HR 2563 "Ending Taxpayer Subsidies for Yachts Act"

I don't know if this is the right forum for this but I am incensed by this bill and this is the most high traffic thread. The Bill itself is a pathetic sound bite implying that the rich boat owners are being subsidized by taxpayers. What it would do is prohibit boats from qualifying as second homes while leaving trailers, RV, condos, apartments, mansions...just about anything else to qualify as second homes allowing interest to be deducted. The sponsors claim this bill would save $150 million over ten years -this is out of the $8 billion/year and growing second home interest deduction. So if you believe their math they are saving 0.18% by discriminating against homes that float! &%&%&$ BRILLIANT!!

What it is really about is using boaters as scapegoats for inequality while the Democrats continue to shovel money to their coastal property fundraisers! These are the same jerks that just rammed through $30 billion to rebuild vacation homes for multimillionaires in Jersey and $200 billion rebuilding New Orleans BELOW SEA LEVEL! Trillions have been spent turning public coasts into private playgrounds for the rich!

Saving money? Here is my proposal -do the exact opposite!!! Cut the second home interest deduction for anything THAT DOES NOT FLOAT!! BOOM $8billion/year savings, hundreds of billions saved by not subsidizing building homes that don't float in flood zones and below sea level!

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr2563

The bill is sponsored by Mike Quigley D 5th dist IL (just a few miles north of me -the shame!) and I plan to make his office aware of my objection. I hope all of you will do the same.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/mike_quigley/412331

https://twitter.com/RepMikeQuigley

http://quigley.house.gov/

 

There is a forum for venting about non boat design subjects here but this ain't it.

 

Sorry Tom,
I will move it soon but I would like to get a bit more attention before it get put in the basement.

 

Agree with Tom. Last sentence and links would suffice for an alert to the unaware.

Porta

 

I think any legislation that will take food off the table for boat designers and builders would be fair game for discussion here.

Sure an old Bayliner might be a cash sale ,not financed,

but few except the very wealthy can have a boat designed and built and pay CASH , so the interest deduction has no value.

Of course a different question could be why there is ANY deduction for any purchase , home, RV whatever.

Last time the idiots ran beserk with a sales tax it destroyed much of the boat building industry .

A repeat attempt at killing our industry would seem OK to discuss.

 

Although it has very little influence or basically not at all any influence on us outside the USA. However a lot of yachtsman live on a boat or boathouse in the USA. Indirectly he or she will at one stage in the future be affected, should such a bill passes the senate. It is time to give all the support you can get, I therefore agree with FastFred.
Bert

 

I don't understand howcome interest is a tax deduction on ANY home let alone on second home (unless rental property and thus business).

but yeah doesn't belong here.

 

What I am miffed about is singling out boats for attack and signaling that it is "politically correct" to do so. I would not be concerned if the deduction was eliminated for ALL SECOND HOMES to save billions -I would support that. The implication that boats are subsidized while maintaining five hundred times that subsidy for real estate and RVs.

I don't claim this bill will become law and deter business for board members. I am pointing out that this is an attempt to make boat bashing fashionable and it would be wise to make it as regrettable as possible for this congressman. He needs to be a cautionary tale.

 

From your supplied site...

It seems you're having a cow over an imaginary threat. Or is it just a conservative preparation for the elections, taking the Swift Boat out for a test run?

 

The point is that a powerful congressman is selecting boating to vilify. I want everyone to know they have an enemy in high places and that they should make their disapproval known -to his office, to your local Democrats "What is your party's intent in singling out boating for political attack?" "I don't think I can contribute or vote for a party that singles me out for attack for no reason".

This is not some high ideology. This guy just thinks he can be more popular by beating up boating. I don't expect to flip his district to republican but I do expect to make it clear this bill is a big negative to him and his party. If we don't we can expect the campaigning against boating to grow.

Samsam, what do you do when you are singled out to be a scapegoat?

 

It's about boating,so FWIW I feel it belongs here though does not apply to me.

I wonder if they will disallow domiciling yachts in offshore trust/corps/LLCs etc or stop giving banks trillions for purposely making "mistakes".

By all means get on the phone and rant at your elected rep.

 

Thinking this will not happen is just sticking your head in the sand because a similar bill was enforced for a time and not so long ago. That was a luxury tax on only the big yachts but is did have a really bad effect on boating builders and workers. Boaters have been singled out for holding tank law in 1971 while exempting all the real polluters and there were almost zero pumpout services available anywhere.

The design forum is for design subjects and I stand by my original comments. Most here will object to anything that singles out boating for getting bashed by politicos. My objection had nothing to do with disagreement with the OP. He admitted picking the design forum as the most popular one to post in. Hopefully all the forums are about boating so that is a strawman.

 

Well, when conservatives use any lame reason whatsoever to tell whoppers about Democrats, I usually say something that gets me in trouble.

You're just making these numbers and statements up. Post some cites to back them up.

Katrina- August 29, 2005. "You're doing a heck of a job, Brownie!" Republican President, Republican Congress, the majority of damage caused by the incompetency of the US Corps of Engineers but you blame Democrats.

I can't blame you for trying to shift blame, but it's never worked too well.

This bill has no chance of being passed, it's a non-issue. You'd be doing better to question your party's attempts at putting Creation Science into classrooms or mandated probes into vaginas.

Boat luxury tax bill signed into law November 1990 by "Read my lips, no new taxes" G. Bush.

 

Like Sam said, in THIS Congress nothing that absolutely doesn't have to pass is going to even make it out of Committee.

There will be plenty of testimony about what happened when the Feds placed a "luxury tax" on boat sales of over $100,000 in the early 90's

You are entitled to your opinion, but both parties are full of self serving thieves and liars, so calling out one over the other is useless.

Steve

 

That was a luxury tax on only the big yachts ,

There will be plenty of testimony about what happened when the Feds placed a "luxury tax" on boat sales of over $100,000 in the early 90's.

Today with the much shrunk dollar a BIG YACHT ($100,000) may be a 30 ft cookie..