Well this is interesting: Bipartisan bill would extend foreign income tax break to U.S. mariners – Professional Mariner
No idea if it has a chance of passing, but that would be nice.
Thoughts?
Well this is interesting: Bipartisan bill would extend foreign income tax break to U.S. mariners – Professional Mariner
No idea if it has a chance of passing, but that would be nice.
Thoughts?
The Bill is here. It does not apply to all mariners, only those on “qualifying vessels.” From the Bill:
QUALIFYING VESSEL.—The term ‘qualifying vessel’ means a self-propelled (or a combination self-propelled and non-self-propelled) United States flag vessel of not less than 6,000 deadweight tons used exclusively in the United States foreign trade.
That word “exclusively” could be problematic.
Odd they included that the vessel be “exclusively used in foreign trade” when in other sections they mention that income only counts when earned when the mariner is employed in a ship involved in foreign trade.
That part makes sense, but defining the vessel itself as exclusively foreign trade seems extremely limiting. For example, nearly every MSC civmar vessel, while they do operate foreign half the time, since they also unrep in CONUS coastwise half the time would they therefore not considered exclusively foreign? And if it wouldn’t that mean that even when trading foreign the mariner could not benefit?
Not sure it matters, is an unrep “trade?”
What’s with the 6,000 DWT minimum? I guess tugs never go foreign, so screw those guys.
Fair point. It gives the definition as the definition found in Section 1355(a)(7), which is:
The term “United States foreign trade” means the transportation of goods or passengers between a place in the United States and a foreign place or between foreign places.
Goods might come from the US or a foreign places, but I suppose a receiving US navy ship isn’t itself a foreign place. Perhaps a receiving foreign navy ship could be a foreign place?
Either way it seems like it’s cutting out a significant portion of the US mariners on foreign voyages, MSC deployees being arguably deserving of tax relief to compensate for longstanding fuckery.
I believe all wages earned while signed on board any US flagged vessel in commercial trade should be exempt from federal tax. That would be a great recruiting and retention tool. Pipe dream I’m sure.
The US is the only maritime nation that taxes their mariners. Most countries exclude mariner from ALL taxation, including property taxes and VAT. Also, pretty much no shipping companies, except US shipping companies, pay any taxes. And, most non-US mariners have some sort of government healthcare and pension program. This bill is likely a Cato Institute inspired program to get rid of the Jones Act but it doesn’t come close to the leveling the tax and cost difference between US and non-US mariners.
No, there are a few others that do as well. For example, the UK offers a deduction only if you’re absent from the UK all 365 days of the year.
in general, aside from in the Philippines, there a lot of hoops to jump through to be tax free as a mariner.
The ship I was aboard yesterday had Russian and Ukrainian mariners - they don’t pay any taxes. Indian mariners don’t pay any taxes. Chinese mariners don’t pay any taxes. Greek mariners don’t pay any taxes… One of my wife’s friends married a British 2nd Engineer (1st A/E) who sailed for Maersk, he said he only paid taxes on wages earned when the vessel was i UK waters - at least that’s what he told me. A British mariner is as rare as an American mariner. Tax exclusion isn’t enough to make up the difference these days - 30 years ago, yes.
I believe that is the point, to ensure nobody but guys on a very few flagged-in ships qualify, which is what? Couple hundred?
This smells like those soulless eunuchs in CATO again, trying to weaken the Jones Act with more performative nonsense.
Some E. European countries exempt mariners after so many days at sea. I’ve been told it varies from 90-180 days.
The likelihood of this bill being passed is small. There’s not a big enough of a lobbying/money group to move it out of committee.
I believe the statude provides for a 2 week visit on the us continent. Some guys tried it on the NOAA ships…(not necessarily a transpo company) … I never heard of their ‘‘success’’ story … I didn’t try it but I certainly never paid taxes during my year in iraq!