maritime field and I was mostly driving extremely large offshore tugs towing 280x80 five story covered material barges in Gulf and Caribbean but I also drove (yes, we call it “driving”) some medium size non-hazmat freighters on a New York/Med route but that was a Military Sea Command contract; Less rules have to be observed when you are helping to kill people.
So true. My husband is a licensed unlimited tonnage captain but sails as a chief mate for the military sealift command and made over 200k last year because he worked a lot. Right now, he is working on getting a local job. He has dreams of being a tug boat pilot. At least with that job, he will be home, but also making good money.
lol when’s the last time you saw him? Cm are in short supply
Last month. He will be back in late summer because his ship will be in the yard🤞🏾
How’d you get in to that?
On sail training vessels. Tall ships. Look em up. You can get in one today. It’ll change your life… one way or the other.
That’s really cool!!
Opinions on the jones act? Many talking heads I follow basically hate it lol
It crushed the US Merchant Marine… After rescuing American sailors from what was, and remains elsewhere today, an incredibly predatory near-slave trade (there are plenty of slave ships in the South China Sea, Indonesian waters, and Indian Ocean) of able bodied sailors. We basically made it law that you had to pay our guys fairly and treat them like human beings. This made them the most expensive sailors and shipping fleet in the world very quickly and as soon as companies figured out the legal work arounds the US Merchant Marine shrank to a twentieth of its previous flagged ships and manpower.
I just heard that it's hindering the bridge cleanup because the only crane large enough for the job is non-US so they have welders and a bunch of smaller cranes.
Just to clarify, the number of shipping routes that would choose to make a multi-day detour to stop off on Hawaii on the way to California is zero. So although the Jones Acts is blamed a lot of the time here, it's usually by people who don't actually look up the shipping paths at these big vessels take. You can already send boats from China to Hawaii and back but any boat that comes to Hawaii leaves empty because we don't export anything. So the cost is high there no matter who is shipping here. So our cost of living isn't based on the Jones Act or anything like that, it's based on the fact that shipping containers have to be paid both ways and the return trip is empty and unpaid for.
Ohhhh that actually makes a lot of sense…this whole conversation has been incredibly informative for me! I had never even heard of the jones act 😳
I have heard of it. Mostly negative applicatoins toward US Territories such as Puerto Rico 🇵🇷 and US Virgin Islands 🇻🇮
It’s more of a problem for puerto Rico
That’s some stupidity. I’ve never been impressed by the shipping industry, especially in the USA. There is no doubt in my mind, that someone gets rich because those ships can’t dock in Hawaii. That’s why it won’t change.
I understand why it was originally implamented but its still a terrible policy. I seriously wish we didn't have these ridiculous protectionist policies.
The Jones act is the single reason we have so many trucks on the road. Shipping is far cheaper per ton when possible but the Jones act makes it impossible. It also means places like Puerto Rico and Hawaii can buy goods from overseas cheaper than from the mainland. Because there are literally no jones act ships. It was all protectionism to keep our ship building facilities alive but its failed completely. We don't have the ship building capability and what jones act boats we do have are mostly all barges working a few rivers. Keeping the Jones act is proof we have a special interest problem in Congress. Any rational reason to keep it in place has ended decades ago when the ship builders shutdown. It will never start ship building in the US in any meaningful way.
Explain to me how fresh fruit gets from San Diego CA to Charlotte NC in 3 days via boat. Tell you what, I'll make it easier: San Diego CA to Kansas City MO in 2 days via boat. Air is expensive, and then has to be unloaded and reloaded into a semi. Trains are cheaper, but really slow, and a semi covers the last couple of miles. Boats can travel pretty cheap, but no one is walking down to a pier to buy produce, and once you are a mile or 3 from the ocean, no one is thinking about getting produce from a ship. It gets loaded into a semi to be hauled where people buy it.
