Finally! Do you have an idea how expensive those things are and how much my wage slaves must work for that?
YSK that americans can now deduce private jet expenses from their taxes
Submitted 3 weeks ago by henaw2@lemmy.world to youshouldknow@lemmy.world
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/14/tax-cuts-private-jets-big-beautiful-bill.html
Comments
thfi@discuss.tchncs.de 3 weeks ago
Taldan@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
The cost ranges from $30,000 to over $100M
Typhoon@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
The law, in its majestic equality, allows rich and poor alike to deduce private jet expenses from their taxes.
Taldan@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
To be fair, you don’t have to be rich to buy a Cessna 150. $35,000 can get you a nice old one
Issue is with taking advantage of the tax benefits
aphonefriend@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
You realize that a majority of Americans don’t have more than 1,000$ in their savings accounts?
LillyPip@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
The cost of the plane is trivial compared to upkeep, hangar rental, fuel, and myriad other expenses.
Sure, you can buy a plane for cheap, if you plan to keep it at your house somehow and never intend to use it.
dil@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
Maybe this somehow makes them start manufacturing planes again, remember seeing those homelesss pilot photos when they had a surplus of pilots and not enough planes or ppl taking flights
Can’t find an image on google was “will fly for food” or something like that.
0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
Made for the
rich whitepeople
ButtermilkBiscuit@feddit.nl 3 weeks ago
For example, a $3 million aircraft purchase – of America’s favorite business jet, the Pilatus PC‑12 – could potentially lower your tax liability by over $1 million if you’re in the 35 % bracket. This isn’t just savings; the Big Beautiful Bill private aircraft subsidy offers financial strategy at its finest. You can read more about the tax benefits of private aircraft ownership in our special report here.
Thanks magats
HK65@sopuli.xyz 3 weeks ago
The PC-12 is a turboprop, not a jet, though.
It’s a leech hauler alright, but not a jet.
EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 3 weeks ago
The distinction isn’t relevant to the point being made. Although the article title says “jets”, the body of the article uses the more generic “aircraft.”
TommyJohnsFishSpot@lemy.lol 3 weeks ago
Lemmutts love speaking authoritatively about things they don’t actually know.
AA5B@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Certainly a bigger problem is how someone who can afford over $1M private jet would be in only the 35% bracket
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I’m out of the loop did they get rid of 39%?
Carighan@piefed.world 3 weeks ago
Buy two! Save double!
who@feddit.org 3 weeks ago
Gross.
quick_snail@feddit.nl 3 weeks ago
YSK that eating the rich is a nutritious way to redistribute wealth
SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 3 weeks ago
Way too much fat
nonentity@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Don’t eat shit, mulch the rich.
schwim@piefed.zip 3 weeks ago
I don’t think that word means what you think it means.
turdburglar@piefed.social 3 weeks ago
indeductable!
whimsy@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
Great deduction!
nonentity@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Financial obesity is an existential threat to any society that tolerates it, and needs to cease being celebrated, rewarded, and positioned as an aspirational goal.
Corporations are the only ‘persons’ which should be subjected to capital punishment, but billionaires should be euthanised through taxation.
callcc@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
I like the that term. Just like obese personality for people who need large cars or are excessively loud.
zeca@lemmy.ml 2 weeks ago
Calling that financial obesity is so weird.
nonentity@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
The financially obese are weird, a perfectly cromulent framing.
SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
nomy@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
I love it. They have more than they’ll ever need but can’t help but continue to gorge themselves. Half of them probably miss out on sleep or family or other healthy activities in their pursuit of more wealth. Financial obesity is a fantastic term that paints a very accurate picture.
HarneyToker@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Why? Is it not an apt description? Or does the wording just make you uncomfortable?
buttnugget@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Calling it financial obesity makes it sound like a good thing. These are superfluous parasites.
nonentity@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
Any reality where financial obesity can me interpreted as a positive or desirable notion must conjure other fascinating paradoxes, please tell us more…
sirico@feddit.uk 3 weeks ago
You allowed this before proper health care because that’s Socialism? Communism? Gay?
