I know Steve personally as a SR-22 owner. We've got guys on the Cirrus owners organization making life difficult for Maine, especially with the exemption of 6000 lb gross weight and above - essentially making Biz Jets and turboprops worth 5 times what a normal light GA single or twin is exempt from the "use tax".
He has his plane registered in MASS which has no sales tax or use tax. He did angel flights into Maine - they looked at his tail # through Flight Aware and saw 20 days of activity inside and out of Maine. Basically COPA has said they won't be going to Maine ever - other owners groups are following suit, and FBO's are posting warnings to owners in states outside Maine cautioning them against flying into Maine.
Here is the latest update from Steve.
"The 5% was $17,500 and about $9,000 for interest, total about $26,500.
So here is the update -- I decided that I had created a stir with all the publicity, so I called the Governor's office and said I wanted to meet with him. The upshot was I got a meeting with his closest advisor (Sr. Political and Economic Advisor) - Jack Cashman. I put a presentation together and flew up to Augusta today. In the process, I was introduced to the Governor and had a substanitive meeting with Cashman. I don't want to get into all the details right now, but I think I found an advocate who is willing to help -- He has the Governor's ear and the ability to make things happen. He does think that Maine's enforcement of this statute is legally constitutional and would be upheld in court. But more importantly, he believes that the law is not fair and was not implemented in an honest way. He also feels that the economic benefits of this law don't come close to the overall costs- but has asked for more data to be sure. Finally, last but not least, he thinks the political and public relations problem is substantial and needs to be fixed quickly!! So, I promised that I would become equally active on the PR in a positive way if they corrected this for all of the pilots that are currently in appeal. (Unfortunately, it wouldn't affect Alan Sugar since he already paid.) So, I am not out of the woods, but I finally feel like I am making some positive progress. Will keep you posted!"
One letter gotten back from the Dep Gov went as follows.
Dear Ms. Helms:
Thank you for your recent e-mail to Governor Baldacci regarding the imposition of Maine’s use tax on aircraft. The Governor’s office has asked that I review your concerns and respond on his behalf.
Much of the contact we have received about this issue followed a story in the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) newsletter and on the AOPA website about AOPA President Phil Boyer’s June 7, 2007 letter to Governor Baldacci. I responded on the Governor’s behalf by letter dated June 21, 2007, addressing the issues that Mr. Boyer had raised. Attached is a copy of that letter.
In the great majority of cases, there will be no tax consequences when an aircraft based in another state is used in Maine. And no Maine business that services aircraft should lose work because of the fact that the use tax does apply in certain situations. The law provides that an aircraft is not being “used” in Maine for tax purposes when it is here for "major alterations," "major repairs" or "preventive maintenance" as those terms are described in FAA Regulations (specifically, 14 Code of Federal Regulations, Appendix A to Part 43, as in effect on January 1, 2005). The federal definition of those terms is extremely broad.
Maine use tax is not even an issue unless an aircraft comes into Maine within the first 12 months after its purchase by a nonresident. And as noted in my letter to Mr. Boyer, even if the aircraft is present in Maine within the first 12 months for purposes other than repair and maintenance, no Maine use tax is due if sales or use tax of 5% or more was paid in another state. Finally, even if an aircraft is present in Maine within the first 12 months after its purchase by a nonresident, no use tax is due if the aircraft is here for no more than 20 days during the 12 months following its purchase.
We understand your concerns regarding this matter and appreciate your taking the time to contact Governor Baldacci.
Sincerely,
Domna Giatas
Deputy Commissioner
cc: Governor John E. Baldacci
Anyway... thought you should know that they are at least saying to my wife that you would not be taxed on the situation you described...
I still think their arguments are pretty weak and I hope it does cause them to lose revenue in the long run... short sighted politicians!
Another owners wife sent this off to the Dep Com.
------------------ And the response............---------------
"Dear Domna:
Your policy sounds so fair and reasonable after reading your letter. But I am still a little confused and was hoping just to clarify, that you would answer a few simple questions for me.
Is it true that you are effectively spying on pilots by seeking out FAA records and airport records of aircraft tiedowns going back at least five years or more?
Is it true that a non-resident could fly into the state just once, spend 3 weeks on vacation in Maine and be subject to your 5% Use tax?
Is it true that you have never posted any information about this secret tax at any general aviation airport in Maine?
Is it true that you are now actively going after pilots that flew into the state several years before this 20 day statute was even written?
Is it true that the statute about 20 days specifically says it is not retroactive before Jan 2005, yet you are still using it to go after pilots as far back as 2000?
Is it true that prior to 2005, pilots would have had no way to know that having their plane on the ground for 20 days in the state would trigger a huge tax? Is it also true, that despite the fact that they would have had no way to know that there could be a tax due, that you are still charging them interest at 12% a year retroactive to the year the flights were made?
Is it true that you are imposing this USE tax on general aviation pilots who were making Angel Flights into the state on purely humanitarian reasons?
Is it true that the original spirit of the USE tax was to ensure that Maine residents who purchased goods out of state and then brought them back into the state, could still be taxed, since they were effectively trying to game the system? Is it true that Maine Revenue Services is distorting the true legislative intent of these statutes to serve its own purposes?
Is it true that there is a specific statute that says there shall be no sales or use tax by a Non-resident who purchases an airplane and immediately transports it out of State? Is it true that Maine Revenue Services has decided to interpret that to mean ONLY if the plane was originally purchased in Maine? -- even though it doesn't say that and it would be illegal to only apply it to instate sales!
Is it true that the way Maine is interpreting these statutes is a flagrant violation of the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution which forbids discrimination against interstate commerce?
Is it true that Maine Revenue Services sees this as an easy money-grab opportunity to generate $2 million a year and only upset a few rich pilots that can afford to pay anyway? !!!"