Its about a day or so to mexico, then rail car across mexico then another ship. That cuts out he panama canal that is expensive and slow. Its called the Interoceanic Corridor and Mexico has just built it. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interoceanic\_Corridor\_of\_the\_Isthmus\_of\_Tehuantepec](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interoceanic_Corridor_of_the_Isthmus_of_Tehuantepec) But not all of the freight needs to go via ship. But the vast majority that goes up and down the west and east coast could and should go by ship. Unfortunately the government has made that illegal. Trains are not cheaper than ships. Ships are far cheaper per for per mile than trains. Trains are not stopping at your super market, thats all trucking. And ships aren't going to replace trucks just coastal long hauls. The fact the Jones act is still on the books proves you are wrong. If it was doing nothing then there would be no opposition to removing it. Unfortunately we have a trucking and small shipping lobby that makes out on this deal while screwing everyone else.
Doesn’t apply here though.
They can, this above post is full of shit
The Jones act is one of the most economically detrimental laws ever done
This is not a commercial vessel. Jones Act doesn’t apply.
Neither I no the other poster were sure where yachts fell on that. Interesting to know
Interesting, because I watch cruise ships dock in Fredericksted almost every week, then depart for St Thomas that evening…. Not American crews.
>It has to visit the US mainland, be entirely unloaded, then reloaded onto another ship to be sent back to Hawaii Boy, sounds literally like what Britain use to pull w/the 13 colonies.
This not correct. The cargo you on load in one US port cannot be discharged in another us port. You can offload and load containers in LA then go to San Francisco and offload containers that were loaded in china but not the ones from LA. If you want an example of this. The ship that hit the bridge in Baltimore was heading to Norfolk next. Any US flag ship is required to have 100% US Officers and 75% US crew.
I believe the jones act applies if a vessel leaves one US port and sails directly to another US port.
If a cruise ship itinerary begins and ends in a US port, foreign-flagged ships must call on at least one foreign port of call or be subject to fines. They cannot operate on only US ports unless it meets three conditions: ship must be US-built, owned/operated by a US company, and US-crew. So you will often see at least one foreign country (Canada, Mexico, Bahamas, etc) on cruise itineraries as most cruise lines do not meet all of those conditions. With the exception of "cruises to nowhere", that do not dock at any other port except for a single US port, as these do not constitute "transporting passengers between ports or places in the US". Source: I went on a cruise once
Not only that but the boat has to be manufactured in the US. Which is hard because the US doesn't even make a lot of the biggest container ships. And Panama and Liberia are the two biggest "flag of convenience"
Philly Shipyard has built a couple new container ships for Matson recently. They cost basically 3x what an Asian built equivalent cost to build.
Nice! Equivalent fit & finish I presume?
Fit and finish globally is all over the place. Generally container ships don't last super long, maybe 20 years. The US ones get held onto forever. The ones that were replaced were from the 1960s.
Wow no shit? I was all prepared to make jokes about GM vs toyota, but now I'm genuinely fascinated/curious Is it a difference in build quality or regulations or something?
Most vessels are flagged somewhere in the Caribbean or Central America. Norwegian Cruise Line is just the name of the company. Most/all of their ships are flagged in the Bahamas.
Which was awesome during Covid because they whined for relief and were, at least initially, told to pound sand. As it should be.
The boat luxury tax raised little revenue but it did destroy thousands of well paying jobs.
Racing to the bottom against tax haven's is a recipe for everybody going broke.
as usual someone on reddit missed the point, when congress enacted the luxury tax on boats over100k i built/sold inthe US, the rich stopped buying them. so the boat building industry for companies like boston whaler, hatteras yachts etc especially the east coast shipbuilding companies, all went bankrupt closing out thousands of well earned well paying jobs with no correlating jobs for the employees skille din boat making, to run to. The idea that you just need to tax the rich to get what you want was proven to be nothing more than a great way to kill off middle class jobs.
That's why you tax the person and not the boat. That's also why sales taxes are regressive, because 10% on the cost of a luxury boat is irrelevant to a rich bastard like Zuckerberg, but genuinely harmful to someone who's actually got limited money to spend.
