STV Answers
10-31-2007, 11:28 AM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: Left to right
Posts: 119
Tax issues
Will it matter how much time is spent in the U.S. for tax purposes?
If vacation and holidays are pretty much the only days in the U.S. , there is not an issue. However, if a pilot keeps his family in the U.S. and comes back during off time, that could be an issue.
Any idea what that is supposed to mean? Is there a part in the loa that tells you how much time you can spend with your stateside family? I hope the union will try to get "could be an issue" defined before the bid closes. I know children are a personal choice, but what if they reside in different households?
Next favorite is it seems STV will be impossible in CDG. Weren't we told that the main reason for STV was to force those lazy line check instructors to paris?
Sorry if this violates civility rules Albie.
This is an interesting issue. As those of us in Subic learned the hard way, you cannot leave the country more than 35 days in a year that you are trying to establish expat status(someone correct me if I'm wrong here, there is another criteria to establish residency but I can't remember it). However, as I don't recall this requirement in the LOA and we bought off on the lovely mandatory tax equalization, a pilot could effectively deny the company the income exclusion by never meeting the expat status residency requirement. The pilot will pay the same tax regardless. Food for thought?
If vacation and holidays are pretty much the only days in the U.S. , there is not an issue. However, if a pilot keeps his family in the U.S. and comes back during off time, that could be an issue.
Any idea what that is supposed to mean? Is there a part in the loa that tells you how much time you can spend with your stateside family? I hope the union will try to get "could be an issue" defined before the bid closes. I know children are a personal choice, but what if they reside in different households?
Next favorite is it seems STV will be impossible in CDG. Weren't we told that the main reason for STV was to force those lazy line check instructors to paris?
Sorry if this violates civility rules Albie.
This is an interesting issue. As those of us in Subic learned the hard way, you cannot leave the country more than 35 days in a year that you are trying to establish expat status(someone correct me if I'm wrong here, there is another criteria to establish residency but I can't remember it). However, as I don't recall this requirement in the LOA and we bought off on the lovely mandatory tax equalization, a pilot could effectively deny the company the income exclusion by never meeting the expat status residency requirement. The pilot will pay the same tax regardless. Food for thought?
10-31-2007, 01:57 PM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,931
Originally Posted by CloudSailor
As strange as it may seem, if given the option I think I will jump on the FDA, if NOT given the option, I would be more likely to pass on the opportunity, weird hu? 
Maybe if we feel like we can choose as compared to being forced to take it or leave it, will make a difference for many of us in the pool...
Maybe if we feel like we can choose as compared to being forced to take it or leave it, will make a difference for many of us in the pool...
10-31-2007, 10:10 PM
#15
"blue collar thug"!
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: A proponent of...
Posts: 1,614
Originally Posted by Cargo Pirate
Will it matter how much time is spent in the U.S. for tax purposes?
If vacation and holidays are pretty much the only days in the U.S. , there is not an issue. However, if a pilot keeps his family in the U.S. and comes back during off time, that could be an issue.
Any idea what that is supposed to mean? Is there a part in the loa that tells you how much time you can spend with your stateside family? I hope the union will try to get "could be an issue" defined before the bid closes. I know children are a personal choice, but what if they reside in different households?
Next favorite is it seems STV will be impossible in CDG. Weren't we told that the main reason for STV was to force those lazy line check instructors to paris?
Sorry if this violates civility rules Albie.
This is an interesting issue. As those of us in Subic learned the hard way, you cannot leave the country more than 35 days in a year that you are trying to establish expat status(someone correct me if I'm wrong here, there is another criteria to establish residency but I can't remember it). However, as I don't recall this requirement in the LOA and we bought off on the lovely mandatory tax equalization, a pilot could effectively deny the company the income exclusion by never meeting the expat status residency requirement. The pilot will pay the same tax regardless. Food for thought?
If vacation and holidays are pretty much the only days in the U.S. , there is not an issue. However, if a pilot keeps his family in the U.S. and comes back during off time, that could be an issue.
Any idea what that is supposed to mean? Is there a part in the loa that tells you how much time you can spend with your stateside family? I hope the union will try to get "could be an issue" defined before the bid closes. I know children are a personal choice, but what if they reside in different households?
Next favorite is it seems STV will be impossible in CDG. Weren't we told that the main reason for STV was to force those lazy line check instructors to paris?
Sorry if this violates civility rules Albie.
This is an interesting issue. As those of us in Subic learned the hard way, you cannot leave the country more than 35 days in a year that you are trying to establish expat status(someone correct me if I'm wrong here, there is another criteria to establish residency but I can't remember it). However, as I don't recall this requirement in the LOA and we bought off on the lovely mandatory tax equalization, a pilot could effectively deny the company the income exclusion by never meeting the expat status residency requirement. The pilot will pay the same tax regardless. Food for thought?
11-01-2007, 02:58 AM
#16
Gets Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: Nordskog Industries Field Technician
Posts: 688
This was taken directly from the new Q&A:
Please confirm how the Tax Equalization plan criteria will be implemented by PwC SPECIFICALLY for Pilots who have already qualified for the $82,000 tax exclusion. How will PWC set criteria for pilots who have lived abroad for a considerable amount of time?
