Desperate Statement by SnF Called 'Inaccurate' By FATA
President, Others...
Despite the many
details, reports, quotes and corroborating stories that have
supported the ANN investigations and series into
problems with Florida Department Of Revenue Taxation
decisions, Sun n Fun President John Burton has gone on
the attack (in an apparent attempt to dissuade reports of sinking
attendance figures and exhibitor unrest) and labeled them
'inaccurate."
Really. No kidding. We could only WISH we were making THIS mess
up.
With the reports, documents, and tax bills of a number of pilots
having been publicly documented over the last year, it appears that
SnF is trying to make others think that ANN has made this story up
-- until you factor in... well, the facts.
Pesky things, those facts. They sure get in the way of an
attempt to evade criticism.
When Fly-Ins Attack
In an email report reportedly sent to a number of persons with
an interest in the long-declining Fly-In, just before the close of
business on Friday, Burton decries that the published reports
aren't true.
"Sun 'n Fun has recently been made aware of media reports of a
'Florida Tax Ripoff' and the impact this may have on the Sun 'n Fun
Fly-In, which opens Tuesday, April 8, and runs through Sunday,
April 13. The reports erroneously describe "non (Florida)-resident
pilots who have been caught in the FL tax trap" and who have been
"targeted for 'use tax' by agents of the state's Department of
Revenue . . . despite the fact that the targeted aircraft were not
owned or operated by state residents. This is inaccurate and
misleading."
The Burton memo skirts
a number of the salient issues, and attempts to avoid direct
conflict with the current tax legislation, as well as making a
number of statements that have nothing to do with the ANN story (or
other published reports on the matter), until it starts in on
the meat of the matter. Alarmingly, Burton does specifically report
(in referring to the FL Use Tax), via an offsetted addendum that,
"*It DOES NOT impact aircraft owners who have purchased an airplane
within the past six months and have it titled, registered or
licensed in another state (other than Florida)."
ANN believes this statement to be without foundation, and direct
contradiction of multiple published reports from a number of
respected sources, besides ANN.
And The Facts Are...
Let us be clear, we believe that we can prove (and have done
so... many times) Burton's memo and statement is in direct conflict
with the facts. Statements from the Florida Department Of Revenue,
statements from the Florida Aviation Trades Association, National
Air Transportation Association, the mighty Aircraft Owner's and
Pilots' Association... and worse -- the direct testimony, reports
and records of pilots who have been caught in the "FL Tax Trap" ALL
contradict the apparently-errant (again)
Burton.
In just one case (of too many), a Piper Meridian
turbo-prop, brought into Florida for training at a well-known
flight training operation in central Florida, for approximately one
week exposed a NON-Florida resident to a $125K tax bill for an
aircraft that had been in his possession but a few weeks. The pilot
in question reported that he was having problems seeing any way out
but to pay the tax, and fight it later, due to the rapidly
escalating penalties and interests that were piling up each day he
failed to pay the bill... And yes, we have confirmed that this
non-FL pilot paid the bill.
FDOR officials did not refute ANN's reporting of the stories
done so far and have in fact commented on them, on the
record. They even related a number of other such taxation
decisions and indicated that the main reason that the
aviation industry was having this problem was because the RV and
Boating Industries had better lobbyists to fight off such taxation
provisions.
The emailed SnF statement released in the late afternoon, Good
Friday on the eve of a major holiday, should have prevented much of
a counter-response (which may have been its intent), but ANN was
able to get some expert analysis by people with solid factual
knowledge of the FL Tax situation.
OK... If We Were Wrong, Why Do So Many Experts Agree With
Us?
Michael Slingluff, the
high-regarded President of the Florida Aviation Trades Association
has been a leader in the intense fight for aggressive revisions in
FL's tax code. When informed of the text of Burton's message,
Slingluff, reported that it was the Burton statement that was, in
fact, "inaccurate."
Yes, he specifically replied that the SnF email was,
"Inaccurate... and, in fact, purchasers of new aircraft that
have traveled to FL within 6 months have had the FL use tax applied
to them, even though there is no nexus, other than pleasure, for
their visit to Florida. The use tax is formulated by FDOR as sales
tax paid in Florida, less any taxes paid in the domiciled state --
the domiciled state tax is credited against the difference of the
total FL Tax. This has been applied to new Single Engine aircraft
up through Large Jet aircraft."