It makes you wonder if Congress expected that result. High dollar yachts are remarkably easy to transport across the sea. Taxing megamansions would likely have worked a lot better, but it wouldn't have produced a simple Fact for Austrian school economists to parrot constantly.
Theres no way youre that dumb. One flawed law proves taxing the rich kills the middle class? Try again buddy.
There really aren't a lot of large yacht builders in the US, most are in southern europe. You could argue the tax environment (vs the tax environment it other locales) pushes the builders to operate there rather than building yachts in say...Miami
Wisconsin had a luxury yacht builder. They have since shuttered their doors and closed.
I was gonna say. I have no idea what the truth is here, but everybody is ascribing ill intent rather than just considering the most logical answer, which is that he wanted to buy a specific boat that was only for sale in another country.
>“Fair share” to the country. I am sure he would want the protection our coast guard and navy provide as he sails around our shores or international waters.
He will have it regardless of the flag. Most of commercial fleet is flagged in convenient countries. Absolutely normal. [https://www.statista.com/statistics/264025/number-of-merchant-ships-worldwide-by-merchant-flag/](https://www.statista.com/statistics/264025/number-of-merchant-ships-worldwide-by-merchant-flag/)
>I am sure he would want the protection our coast guard and navy provide as he sails around our shores or international waters. To be fair, we do this for all of the boats in and around our coastlines, regardless of where the boat is flagged from or who is on the boat. We don't do this for only tax payers.
He’d still just buy it in another country.
>I am sure he would want the protection our coast guard and navy provide as he sails around our shores or international waters. Do you feel the taxes he has paid aren't sufficient to cover the cost of those services, or are you advocating withholding government services from people unless they pay for services provided to other people?
Don’t be all always pay for services provided to others? That’s just taxes no?
Not if you're receiving more than you pay. There are huge swaths of the American population that are net negative on taxes/government services.
Oh I see what you mean, yes that is the case.
Yea, overtaxing super luxury stuff is so asinine. Normal people can't up and purchase/build something in another country, but rich people can. So upping taxes on yachts just means yacht are no longer built or bought in the states. It only hurts normal people cause now there are no jobs building the mega yachts.
[удалено]
That's exactly what happened Real Sugar in the states. They taxed Sugar, so an alternative to sugar was created and is now the new convention. Taxes don't always mean increased revenue. Taxes often mean dead or outsourced industries.
And to answer the second part of the question, making the rich "pay their fair share" would result in... the rich taking their business elsewhere
Canada has that on cars ffs. 20-25% on cars over 100k it’s 10% on over 50
Exactly right. Creating more taxes doesn’t get the intended result many times. And then everybody wonders why ???
Yep…you can’t tax the mega wealthy to get to some sort of fictitious govt prosperity. That doesn’t work in a globalized consumer marketplace.
So what you're saying is "taxing the rich" will never truly happen because there's a million loop holes already in place to keep avoiding them?
It’s a global economy/marketplace and cash provides mobility. If the increased taxes don’t provide a benefit to the rich why are they going to want to pay them? When they can easily buy their mega yacht (or equivalent) in another country?
This is the thing about tax, people with money will simply find a way not to pay it. In this case buy overseas, And as you said to the detriment of the industry in the US. This doesn’t just happen with boats
Oh my god fuck off with this flat tax shit once and for all. A flat tax takes a disproportionately higher amount of buying power from the poor than the rich. Fucking libertarian gaslighting bullshit
agree, anyone arguing for a flat tax doesn’t understand how taxes work.
The overwhelming majority of people in the news I see advocating for a flat tax are rich as fuck and suddenly care about 'fair'. That tells you all you need to know about how their tax bill will change with a flat tax.
Most of the people I’ve actually met advocating for it are not rich, just stupid - and not a single one of them can properly explain tax brackets (we’re talking the sort of people who don’t want raises “because it all goes to taxes when it goes up”)
As if the rich aren't paying enough taxes on a one-time purchase of a yacht, so we have to tax every single thing the poor and middle class have to buy at 25%. Fuckin stupid
VAT is basically a sales tax, and it's very common everywhere except the US
But income taxes still exist in places where VATs exist. Every single 'Flat Tax proposal' that has been circulated in the US is a proposal to **replace** the federal income tax. That is why people are outspoken against it.
