• nonentity@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Financial obesity is an existential threat to any society that tolerates it, and needs to cease being celebrated, rewarded, and positioned as an aspirational goal.

    Corporations are the only ‘persons’ which should be subjected to capital punishment, but billionaires should be euthanised through taxation.

  • IWW4@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I am pretty sure this isn’t new. Air travel is like any other business travel expense, and plane are an expense like a plumbers van is…

  • dil@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 hours ago

    We couldve been a flight based country instead of cars if we went in another direction, when we had more pilots than planes

  • chillpanzee@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 hours ago

    It’s bonus depreciaton, not expenses, and it’s a business tax benefit, not an individual tax benefit.

    Businesses can, and for a long time, have been able to deduct aircraft expenses. Nothing has changed there, and it’s not unique to this turd of a president. The return of bonus depreciation lets them depreciate faster, but again, depreciation is not new. It’s reasonable to removed about that, but you have to get every fact wrong to make that complaint.

    • Treczoks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      12 hours ago

      And let me tell you how this works with cars. With planes it is the same, except that the savings are even better.

      A real rich person owns no cars. He owns a car sales company. That company has a few select cars, which the rich person can “test drive” whenever they like. If the prime time of a car is over, the car is sold and a new one is bought. The car sales company pays for everything: purchase, insurance, taxes, fuel, cleaning, etc. Of course, this company does not make any profits. On the contrary. So the rich person pays for these losses, and those payments are tax deductable.

      • BanMe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 hours ago

        This also applies to houses, boats, and inevitably surrogates now that they’re using them like pack mules.

  • Typhoon@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    92
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    12 hours ago

    The law, in its majestic equality, allows rich and poor alike to deduct private jet expenses from their taxes.

    • Taldan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      13 hours ago

      To be fair, you don’t have to be rich to buy a Cessna 150. $35,000 can get you a nice old one

      Issue is with taking advantage of the tax benefits

      • dil@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Maybe this somehow makes them start manufacturing planes again, remember seeing those homelesss pilot photos when they had a surplus of pilots and not enough planes or ppl taking flights

        Can’t find an image on google was “will fly for food” or something like that.

  • floofloof@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    189
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Deduct. And the USA is taking the world in completely the opposite direction from where it needs to go.

  • Thomas@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    128
    ·
    24 hours ago

    Finally! Do you have an idea how expensive those things are and how much my wage slaves must work for that?

  • ButtermilkBiscuit@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    79
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    23 hours ago

    For example, a $3 million aircraft purchase – of America’s favorite business jet, the Pilatus PC‑12 – could potentially lower your tax liability by over $1 million if you’re in the 35 % bracket. This isn’t just savings; the Big Beautiful Bill private aircraft subsidy offers financial strategy at its finest. You can read more about the tax benefits of private aircraft ownership in our special report here.

    Thanks magats

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Certainly a bigger problem is how someone who can afford over $1M private jet would be in only the 35% bracket

      • EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        12 hours ago

        The distinction isn’t relevant to the point being made. Although the article title says “jets”, the body of the article uses the more generic “aircraft” interchangeably with “jet.”

        I’d expect this is applicable to helicopters as well, though they have a different usage.

        Edit: I looked it up and apparently helicopters are not included. The distinguishing feature is “fixed wing” aircraft.

        • Taldan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          13 hours ago

          It was a quote from the article. Your complaint is with Boomerang, not the guy quoting them

  • Hathaway@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Ah, and only 90% of gambling losses. Looks like another point against the poor.

    Not that I’m condoning gambling, but, weird how those things impact polar opposite sides of the wealth gap.

    • quick_snail@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      16 hours ago

      In my experience, poor people gamble a lot. I’ve never seen a rich person buy a lottery ticket

      • IronBird@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 hours ago

        rich people gamble plenty, they just call it investing and get way more tax write offs for doing so

      • Hathaway@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        16 hours ago

        That’s the point. Poor people gambling can’t write off their losses on taxes. Well, they can, just only up to 90%. Rather than all of it like it has been.

          • some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            15 hours ago

            They don’t make enough to itemize in the first place, they’ll just take the standard deduction. (Unless they lost like $20k on scratchers somehow)

            • Pyr@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              15 hours ago

              I’m always terrified to write stuff off because I fear I will accidentally write something off that I’m not really allowed to due to some obscure legalese and then I will get audited in 5 five years and owe 10 grand in late fees and interest or some shit.

              • AA5B@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                5 hours ago

                It’s not too bad as long as you’re not a dick about it. One year I marked myself as head of household instead of single. I’m not even sure why I did it. I only thought “huh, this saved a lot on my taxes”, and really had no idea what I was doing. They sent back a correction and how much i owed. I paid and that was it. Not scary at all.

                Of course in today’s world all about spite and punishment I could imagine it being much worse

                • BeeegScaaawyCripple@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 hours ago

                  Yeah, I’m a sane world you just get a letter explaining where they think you made a mistake, and you can either pay the difference or provide evidence your position is correct. All done by mail.

                • Delphia@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  4 hours ago

                  In most countries for average people if you can make a convincing argument about why you thought it would be allowed and can argue it with a straight face they arent interested in nailing you over it because it isnt worth their time.

                  I asked my accountant “Hey, when I take sick leave at work and I have to get a doctors certificate to get paid for those days, does that make the doctors visit a work expense?”

                  He said “Thats a legitimate enough argument that if you want me to I’ll put them on your return. Dont know if it would pass an audit but the reasoning is solid”

          • Hathaway@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            16 hours ago

            It’s not hard to file taxes. Especially for an individual, with a normal W2 income, and not much else. Certain people try to make it hard, but it’s not.

            I don’t need to pay someone to put a number on a form.

            • toddestan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              15 hours ago

              Most poor people probably just take the standard deduction anyway. It’s not like they have enough money to accumulate a large amount of deductible expenses anyway. Possible exceptions might be large medical expenses or a mortgage.

  • Destide@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    23 hours ago

    You allowed this before proper health care because that’s Socialism? Communism? Gay?

    • Taldan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      13 hours ago

      To be fair, America has the best aviation infrastructure in the world, and it is almost entirely socialized. So we do socialism sometimes