Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS -- (Senate - January 26, 2005)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
By Ms. MURKOWSKI (for herself and Mr. STEVENS):
S. 170. A bill to clarify the definition of rural airports; to the Committee on Finance.
By Ms. MURKOWSKI (for herself, Mr. STEVENS, and Mrs. MURRAY):
S. 171. A bill to exempt seaplanes from certain transportation taxes; to the Committee on Finance.
Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce two related pieces of legislation addressing inequities that affect seaplane operators and passengers in rural areas. Both of these were included in S. 1072 when it passed the Senate last year, but because that business remains unfinished, it is necessary to reintroduce them.
The first of these--on which Senator STEVENS is joining me as a cosponsor, is a modification to the definition of a ``rural airport.'' The law adopted in 1997 provides for a per-passenger fee--now $3.20--on each domestic flight segment. Rural airports were exempted from the tax on the grounds it was intended to cover increased security costs for airports handling large aircraft and international flights. The law defines a rural airport as one which--for a given calendar year--has fewer than 100,000 departures in the second preceding calendar year, and which either received essential air service subsidies as of August 5, 1997, or is more than 75 miles from a larger airport.
The latter provision is a significant problem in my State. It was intended to reflect the fact that 75 miles is not really a long way to drive to and from an airport. Unfortunately, that assumes there is a road to drive on. That's not always the case. My State has a number of small community airports that are within 75 miles of a larger airport, but where there are no roads connecting the two. Thus, passengers cannot choose to drive to the larger airport. In order to fly to their ultimate destination, they are forced to fly from their village to the larger airport, where the passenger tax is legitimately collected. The bottom line is that these rural residents are unfairly taxed at least twice as much as all the other passengers leaving from the larger airport.
My bill simply adds this one additional unique criterion to the definition of a rural airport--that it may include a small airport that is within 75 miles from a larger one, but where there is no road connection between the two.
The second bill I am introducing today--along with Senator STEVENS and Senator MURRAY--is also intended to correct an inequity. Air passenger transportation is subject to a 7.5 percent excise tax in addition to the $3.20 per-segment fee. This generates revenue that goes toward the maintenance and improvements of airports receiving Airport Improvement Program (AIP) funding. However, in several cases in Alaska, and in at least one case in the State of Washington, the taxes are imposed on seaplane operators who land on and take off from open waters, not from facilities using AIP funds, and which rarely if ever make use of FAA communication and navigation systems. It should be a fundamental tenet that those who do not receive a service should not be required to pay for it. That is exactly the basis for my second bill.
Both these proposals have been in circulation for several years. Each of them has been estimated by the Joint Committee on Taxation to have negligible impacts on revenue--less than $2 million per year for the rural airport definition and less than $1 million for the excise tax. In that connection, it should also be noted that even if the excise tax for seaplane operators is eliminated, they will still be paying their fair share because they will automatically begin paying higher fuel taxes. The latter will go up from 4.4 cents per gallon to 19.4 cents per gallon for aviation gasoline and to 21.9 cents per gallon for jet fuel.
I encourage my colleagues' support of these two important measures.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of both measures be printed in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the bills were ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://thomas.loc.gov