{"id":17575,"date":"2021-02-01T18:28:36","date_gmt":"2021-02-01T18:28:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/saj.pachecostudios.com?p=17575"},"modified":"2021-02-01T18:28:38","modified_gmt":"2021-02-01T18:28:38","slug":"nbaa-nata-urge-irs-to-provide-guidance-on-fet-collection-and-liability","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/index.php\/national-news\/nbaa-nata-urge-irs-to-provide-guidance-on-fet-collection-and-liability\/%20","title":{"rendered":"NBAA, NATA Urge IRS to Provide Guidance on FET Collection and Liability"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>The National Business Aviation Association (NBAA) and the\nNational Air Transportation Association (NATA) asked the Internal Revenue\nService (IRS) to continue the reform of Federal Excise Tax (FET) regulations by\naddressing unclear and confusing rules covering the collection responsibilities\nfor air charter operators and brokers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>After a years-long advocacy effort led by NBAA and NATA, the\nIRS, at the beginning of 2021, issued final rules on FET obligations for\naircraft management services paid for by aircraft owners. The final rule also\nreferenced regulations on payment and collection of FET, an issue raised by\nNBAA and NATA in their comments, but the agency suggested a separate rulemaking\nproject to address those concerns.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cWhile we understand and appreciate that the final rules did\nnot address these changes due to their broad implications for industry, the\nissues are still critical for our members,\u201d NBAA and NATA said in a Jan. 28\nletter to the IRS. \u201cWe believe that existing regulations and guidance regarding\nFET collection responsibilities under \u00c2\u00a7 4291 and liability for unpaid FET on\naudit under \u00c2\u00a7 4263(c) are unclear and create confusion for taxpayers and the\nIRS,\u201d the associations added.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/nbaa.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/advocacy\/letters\/20210128-NATA-NBAA-Lettter-FET-Rule.pdf\">Read the letter to the IRS.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>NBAA and NATA, in their letter, noted that current IRS rules\ndo not sufficiently explain FET collection responsibilities for transactions\ninvolving charter brokers. The groups explained that a rule placing the\nresponsibility to pay FET on the air carrier providing the initial flight\nsegment, if FET was not collected from the passengers by a broker, is\nunreasonable. \u201cThis obligation on the air carrier\u2019s part to pay the tax if the\nparty responsible for collecting it fails creates confusion and unfair\nliability exposure for the air carrier in instances where a broker is\ncollecting payment from the passenger,\u201d NBAA and NATA explained.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>\u201cWe have developed a strong working relationship with the\nIRS and are eager to work on regulations or guidance to provide much needed clarity\non tax collection and remission roles when brokers are receiving payment for\nthe transportation from passengers,\u201d said Jacque Rosser, NATA senior advisor,\nregulatory affairs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>As a first step in approaching these complex issues, the\ngroups requested an initial meeting with IRS officials to discuss how guidance\nor a rulemaking project could progress. \u201cWe appreciate how the IRS engaged with\nindustry on the most recent FET rulemaking and look forward to working\ncollaboratively on issues related to lability and collection of the tax,\u201d said\nScott O\u2019Brien, NBAA senior director of government affairs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The National Business Aviation Association (NBAA) and the National Air Transportation Association (NATA) asked the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to continue the reform of Federal Excise Tax (FET) regulations by addressing unclear and confusing rules covering the collection responsibilities for air charter operators and brokers. After a years-long advocacy effort led by NBAA and NATA, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[115],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-17575","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-national-news"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17575","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=17575"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17575\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":17576,"href":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17575\/revisions\/17576"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=17575"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=17575"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stateaviationjournal.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=17575"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}