Tax Equalization simply tries to make the U.S. citizen pay the same tax he (she) would in the U.S. Thus, since you do not get the $82,000 exclusion in the U.S. , you also do not get it in a Tax Equalization program. If you did, that would be a tax holiday, not Tax Equalization. Don't lose sight of the objective of Tax Equalization which is to provide the pilot with a “tax neutral” position as if he (she) remained in the U.S. It is designed to yield neither a tax benefit nor loss to the employee for taking the assignment. The majority of pilots would incur a financial loss without the tax equalization mechanism regardless of the exclusion.
This is literally a bold faced lie. I realize that this may be the case in some countries, maybe even France, but it is far from the case in Hong Kong. Apparently getting the exclusion, plus only paying a maximum 17% (15% for most incomes) is a 'financial loss' compared to the 30+% you pay in the states.
Anyway, just suggesting that you read this Q&A propaganda with a wary eye, as it doesn't seem entirely accurate.
I hope every junior bus guy who voted yes gets STV'd against his will and gets a case of Chairman Mao's Revenge and misses his kid's first birthday.
Just kidding, I hope no one ever has to go against their will and we create some new jobs for my buds still grinding it out at the regionals and ACMIs.
Please confirm how the Tax Equalization plan criteria will be implemented by PwC SPECIFICALLY for Pilots who have already qualified for the $82,000 tax exclusion. How will PWC set criteria for pilots who have lived abroad for a considerable amount of time?
Tax Equalization simply tries to make the U.S. citizen pay the same tax he (she) would in the U.S. Thus, since you do not get the $82,000 exclusion in the U.S. , you also do not get it in a Tax Equalization program. If you did, that would be a tax holiday, not Tax Equalization. Don't lose sight of the objective of Tax Equalization which is to provide the pilot with a “tax neutral” position as if he (she) remained in the U.S. It is designed to yield neither a tax benefit nor loss to the employee for taking the assignment. The majority of pilots would incur a financial loss without the tax equalization mechanism regardless of the exclusion.
This is literally a bold faced lie. I realize that this may be the case in some countries, maybe even France, but it is far from the case in Hong Kong. Apparently getting the exclusion, plus only paying a maximum 17% (15% for most incomes) is a 'financial loss' compared to the 30+% you pay in the states.
Anyway, just suggesting that you read this Q&A propaganda with a wary eye, as it doesn't seem entirely accurate.
I hope every junior bus guy who voted yes gets STV'd against his will and gets a case of Chairman Mao's Revenge and misses his kid's first birthday.
Just kidding, I hope no one ever has to go against their will and we create some new jobs for my buds still grinding it out at the regionals and ACMIs.
11-01-2007, 03:08 AM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,931
Originally Posted by md11phlyer
The majority of pilots would incur a financial loss without the tax equalization mechanism regardless of the exclusion.[/I]
This is literally a bold faced lie.
Anyway, just suggesting that you read this Q&A propaganda with a wary eye, as it doesn't seem entirely accurate.
I hope every junior bus guy who voted yes gets STV'd against his will and gets a case of Chairman Mao's Revenge and misses his kid's first birthday.
Just kidding, I hope no one ever has to go against their will and we create some new jobs for my buds still grinding it out at the regionals and ACMIs.
This is literally a bold faced lie.
Anyway, just suggesting that you read this Q&A propaganda with a wary eye, as it doesn't seem entirely accurate.
I hope every junior bus guy who voted yes gets STV'd against his will and gets a case of Chairman Mao's Revenge and misses his kid's first birthday.
Just kidding, I hope no one ever has to go against their will and we create some new jobs for my buds still grinding it out at the regionals and ACMIs.
I agree with what you said above.
11-01-2007, 07:46 AM
#18
"blue collar thug"!
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: A proponent of...
Posts: 1,614
The majority of pilots would incur a financial loss without the tax equalization mechanism regardless of the exclusion.
It IS a bold faced, flat out, POS lie! The bid calls for 75 crews in CDG and 90 crews in HKG. I have worked the numbers for myself, anyway, and for HKG, without the tax-equal., I would have less of a financial loss than I would in CDG. 90 pilots is more than 75, so the majority loses under the tax equal program.
And besides......a tax holiday! That is pure BS. Is the term holiday a negative connotation that implies that those who use it are scamming? That "holiday" is everyones right under the tax laws of the US of A.
Man, I am getting fired up again!
It IS a bold faced, flat out, POS lie! The bid calls for 75 crews in CDG and 90 crews in HKG. I have worked the numbers for myself, anyway, and for HKG, without the tax-equal., I would have less of a financial loss than I would in CDG. 90 pilots is more than 75, so the majority loses under the tax equal program.
And besides......a tax holiday! That is pure BS. Is the term holiday a negative connotation that implies that those who use it are scamming? That "holiday" is everyones right under the tax laws of the US of A.
Man, I am getting fired up again!
11-01-2007, 08:45 AM
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Position: Reverse Apexed
Posts: 123
From another FCIF
In addition to the already scheduled practice bid on November 13th, Bxxx
Hxxxxx's manning mafia has agreed to add practice bids on October 22nd and November 1st. The bid still closes on November 19th.
Hxxxxx's manning mafia has agreed to add practice bids on October 22nd and November 1st. The bid still closes on November 19th.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
