Obrázky stránek
PDF
ePub

AMEMDMENT TO CIVIL AERONAUTICS ACT OF 1938

THURSDAY, MARCH 11, 1943

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON

INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN COMMERCE,
Washington, D. C.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10 a. m., in the committee room, New House Office Building, Hon. Alfred L. Bulwinkle presiding.

Mr. BULWINKLE. The subcommittee will please be in order.

Mr. Howell, will you introduce these gentlemen who wish to appear as witnesses?

Mr. HOWELL. Mr. Chairman, I did introduce these gentlemen to some of the members before the session opened, and I think probably the first to testify will be Ben Regan, who is the chairman of the Illinois Aeronautics Commission, and then Mr. Roberts, the secretary, who is with him, and will want to testify also.

Mr. BULWINKLE. Mr. Regan, we will be glad to hear you.

Mr. HOWELL. And, I might say that I thought it might be helpful if the committee heard some of these men give us the State's views of this problem.

Mr. BULWINKLE. We will be glad to hear you, Mr. Regan. Give your full name for the record.

STATEMENT OF BEN REGAN, CHAIRMAN OF THE ILLINOIS AERONAUTICS COMMISSION

Mr. REGAN. My name is Ben Reagan, chairman of the Illinois Aeronautics Commission.

For the past several years, and particularly since the start of the war, the Illinois Aeronautics Commission has attempted to coordinate its services with those of the Federal authorities and to cooperate with the Aeronautic Administrative Authority, the Civil Aeronautics Administration, within our State.

We have had a very fortunate relationship with the Civil Aeronautics Administration, because of the very fine spirit of cooperation which the Federal authorities in our State have exhibited in our matters. We also have letters of commendation for our cooperation from the War Department and the Navy Department in matters of public interest in which we have had the necessary authority.

In the matters of air-traffic control and administration of airport regulations, the Illinois Aeronautics Commission has always deferred to the Federal authority, believing that uniformity of laws

1

regarding air safety is one of the most important matters potentially facing the future of aviation.

We are in hearty accord with the Civil Aeronautics Act of 1938. However, in a meeting held in Springfield on February 2, of the Illinois Aviation Conference, which represents trade associations, aviation groups, and State bodies within the State of Illinois, there was a unanimous expression of opposition to H. R. 1012.

Mr. HOLMES. You mean as to certain sections; not as a whole? Mr. REGAN. TO H. R. 1012; not specifically by sections, but to those sections which transgressed or appeared to transgress State rights. Mr. BULWINKLE. At that point, Mr. Regan-would you rather not be interrupted?

Mr. REGAN. That will be all right; that will be fine.

Mr. BULWINKLE. Did you examine the amended bill which was reported to the House on February 13?

Mr. REGAN. Well, because, shall we say, the viciousness of some of the opposition to this bill, we examined the amended bill very carefully. Specifically we find considerable objection to the definition of air commerce as amended in the general provision, definitions.

Mr. BOREN. You refer to the definitions of interstate air commerce, on page 69, line 7?

Mr. BULWINKLE (reading):

(3) "Air commerce" includes interstate, overseas, and foreign air commerce." Mr. REGAN. Section No. 3, definitions; title I, section 3 as amended, in which all intrastate aviation activities are placed under direct Federal juricdiction.

We also object to the terms of section 41 in regard to State regulation and multiple taxations.

Mr. BOREN. Before we leave that subject, Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question?

Mr. BULWINKLE. Mr. Regan, before you proceed any further, are you looking at the Ramseyer rule in the report?

Mr. REGAN. I beg your pardon.

Mr. BULWINKLE. Are you looking at this Ramseyer rule? That is, that part which we have in the back of the report?

Mr. REGAN. Report 124 accompanying H. R. 1012.

Mr. BULWINKLE. Which page?

Mr. REGAN. Page 16, section 41 on "State regulation and multiple taxation."

Mr. BULWINKLE. What I want to call your attention to, sir, is the difference as shown in that report between the introduced bill and the amended bill.