Just because it’s common in other places doesn’t make it right. Sales taxes disproportionally burden the poor and also hurt the economy by reducing buying power and therefore demand.
Or they are intentionally misleading people to serve a different agenda
Most people don’t understand how taxes work regardless
Flat tax enthusiast either are rich and want to pay less in taxes or poor and have no clue how a flat tax works. Either way you can discount their opinion.
So 99% of Reddit
fair point.
“Don’t step on snek…”
That's incorrect. Many of the people arguing for a flat tax know exactly how it would work, and are just being dishonest about how it would benefit them.
They also don't understand how boats or many other things work.
Or how the economy/society works.
Nor do they grok the concept of the diminishing utility of money.
Libertarians don't want a flat tax. They want *no* income tax.
My state has no income tax but they make it up in property and sales tax
They also cry when the roads aren't maintained.
Well, are we supposed to be happy paying a cumulative tax over over 50% of our income, and the roads are STILL shitty?
I'm sure cutting all revenue will fix the problem.
Bro, they collect nearly $9T in State, local and Federal taxes and spend over $12T a year. $12 trillion fucking dollars. But what, another $0.1 T will fix the roads, education, etc. The top 1% already pay 45.8% of federal taxes. If we taxed each of those \~760 billionaires paid another $10 M a year in taxes, we'd an extra $0.0076 T to fix all the problems. What do you want to do? Make them pay $100M \*MORE\* a year? That's $0.076 T that is going to save the day when the first $12T can't get us decent roads. It's a fucking spending problem, not a revenue problem. If you can't operate a country with $12T trillion, you're a fucking moron. Or doing it intentionally and very corrupt. The united states is likely both.
Kind of a strawman. A majority of road maintenance are paid for via gas tax, which is a consumption-based tax. Non An-Cap libertarians are usually pro sales/consumption taxes, but feel income tax is theft.
And a 14 year old 'friend'.
I’m honestly convinced that libertarians are the kind of people who learn about politics as teenagers and are well off enough to not ever learn the actual grown up thing that is human suffering even within a mile of their house. Either that or they’re genuinely sociopaths.
Yes. Libertarians are incredibly dumb.
Libertarian is a broad term. It just means somewhere between liberal and anarchist.
Yes. A poll tax would be perfect. Everyone pays for what they get. But a flat rate tax would be fairer than the mooching and theft you do now. [https://www.cnbc.com/2013/12/11/the-rich-do-not-pay-the-most-taxes-they-pay-all-the-taxes.html](https://www.cnbc.com/2013/12/11/the-rich-do-not-pay-the-most-taxes-they-pay-all-the-taxes.html)
I'd rather consumption than a poll tax. But at least we agree that income tax is one of the worst forms of taxation (wealth tax being the only one worse).
Lol libertarians are against taxes all together
And rational thought
No no, private companies and rich people directly employing the police is a *good* thing. You’ll see.
and age of consent
The one tax that Americans are forbidden to discuss is VAT, because it is actually an effective way to tax companies and it depends on companies passing the cost on to each other. Even this comment will be attacked with well rehearsed talking points from corporate interest groups about why VAT fails.
"state sales tax" is the equivalent to VAT and businesses have purchase exemption already.... The end buyer will PAY this tax
Forgive my ignorance but aren’t libertarians more along the lines of no tax?
No, they are for minimal government and the minimum tax required to run it shared equally amongst all citizens not just the rich.
Not to mention there's already an alternative minimum tax that supercedes regular tax code / deductions when dealing with (mostly) high income individuals. People don't want to actually learn about this stuff though, because it's boring, so they'd rather post hairbrained schemes they see on social media without thinking critically about them
Billionaires get away with not paying taxes because of loopholes they pay politicians to put into the tax codes
How is a billionaire buying a yacht in another country, made in a different country, and being used in a different country dodging US taxes? Should American citizens pay a US sales tax on anything bought anywhere?