Slingluff was admittedly surprised by the SnF memo and reported
that, "FATA, AOPA and other various organizations are seeking a
moratorium from the use tax while legislation is sponsored in
Tallahassee."
Finally, Slingluff added that, "The press coverage by ANN and
AOPA has been truthful and accurate."
Some Cirrus Pilots Afraid of FL
Some new Cirrus Owner's and Pilot's Association owner/members
have been avoiding Florida for fear of similar treatment... as
other Cirrus owners have ALREADY been targeted by FDOR. Curtis
Sanford, President of COPA, reported that "COPA has had members
cancel their attendance at our Florida events due to the state's
use tax policy on recently purchased aircraft. Given the number of
newly purchased aircraft in our membership, it makes us question
the viability of holding fly-in events in Florida."
And Let's Not Forget AOPA's Extensive (and Corroborating) Work
On This Subject!
Phil Boyer, president
of AOPA, a tireless (and extremely effective) advocate for the
aviation industry has just filed a letter with the State of
Florida, asking for a moratorium against further tax attacks
against non-resident pilots. AOPA coverage of the issue
specifically states that, "The state Department of Revenue has
recently been charging Florida use tax on any airplane that is
brought to the state within six months of being bought if the owner
did not pay at least 6-percent sales tax at the time of
purchase."
Boyer wrote a forceful and reasoned letter imploring Governor
Charlie Crist to impose a moratorium on the FL Use Tax until the
legislature could deal with the matter appropriately. We must note
that SnF President John Burton was copied on the document and his
name is in plain sight at the completion of the two page letter...
so we really find it hard to believe that Burton could find ANY
reasonable basis to refute ANN (and AOPA's) carefully researched
coverage of this serious issue. So the question is this... if
Burton had to know all this and was so informed by all the coverage
by ANN (which he obviously read), and other media outlets (as
well as industry and trade associations)... what could possibly
motivate him to put so many people's property at risk by making
such questionable statements that seem to be in such direct
opposition to KNOWN facts and published reports and
legislation?
Does 'SnF' really mean CYA?
Also on late Friday, ANN became aware that an aviation
association website had posted a story based on the SnF report.
When questioned by ANN, their reporter admitted that he did
not think to ask for ANN's data, details, research and other
information to refute/corroborate the SnF memo. Following that, a
Senior official of the organization, seeing "serious problems" with
the SnF report, pulled the story from the site and personally
called ANN Editor-In-Chief Jim Campbell to apologize.
(NOTE: This was a classy thing to do under tough circumstances,
regardless... and it was appreciated and accepted-- ANN E-I-C Jim
Campbell).
This is not the first
time that SnF reports have been called into question. In an April
2003 ANN Report, after years of urging (by ANN, among
others) an examination of the veracity of SnF attendance
figures, some startling details emerged. An April 27, 2003 report noted that,
"Last year, we expressed open incredulity at SnF's claims, on
these pages; but the locals in politics in Lakeland and surrounding
Polk County refused to examine their own pet project. Heck -- we
like big airshow attendance! We like big fly-in attendance -- we're
aviation press, ferpetesake. What we don't like is being treated
like idiots.
Last week, even The Lakeland Ledger, an unabashed
cheerleader for the biggest thing in Lakeland, raised an eyebrow.
Reporter Rick Rousos did a lot of homework, examining, among other
things, SnF's 2001 tax filings. He noted, 'Sun 'n Fun claimed an
'estimated attendance' of 645,000 for its week-long fly-in in April
2001. But Sun 'n Fun's tax and internal records show the attendance
was less than 250,000. Of that number, 86,515 actually paid to get
in...'
Rousos was liberal in his estimates (and told ANN yesterday
that he, 'gave them every benefit of the doubt') of how many could
actually have shown up. For instance, he counted seven days'
attendance for each of several identified groups -- volunteers
(4000) and campers (12,000) were even counted separately, although
it is well-known that a lot of the volunteers are camping. He
counted 503 exhibitors six times (each gets six passes), then seven
times (seven days), and then added a 65% fudge factor, giving SnF
"35,000" exhibitor-person-days. He counted the 1100 VIPs twice. All
this "rounding up" still gave him a figure of 242,000 for the
show's attendance, about 400,000 shy of the organization's official
report."