Taldan@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
To be fair, America has the best aviation infrastructure in the world, and it is almost entirely socialized. So we do socialism sometimes
chillpanzee@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
It’s bonus depreciaton, not expenses, and it’s a business tax benefit, not an individual tax benefit.
Businesses can, and for a long time, have been able to deduct aircraft expenses. Nothing has changed there, and it’s not unique to this turd of a president. The return of bonus depreciation lets them depreciate faster, but again, depreciation is not new. It’s reasonable to removed about that, but you have to get every fact wrong to make that complaint.
Treczoks@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
And let me tell you how this works with cars. With planes it is the same, except that the savings are even better.
A real rich person owns no cars. He owns a car sales company. That company has a few select cars, which the rich person can “test drive” whenever they like. If the prime time of a car is over, the car is sold and a new one is bought. The car sales company pays for everything: purchase, insurance, taxes, fuel, cleaning, etc. Of course, this company does not make any profits. On the contrary. So the rich person pays for these losses, and those payments are tax deductable.
BanMe@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
This also applies to houses, boats, and inevitably surrogates now that they’re using them like pack mules.
corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
deduce private jet expenses
I can deduce it right from a receipt, if they give you one.
JensSpahnpasta@feddit.org 3 weeks ago
Thank you, government. That is really an improvement of my life!
IWW4@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
I am pretty sure this isn’t new. Air travel is like any other business travel expense, and plane are an expense like a plumbers van is…
sausager@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Literally no one needs a private plane.
IWW4@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
NFL teams would cause a riot if they flew commercial…
It is cheaper for College sports to use private planes.
Oil companies fly to remote places all the time on irregular schedules.
One of my friend owns a demolition company that blows up shit all over the world, his company literally can not use commercial planes.
Asfalttikyntaja@sopuli.xyz 2 weeks ago
My plumber comes with his private jet all the time.
SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
My plumber’s van has two hot stewardesses.
Soup@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Plumbers actually need their vans to get their stuff around but for these business people there’s no real reason they can’t fly in a normal plane like everyone else. They can fly fancy, but this whole private plane nonsense is comepletely absurd.
IWW4@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
There are so many uses for private aircraft. It isn’t all executives benefits
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Yeah, I was going to say I deducted airplane expenses for a client for twenty years
Hathaway@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
Ah, and only 90% of gambling loses. Looks like another point against the poor.
Not that I’m condoning gambling, but, weird how those things impact polar opposite sides of the wealth gap.
quick_snail@feddit.nl 3 weeks ago
In my experience, poor people gamble a lot. I’ve never seen a rich person buy a lottery ticket
Hathaway@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
That’s the point. Poor people gambling can’t write off their losses on taxes. Well, they can, just only up to 90%. Rather than all of it like it has been.
IronBird@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
rich people gamble plenty, they just call it investing and get way more tax write offs for doing so
Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Wait, if you buy a 10 dollar scratch card, you can deduct 9 dollars from you income for tax purposes?
some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
You think the people buying scratch tickets are itemizing? Idk, maybe they will, they’re not the brightest
MissingGhost@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
Why not make it be for bicycle repairs instead?
iamericandre@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Only poor people ride bikes that’s why
njordomir@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
If I get write-offs for my bike collection, I will also be stimulating the construction sector as I barely have room to store them all as it is. :-D
dil@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
We couldve been a flight based country instead of cars if we went in another direction, when we had more pilots than planes
jj4211@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Was never going to happen. The most efficient plane uses way more fuel than even a “gas guzzler”. The common driver is dangerous enough with a land vehicle between mistakes operating and slack maintenance, imagine if that population were all flying around.
dil@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
I was more thinking taxi/uber, rather than the general population flying themselves lol, and car crashes are very common
dil@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
The population was well trained after being drafted, some war ended (idr history that well) and we had a fat surplus of pilots, eventually they increased the hours needed for training, etc. to bring those numbers down, and up until recentlly, we apparently had a shortage, according to google.
Deceptichum@quokk.au 3 weeks ago
lemmy_get_my_coat@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Just the one that he does the Hitler salute with, silly
melsaskca@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
Kash Patel is gonna make a killing!
floofloof@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
Deduct. And the USA is taking the world in completely the opposite direction from where it needs to go.
RestrictedAccount@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
It would be nice if we could deduce them.