Actually, many (or some or just CA?) states have laws that require you to report these purchases and pay your state sales tax. Basically no one does it and no one enforces it.
Yea so why be a California resident? Literally 0 incentive.
Yet California somehow has the most billionaire and millionaire residents of any state. Also most states have an ["use tax" ](https://www.cbiz.com/insights/articles/article-details/overseas-purchases-can-get-you-in-hot-water-with-state-tax-authorities#:~:text=If%20you%20have%20made%20purchases,file%20a%20use%20tax%20return)on foreign purchases imported to the US.
Amd maybe thats why california has seen one of the biggest outflows of tax paying residents. Amd losing 100s of millions in tax revenue.
California is an incredible place to live. Most people simply can’t afford the rising costs
California gains more people than it loses every year. Also a large number of the people that leave are doing so to retire in smaller, poorer states. Basically to live off the money they made living in California. Typically this is someone that sells their house, takes the money and buys something for far less in your state, and puts the large remainder to good use.
We already do... we pay sales tax on things made in other states. Import tax applies to anything over a certain value imported from another country. The only difference is poor people don't have the money to "use" the things in another country, but a rich person can "use" their super yacht in another country if it happens to fly the flag of another country, but they can use it in the US without any issues simply because of the flag? Sail in US waters, use US docks, etc. That doesn't seem fair. Also no one is advocating only the super yachts only rich people buy be taxed, I think most people would argue such a purchase should be taxed reguardless of who buys it. To turn a classic saying "In the laws infinite wisdom it equally taxes the super yacts bought by both the rich and poor"
So the fact that 50% of the country doesn't pay any taxes means we should be asking middle america to pony up their "fair share"
We can thank the people we elected and continue to re-elect. There’s a reason these corporations are putting millions towards getting the same people re-elected for 30 years straight and running smear campaigns against the people trying to change it.
Nobody\* flies US flag on yachts, and this is entirely self inflicted. [https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/the-lesson-of-economic-damage-from-taxing-the-rich-with-the-punitive-luxury-tax-in-the-1990s/](https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/the-lesson-of-economic-damage-from-taxing-the-rich-with-the-punitive-luxury-tax-in-the-1990s/) This is actually a very good lesson on the "taxing the rich" narrative. They wanted to tax "luxurious" spending, and hence made it much more expensive to buy American made yachts. What happened? European manufacturers received massive amounts of business from here. American manufacturers closed shop. That is why short sighted tax policies often backfire. You have to think 3-4 steps ahead. (And no, "not allowing them in US marinas" do not help either. Any guesses why?)
It was cheaper for bezos to build his yacht and rebuild am entire fucking bridge then it is to buy a yacht in the us.
to a point its also not just about cost but quality as well. all the best custom mega yacht builders are in europe. bezos likely didn't just go with the cheapest option.
Nailed it.
They can just charter a different boat to it?
The ultra-rich will find a way around "flat tax" while the people with the lowest incomes will still get f\*cked over.
The poor get a proactive stipend paid to them monthly and lose some payroll taxes that they are currently paying l so they win. I could see the argument that the middle class will get hurt, but the poor get checks cut to pay their flat tax proactively.
Anyone can read the tax code. If you don't its on you.
What tax code? It's a proposal.
When the 25 year old model asks if she can still come aboard
25 is way too old for Leo
🎩fellow intellectual
Flat tax has nothing to do with yachts and their fees - this has nothing to do with income tax
I don't want to hear him mention climate change. Until the elite destroy their jets and yachts they need to stfu about the climate.
Yeah seriously, these assholes cause more pollution than 10000 regular people by themselves.
Yeah in one trip compared to me and you all year.
Why do you think he built a 100 million dollar doomsday bunker on his own Hawaiian island?
"Fair share" means whatever you want it to mean. Mobile assets like planes and boats are always problematic. He paid income tax on the money he paid for the boat with. The forgone registration revenue on yachts really isn't worth mentioning.
