Say "bye bye" to your boat interest deduction.

Four Suns

Not a pot stirrer
TECHNICAL Contributor
Oct 4, 2006
10,533
Williamsburg, VA
Boat Info
2003 480 DB
Engines
QSM-11 Diesels
This doesn't affect me but I thought it was interesting... this is a quote from the NY Times article:

“Yes, believe it or not, Uncle Sam subsidizes the purchase of sprawling, luxurious, 72-foot Viking yachts,” Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, said on the Senate floor in arguing to close what he sees as tax loopholes for jet and yacht owners. “As long as your yacht has a place to sleep and a place to — how shall I put it — relieve yourself, you can classify it as your ‘second home’ and claim the mortgage interest deduction.”

Full article here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/08/us/politics/08lobby.html

Frankly, it's BS on singling out the "corporate jet" thing... They going to single out "back hoes" next?

And before you start Mr. Corn Hole... it's not "Fox News".
 
This isn't a political post... it's just pointing out that there is a big push to remove the interest deduction from boats that have loans on them. We can't talk about something like that (and I assume is very important to people) without it getting shoved under the rug?
 
I'm just wondering how the government "subsidizes" 72' Viking Yachts... they get a check in the mail or something? Should have bought a Viking.

What Chuck Schmuck Head doesn't get is the number of jobs that were sustained with the purchase of that 72' yacht... Guess the evil bastard should have not bought the yacht so the government could take the money and dish it out to the would-be Viking factory worker in the form of a welfare check instead of a paycheck.

I'm just guessing that taking that interest deduction away will kill new large boat sales... Especially for the middle class.. Well... My son works full time at Chick-fil-a (sp?) and he pays taxes... so I assume he's in the upper 50% of wage earners now... at 16.
 
Last edited:
Chuck Schumer is a Jacka$$.
Yep !! +2. :smt021.

I lived here all my life and its getting so F'd up here. :smt100

I'm moving to Canada. :thumbsup:. If they will forgive me for my last visit there. :grin:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
They all make me sick. I'm tired of subsidizing those who CHOOSE to sit on the porch all day and complain of how the world owes them something.
 
The "world" owes me a big Sundancer... so I can sit on it all day.... I have been waiting for one to be delivered but it hasn't shown up yet...:huh:

I guess I will have to keep working hard to get it myself then!:thumbsup:
 
Gee, I'll have to make the boat my primary residence, and write off the interest from my land-locked secondary home ! Will that work ?
 
There are two separate issues in this article. First, is depreciation on a corparate owned luxury item. Second, is claiming mortage interest on a second home. These are completely two different things. I think the article and main concern was on the depreciation on corporate jets. Although, I don't agree with either, I don't believe they will get rid of the mortgage interest on a second home. that would totally collapse home/vacation property sales. But, who knows, is it time to vote again?
 
The joke is this... There is already a $1M limit on mortgage principle for personal tax purposes. That includes one's primary residence, second mortgages, and a "second home." Last time I checked, a 72 foot Viking is about a $4M boat. Maybe I'm nuts... but a person who is buying a $4M boat is not going to finance it for tax purposes on his/her personal income tax. I'm assuming if the person has a $4M boat, he/she probably has a house worth over $1M and if they want to play the spread on interest paid and interest earned, they'll have already hit the limit on their house. They probably couldn't give a rat's ass about the tax issue on the boat.

Who this really impacts is the family buying a $100K - $500K boat who has not hit the $1M limit on mortgage principle imposed by the IRS... those are not the "millionaires and billionaires" being discussed... they are upper middle class. People that buy Bayliners, etc...

But Chuck Shoe Maker needs to make villians out of someone... might as well be the middle class who own boats.
 
Last edited:
Also say bye bye to your boat dealership, marina, dock neighbors, West Marine, and thousands more jobs.
 
There are two separate issues in this article. First, is depreciation on a corparate owned luxury item. Second, is claiming mortage interest on a second home. These are completely two different things. I think the article and main concern was on the depreciation on corporate jets. Although, I don't agree with either, I don't believe they will get rid of the mortgage interest on a second home. that would totally collapse home/vacation property sales. But, who knows, is it time to vote again?

What experience do you have to judge that a "plane" owned by a corporation is a "corporate owned luxury item?" Maybe the Snap On tools owned by my mechanic are "luxury items" as well... Get a clue. You drink Coors?
 
What experience do you have to judge that a "plane" owned by a corporation is a "corporate owned luxury item?" Maybe the Snap On tools owned by my mechanic are "luxury items" as well... Get a clue. You drink Coors?

I was using their terminology! Chill out, I'm on your side, BTW I drink Diet Green Tea, it is a natural laxative.
 
Get a better CPA and you guys can hide more cash. :smt001
 
Sorry... I find the plane issue ridiculous as well... Corporate owned planes are tools... not luxuries.. if the CEO goes on personal travel on a corporate jet, it has to be recorded as income and taxed... it's not a play toy that is tax free for personal use.

Maybe we should start taxing company cars/vans because employees could ride a bus afterall... Load up their crap/tools... go to the Greyhound station... or city bus station... Man.. I could be a congressman.
 
Last edited:
Washington functions like we have a powerboat engineering team and a sailboat engineering team trying to build one vessel. It isn't going to work out very well. Washington is closely divided between tax and spenders versus low tax small government. Our economic polices are incoherent because both sides win a few and leave the citizens scrambling to keep up.
 
Sorry... I find the plane issue ridiculous as well... Corporate owned planes are tools... not luxuries.. if the CEO goes on personal travel on a corporate jet, it has to be recorded as income and taxed... it's not a play toy that is tax free for personal use.

Maybe we should start taxing personal cars because you could ride a bus afterall...

And when all of these Corporations quit buying jets ( just like when they had the luxury tax) they'll get the message. But before that happens, a lot of jobs will be lost and never to be found again because they will end up over seas.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
112,945
Messages
1,422,746
Members
60,928
Latest member
rkaleda
Back
Top