Mr. BOREN. Mr. Chairman, could I ask just one question?

Mr. BULWINKLE. Let us get this straight first.

Mr. BOREN. Yes.

Mr. BULWINKLE. What was the second objection you had to it? Mr. REGAN. Section 14 as reported; and it is on page 112 of your new bill on taxation.

Mr. BOREN. One hundred and twelve?

Mr. REGAN. Yes. And, I would like to go into a little detail on that, if I may.

Mr. BULWINKLE. Mr. Boren, you wished to ask a question first?

Mr. BOREN. If I might refer to just one question. You spoke of uniformity of regulations concerning safety.

Mr. REGAN. Air safety; yes, sir.

Mr. BOREN. Now, under the definitions, I will want your analysis of this. Perhaps you will have to extend it to some extent, but under the definitions and the regulatory sections in which we define the Federal jurisdiction over these air carriers, is not this bill as reported, pretty strictly confined to air safety; is it not confined to licensing pilots, and dealing with other features of safety? If not, what I have in mind is to request, to the extent it exceeds those phases, I want you to point out to us specifically wherein it does.

Mr. REGAN. That is what I was about to discuss in this matter of taxation.

Mr. BULWINKLE. All right, you may proceed.

Mr. REGAN. On page 3, and page 112 on taxation-I would like to present if I may, the position of Illinois in the establishment of airports at the present time.

As you know, the Federal Government has appropriated large sums of money for the construction of airport facilities which consist of runways; construction of runways, necessary drainage and grading of the port area and merely building of the port on property which is publicly owned by the community or by the State.

The Federal Government does not purchase the land. Now, in the State of Illinois, acreage prices for much of this land, which is some of the richest farm land in the country, runs from $150 to $300 an acre, and in some cases higher.

In many Southern States, where airports have been built during the last few years, it is rather a much simpler matter, or where the lands are not productively used and can be purchased at a cost of $1 to $10 per acre.

My specific point on this is that if a community or the State must borrow money or issue bonds to purchase lands required for an airport and to construct that airport in cooperation with the Federal Government, the community has to make some provision for the payment of the principal and interest on such bondings.

Your section on taxation would indicate that Federal approval must be received before any community can impose any kind of tax that might even be slightly controversial.

Now, I can assure you that most airports now under consideration in the State of Illinois, for cities within Illinois, will require public borrowings of money to purchase land and if these moneys are borrowed in the usual manner for such projects, not based upon an ad valorem tax, but based on special assessments, there must be some revenue provision which will have to be imposed to pay for the bonds, and it is a very great question in the minds of attorneys who have studied this, as to whether or not this provision of the bill will preclude such provisions.

Mr. BULWINKLE. Using an illustration, what kind of taxes do you impose in Illinois, so that I may understand you.

Mr. REGAN. We have none on aviation today.

Mr. BULWINKLE. Sir?

Mr. REGAN. We have no taxes on aviation today; we have no gasoline taxes on aviation. Gasoline-tax moneys are refunded. I am not certain as to the period, but all gasoline taxes are refunded. Mr. BULWINKLE. Mr. Holmes.

Mr. HOLMES. What is the ratio, in proportion to the cost of airports today of your land?

Mr. REGAN. On the most recent airport proposed in Illinois, I think the cost of the land was between 12 and 15 percent. It was to be a very big project. Nevertheless, some communities are up to their statutory limit on funded debt.

Mr. HOLMES. Do not most of these communities come to the Federal Government and beg to build airports, and furnish the lands free, and give us access?

Mr. REGAN. That is not the case in our State. Many of them do, and quite recently the voters of one community voted against the bond issue, and I believe that this idea was one of the factors which defeated the airport project for this city.

Mr. HOLMES. Now, how are your privately owned airports of Illinois assessed; how is the equipment on the airport assessed; such things as the hangars and other equipment placed on those airports? I mean, how are they taxed by the communities?

Mr. REGAN. The personal-property tax is the only tax, and it applies to ownership of aircraft, automobiles, or any other personal property. Mr. HOLMES. That includes the buildings?