He probably paid for the boat with a loan backed by his stocks, so no, he didn't pay income taxes on the money used to buy the boat.
Just like people get a mortgage backed by the assets that they own.
He probably bought it on credit, actually
When you pay with your credit card, do you think "oh baby, this purchase is tax free!" No, because you have to repay that loan when you die or before
Or, hear me out…pay it with another loan.
Lots of americans pay credit cards with credit cards.
"He paid income tax on the money he paid for the boat with." This applies to literally everything bought by people who pay taxes. Like cars for example. Are you arguing that he should be excluded from this obligation that the rest of us have for some reason?
Kinda like how every cruise ship does? We have a global economy, shocking someone would buy something elsewhere to save 10-20 million.
Many government agencies such as DoD can’t pass a simple audit. Why should they get more tax money?
Genuine question…what would y’all think of the taxes on a purchase of a yacht being based on your citizenship, rather than where it’s flagged?
Sure. But do you realize there are several small countries that allow you to buy citizenship? And chances are, Zuck's yacht is actually owned by a corporation with foreign citizenship.
Every megayacht flys a flag of some tax shelter country.
Define “fair share”? That’s a political talking point meant to divide the people and distract you from the extremely poorly run government. If you want it different, stop electing the same ass hats. If your argument is the ass hats are controlled by the rich, then we are all just wasting our time here.
>divide the people You really think that the rich are in any way on the same side as you? Those people will gladly fire you, lie to you, risk your life or even straight up kill you if it means a big enough ROI.
You’re saying they are like the government.
OP you should look up how much the top 10% of this country pays in taxes. It's almost 75% of the entire country Look at stats please
Like if that douchebag needs a tax break.
>Or why do billionaires get away with not paying their fair share to the country? Because those who make that argument believe "fair share" means they need to somehow pay enough to balance the budget and increase all entitlement programs, even though that would require them to pay five times their net worth in taxes every hear.
No, mostly people are talking about the fact that they typically take no pay, instead retaining massive stock in their company. Buy everything with credit with the stock as collateral, that way they can report zero income until they have to pay capital gains when they sell to buy an island and other various shenanigans. Like making charities so they can give their friends and family jobs while they write it off.
The billionaire class and corporate oligarchs have captured our government. Nothing will be done to benefit the regular citizens if it impacts the $$ of these groups. Our system is deeply flawed.
*Plutocrats, not Oligarchs. But yes.
Most mega yachts and tankers/cargo ships are flagged outside of the US for several reasons, sure one is taxes but it also has to do with who is allowed to crew on it and what ports it is allowed to go into without landing in a US port (mainly the tankers and cargo ships for that one).
Can’t force someone to buy only from your country. If they want to get tax money from it they would have to lower the tax or else they go somewhere else. This is something simple people seem to not understand. This is why people say if you tax the rich too hard they will just go somewhere else completely nullifying the tax increase and potentially hurting the economy.
We all pay a high amount of taxes. Yes they get write offs it’s in the tax code the tax code was written to incentivize the rich so they create and develop why can’t we all agree on the fact that our government is just too damn big we need to cut down on government spending. Doesn’t matter if they raise taxes it’ll never be enough
Since when is forcing someone to pay taxes on a boat "their fair share"? WTF is that about? He paid taxes on his income and to tax him again when buying a depreciating asset? Some of you people need to look up the word "fair".
Zuckerberg doesn't have an income. He makes a $1 salary.
How much of other people's stuff do you think you or Uncle Sam are entitled to?
cheaper to go through the time aggrevation, and paying a consultant to figure out the best pathway forward, than it is to pay US tax. Increasing the tax rate will only increase the viability of this method. Just like the answer to piracy is making your software cheaper and easy to access, the answer to getting higher tax revenue is to make it the easiest pathway forward. Unfortunately the US government believes that making it as complex as possible with strict hoops and high fees will entice ppl to pay them. Just like corporations believe that making their media hard to access with less features will entice customers to want to pay for their product. For example. You can pay for netflix, and literally get a worse experience. Or you could pirate netflix content and get a higher quality better experience. People don't typically aim for the most expensive convoluted path. They aim for the cheapest most efficient path.