Worse, though, are the implications for those who may hear SnF's
reports and NOT understand the true threat to their personal
property by getting the FACTS. SnF reports that they "...talked
with the General Counsel of the Florida Department of Revenue and
he assured me (Burton) that, number 1, there will not be state tax
agents doing ramp checks, and that out-of-state pilots have nothing
to fear," during the Lakeland event.
If FDOR does, indeed, avoid Lakeland... this still places
aircraft at outlying airports, that stay for a night or
more, at risk for a future tax bill.
So... The TRUTH Is, There Still May Be A Risk
Picture it this way...
Mom and Pop GA fly their new 2008 Machbuster Thundercrunch to
Florida so that Pop GA can go to Lakeland with his buddies and Mom
GA and the little GA kiddies go to see "the Mouse." Pop GA, having
braved the insanity of the Lake Parker arrival once already (which
is enough for many pilots), lands at Kissimmee (or any other
outlying FL Airport), offloads his GA family, drives to Lakeland,
returns in a few days and flies home to another state -- where he
lives, works and keeps his aircraft. Months later, he gets a
$30,000 tax bill for his short trip to FL.... even though he is NOT
a FL resident, owns no property in FL, does not work in FL and only
visits their once every other year or so...
His crime?
Having a new airplane, believing John Burton, and having been
surveiled by an agent of the FDOR. Yes, he's in for a rude
surprise. There are a number of possible scenarios that expose
new aircraft owners, from out of state, to risks of additional
taxation and any possible confusion, obfuscation (or whatever else
you want to call it) on the part of the Sun n Fun folks, can't
change that possibility. Period. Simply put, FL Tax law just isn't
all that fair right now and while this matter exposes people to
such risks, it might be best to avoid them until your aircraft has
a few more hours under it's wings... at least six months
worth.
We must note, for the sake of trying to find a silver lining in
his mess, that if just ONE small part of Burton's attack on ANN has
ANY veracity, we hope it involves his assertion that state
officials will be avoiding the Fly-In, itself. If that is the case,
those who have been taxed by FL under this Use Tax game may have a
defense in the FDOR's apparent SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT of the tax
regs. Mind you; the other side of the coin means that FDOR may
not have a choice but to target SnF, and conduct some level of
surveillance, in order to not see their organization accused of
selective taxation -- and risk the possibility of having to refund
the monies it has collected under this program.
Summing Up (Finally!)
OK... the facts are
these... some new aircraft owners who do not reside/operate in
Florida may find an unacceptable risk of unfair taxation by coming
to the state until their aircraft have aged some. We do not see how
Sun n Fun can minimize this risk -- and we conjecture that
their considerable fears of the possible failure of their flailing
Fly-In may be pushing them to "bend" the truth. We see this as
unfortunate, sad and shameful... and worse than anything else, bad
for aviation.
Sun n Fun had an opportunity to be an activist in this matter,
to get in front of the problem, and be a "good aviation citizen" by
helping to protect their fellow pilots who may be at risk of unfair
taxation. Instead, the only concerns that seem to be in force in
the SnF memo revolve around their own self-interest. We hope that
is not the case, but based on our long experience with Burton and
others in the SnF organization, we admit that this is one of the
first possibilities that has crossed our minds.
Sun N Fun Blew What Little (if Any) Credibility They
Retained
We find it hard to believe that they sent out this memo with any
possibility that they didn't know that the contents were seriously
errant/flawed and exposed their visitors to the potential of
serious risk to their personal property. If that is the case, the
letter may in fact, expose them to complaints of fraud -- as did
their many errant untrue statements about past attendance
figures.
And, of course, we can't help but note that (once again) SnF has
decided that attacking the messenger, rather than the problem, is
to be their course of action... which sure as hell hasn't worked
for them, in the past.
ANN is researching this matter carefully and will have more to
report shortly.