Mr. REGAN. Yes. Of course, there is a real-estate tax there.
Mr. HOLMES. Yes.

Mr. REGAN. That is no different or there is no variance with any other taxes.

Mr. HOLMES. I mean, you do not tax the Federal Government for its hangars or equipment, or machinery, and things of that kind in any way, shape, or manner?

Mr. REGAN. That is my understanding.

Mr. HOLMES. Let me ask you about these taxes. You say You say that you have no taxes on aviation?

Mr. REGAN. I might add in that connection we have no airports in Illinois either. We only have two airports from which they are giving passenger service. We have a third airport, in the second largest city in the State, which is now complete to the point where they can have passenger service. We only have three airports in the entire State where it is possible today to give them service, because of the high cost of land in Illinois. We have had many trade associations urging that the State participate in the construction of airports through a greater degree, so far as financing is concerned. Mr. HOLMES. Has the State done any of that?

Mr. REGAN. The State today renders engineering services and technical advice to any community wanting an airport.

Mr. HOLMES. And no financial assistance?

Mr. REGAN. No financial assistance whatsoever. The local subdivision is required to acquire the property.

Mr. HOLMES. In other words, the gasoline tax is used entirely for highway maintenance, and so forth?

Mr. REGAN. There is no gasoline tax on aviation.

Mr. O'HARA. Mr. Chairman.

Mr. BULWINKLE. Mr. O'Hara.

Mr. O'HARA. I should like to ask a question. You say that there are three airports. You mean three commercial airports?

Mr. REGAN. We have three airports with paved runways of adequate size and length to serve commercial aviation.

Mr. O'HARA. And are those municipally owned; is the fee to the land municipally owned?

Mr. REGAN. They are municipally owned.

Mr. O'HARA. Of course, you have a great many smaller airports for private aviation, I presume?

Mr. REGAN. Í believe today we have slightly over 70 privately owned and controlled airports.

Mr. O'HARA. And the ownership of that land is vested in whom; is it municipally owned or privately owned?

Mr. REGAN. Privately owned in most cases and in many cases it is leased by the airport operator.

Mr. O'HARA. And the taxation of that property, of course, is on the same basis as other property?

Mr. REGAN. That is correct.

Mr. O'HARA. Real-estate taxes.
Mr. REGAN. That is correct.

Mr. O'HARA. And, have you had a supreme court decision in Illinois, such as in Minnesota, as to the taxation of transient aviation personal property?

Mr. REGAN. That has not even been considered in Illinois.

The CHAIRMAN. Is it your fear that the States will be deprived of taxes they should have? Is that the basis of your objection?

Mr. REGAN. The States or subdivisions of the State, local subdivisions of the government, might be deprived of the necessary taxes to operate such an airport.

The CHAIRMAN. Doubtless you are aware of the duplicate taxation that is frequently imposed in the country. For instance, I heard of one case where a circus came to town, a large circus, worth several hundred thousand dollars. The State law provided that a person who had property in that State, in that town, at noon on the 4th of March, had to pay taxes on it. The circus had to pay taxes on property probably worth $300,000 or more, and yet it might move off into another State and get in the tax period over there and be taxed again. There is a great injustice in that; it is a hold-up; it is not legitimate taxation. Airplanes are going to be subjected to some of that style of taxation, unless they are protected. It seemed to the committee that it would save a lot of trouble if we can establish some rule to prevent that vicious system of taxation before the matter advances any further. As time goes on, if these different communities get used to taxing aviation in such a manner as that, they will be very reluctant to give it up. So, it is that form of taxation we were trying to provide against here.

I presume you would have no sympathy with that method of tax

ation.

Mr. REGAN. I quite agree with you, sir. I know the case you refer to, and I assure you there will be nothing like that in Illinois.

The CHAIRMAN. Aviation should pay its fair share of taxes, the same as any other property in the country, but because airplanes move through so many States they should not be held up for unlimited. taxes, or have taxes repeated on them. And, in some instances

« PředchozíPokračovat »