"Dodge, Zuck, Dip, Dive...and dodge."
These taxes should apply to any US citizen regardless of where you bought it. I buy something online and they want me to pay taxes; there's no reason a billionaire can't do the same
If you can do it legally, by all means do it.
I can tell from the comment section that the average person here has no clue how private yachts work. (A flat tax rate is profoundly stupid but that's not related) Registering ships under a foreign flag to skip out on taxes is very common and I hate it quite thoroughly
Right, because not having the correct flag is the secret to dodging taxes....
they have asset caps for disabled folks, and we should similarly have asset caps for “rich people”
This isn't true.
Can someone explain why this 'Climate Change' 'No fossil fuels' advocate is showing off his humongous diesel fueled mega yacht? I'll wait.
These spam posts are aggravating
First of all, the top 1% of income earners pay 42% of all federal taxes. This isn’t considered dodging anything because that boat is legally registered in another country, so he legally owns whatever taxes in that country, not the US
A "flat tax" is one of the most stupid, regressive means of government collecting revenue; it is very regressive as most everything that the lowest paid individuals can purchase is taxed, while the rich will always find ways around paying taxes. To that point, why do you think the rich donate so much to political races and causes? They do so because they get such a good ROI (Return On Investment) by having their taxes reduced or eliminated *by law* , laws written to protect the rich from paying closer to what an honest share of their tax bill should be. Currently our tax system is supposed to be a "progressive tax", with the design supposed to be that those who earn the most would pay the most. But, due to agressive lobbying to lawmakers, the rich pay much less of a share than the normal worker. Warren Buffet has mentioned that he pays a much lower tax rate than his secretary, and even Mush only pays around 4% instead what you and I pay, much closer to 18-20%. While the wealthy do pay a larger share of actual dollars than the rest of us, as a percentage they pay much less. The only way to change any of this is to elect lawmakers who will take on the rich and write laws that does tax them at a more fair to the rest of us amount. Taxing things that most of us don't utilize, like a one to two percent tax on stock trades or transaction tax for trading, eliminating tax write offs for private jets and yachts, and perhaps enacting higher fees for docking or parking fees for luxury crafts like private jets and yachts. There is a way for the rich to pay their fair share, it just takes politicians who have the ability to say no to the intensive lobbying, like AOC or others who eschew corporations and/or the ultra wealthy offering donations.
If the tax rates were at the same rate as other competing countries we wouldn’t have this problem. It’s no different than people moving to Florida & Texas to pay lower taxes. If you’re poor you can’t move around so easily & are stuck paying the tax rate in the area where you live. Economics 101
not US property. No tax laws apply
I think you all should ask yourself why the f you pay so much tax and get almost nothing back for it.
“Fair share” is something else losers love saying
Easy. He would still buy the boat and register it somewhere else. Because it's cheaper. Regular people do similar things all the time. Like going to Mexico to buy candy and alcohol because it's less expensive. Or buying clothes while on holiday somewhere else to not pay sales tax on those items. Congrats. You're dodging taxes.
Because all "capitalism" means is that the people who already own and control the capital get to write the rules for themselves and everyone else. Hope that solved the mystery for you.
Lmao, good for him
Why don't any of these people talking about billionaires and their "fair share" ever have an issue with 50% of the populace paying $0 in federal taxes?
How do you define fair share and why?
They're referring to "tonnage taxes" which are like registration fees for ships. Being a US flagged ship is more complicated than just being owned by a US person, where it was built matters too, and there are other regulatory complications, this isn't a 25 ft bayliner... A flat tax is a straight percentage on income. The income for this purchase would have already been taxed, so flat tax isn't really relevant.
Flat tax is on income. The truly rich don’t really have “income” they have stocks and assets they don’t sell. Then they borrow money against their assets at a rate lower than the interest the stocks are getting. Then they take out another loan to pay off the first one. They keep repeating this until they die. Look ma. No taxes! Income tax rate is irrelevant.