Corporate Jet Deduction: It is a joke, right?

The President is serious of cutting the deficit, although there has been no tangible proof of such. (like any spending cuts) He says the deficit is a serious problem. To demonstrate his determination to cut it and buff up his reputation as a fiscal titan, he has proposed to change the depreciation schedule on corporate jets by making it seven years rather than the current five years. Of course, this does not really increase any nominal taxes over the life of the asset as the full cost is depreciated over time but it does affect the time value of the money on the payment of the taxes. Hence, revenue pick up over current law.

Mr. Obama mentioned the corporate jet break six times yesterday in his press conference. Now that is bold, powerful and deep thinking. If Congress would just make that change the whole mess would be over. No? I see, such a change is projected to put only $3 billion into the Treasury in the next 10 years. To put that is prospective; the deficit this year will be roughly $1.65 trillion or about $4.5 billion a day. So this change would be less than a day of deficit reduction but over a ten-year period or some 3650 days more or less. If the problem were not so serious, this would be comical.

Perhaps, the President needs some more suggestions. There are other great revenue raisers out there. Some ideas for him to consider:

Ø    Eliminate the deductibility of the cost of food served in Executive dining rooms including putting a ceiling on the cost of a bottle of scotch consumed by high income drinkers;

Ø    No more deductibility of the use of corporate cars, sedan services if a passenger makes over a certain amount;

Ø    Place an excise tax on the tuition paid by rich parents for their children attending private schools or universities;

Ø    Stop any tax credits, bonus depreciation for the production of Hollywood films and television shows where a major character portrayed is rich;

Ø    High Income professionals would not longer be able to deduct office magazine subscriptions, particularly to those snooty, elite magazines.

Ø    Include in income any employer reimbursement for housing costs or use (corporate apartments, hotels) by the rich where the reimbursement or value is more than the rate of the local Motel 6, (This could be expanded to include income to be imputed for the use of the White House by its occupant, the value of which is currently excluded from income)

I know the President is struggling with all of this and we all want to be helpful to him and our country. For my part, I am willing to keep the suggestions coming.