Like 172Driver mentioned, here in California there’s about $1% tax of value per year. But when you buy the plane, you pay the local sales tax of your home base on purchase price. That’s about 10% here in most parts of California. So, that’s a substantial cost, like a stamp duty in the UK. There are ways around that by taking the delivery of the plane outside of CA and not entering CA airspace for at least 6 months, but most people get hit by it.
AdamFrisch wrote:
That’s about 10% here in most parts of California. So, that’s a substantial cost
Malibuflyer wrote:
To add the German situation: In Germany we do not have a tax on private assets and therefore also no tax on airplanes.
Germany is actually a tax haven for owning things. No tax on wealth, low taxes on real estate, reduced tax on income from stock etc., reduced inheritance tax on companies etc. But for making money Germany is no tax haven at all and therefore not regarded as a low tax country. It took me some time to realize the full extend of this massive contradiction.
Dimme wrote:
AdamFrisch wrote:
Those comparisons of VAT across Europe always have to be taken not only with a grain but with massive amounts of salt! While the face values are obviously correct, in all of these countries there are more exceptions than goods where you actually pay these rates – most countries have reduced rates on food, books, etc. and other things that are deemed “good” and many have increased rates on alcohol, luxury goods (incl. cars), etc. and many “bad” things".
Sebastian_G wrote:
It took me some time to realize the full extend of this massive contradiction.
It’s actually not a contradiction but a very clear philosophy behind it – which obviously can always be discussed but at least follows a certain logic:
Ownership has no value (beyond generating envy by some other people). If you have a ton of gold in the bank (or a ton waste) does not matter, as long as you keep it in the bank and do not use it. Therefore there is nothing to tax. Only if you use the things you own there is a tax on it.
This is not only pretty straight forward, but also practically very handy as there is no theoretic discussion on what the value of assets you did not touch for ages really is…
Also VAT on aircraft is of direct relevance only on the first transfer from a VAT registered vendor to a non VAT registered vendor. Thereafter, assuming non VAT regd owners, the “VAT paid” status merely inflates the price, but in the long run probably by not much, due to international competition in the marketplace.
I found an identical thread from 8 years ago and merged it into this one. The 1st post is staggering. I wonder if @aart knows anything about that?
Spain has had a wealth tax for decades. But some regions of the country have been ‘switching the tax on and off’, but never applied them retrospectively AFAIK. Right now, all regions apply the tax with varying rates, except for Madrid. It’s zero there. Wonder how much longer that’s going to last.. Their local elections next May could influence that.
There are quite a few rules that can make this tax bearable. Like a fairly high threshold, an exemption for the house where you live, maximum amount to not exceed a certain % of your income, a certain flexibility regarding valuation of assets etc.
Regarding the 12% registration tax for aircraft over 1550 kg MTOM there is a debate going on. The Authorities are making noises to start to enforce an old law that anyone with an aircraft primarily based here will need to put it on a EC reg. AOPA and others are fighting this as being contradictory to EU/EASA regulations. My impression is that in the end it’s not so much about having the aircraft on a Spanish reg, but about being able to hit people with that 12% tax. And obliging owners to put it on EC reg puts one on the radar and makes levying the tax easier of course.
aart wrote:
that anyone with an aircraft primarily based here will need to put it on a EC reg. AOPA and others are fighting this as being contradictory to EU/EASA regulations.
Which EU/EASA regulation is this contradicting against?
I don’t know where I could find the text, but isn’t there a rule that in the EU, any EU resident can own and station any kind of EASA-reg aircraft in any country? Well, even if there is no formal rule, it’s certainly the way it works, or are there other countries than Spain that do things differently?
Unlike with cars, where countries can oblige you to get a local number plate when you effectively station a car in a certain country, whether you are are resident there or not.
aart wrote:
I don’t know where I could find the text, but isn’t there a rule that in the EU, any EU resident can own and station any kind of EASA-reg aircraft in any country?
Well – I don’t see such a rule anywhere.
aart wrote:
Well, even if there is no formal rule, it’s certainly the way it works, or are there other countries than Spain that do things differently?
Even if it might be – it is something completely different than claiming “it is against the regulations”. There do not seem to be too many countries that have something like the Spanish “registration tax” that could be evaded by registering the plane abroad and trying to hide it from the local authorities.
In Germany, e.g. this simply is not an issue because – despite the fact so many people are so loudly ranting about the LBA the vast majority of EU reg planes within the country are actually D-reg. The very few exemptions are again to a large extend special cases. Therefore even for the German regulator the problem is too small to introduce rules to prevent it.
aart wrote:
Unlike with cars, where countries can oblige you to get a local number plate when you effectively station a car in a certain country, whether you are are resident there or not.
And this is a good example, that such registration rules in general are not against EU regulations and not even against EU principles.
Regarding Greece,
I am sad to report that there is an annual Luxury Tax on A/C. It is calculated as 13% on the Fictitious annual Income that gets imposed on owners. So even if you are in an income bracket where the “fictitious” 65k€ income doesn’t raise it, you still need to dish out, about 8.5k if you own a C-172 or anything smaller, as extra tax on top.
Doesn’t affect me, but it is Disgraceful.
The funny thing is that this fictitious 65k€ income is supposed to reflect an annual expenditure on the A/C, and is thus called “Objective expenditure”.
Obviously, it is out by a factor of 5, at least.
Luxury tax for an Ultralight is about 2.6k€, as the “objective” expenses are set at 20k€/year !
and yes, you have guessed it, over 1k€ luxury tax is also applied on gliders, at 8k.
“Objective”, my ass
