New Soo lock and Taxes

[Guest]

I don't really see the need.

If we need a second lock at the Soo, don't we need second locks even more at Eisenhower, Snell, Côte Ste. Catherine, Beauharnois (x2), Iroquois, and I believe 4 different locks on the Welland Canal that aren't twinned?

Sault Saint Marie has the Poe and the MacArthur. If the Poe Lock goes down for an extended period, we still have a lock that can handle a significant percentage of the US fleet, all of the Canadian fleet, and all of the saltwater fleet that trades inland.

And with shuttles, assuming a typical distribution on both sides of the lock of footers and the handful of smaller ships too large to be accommodated, this sizable chunk of the US Great Lakes fleet would hardly be at a standstill.

And if the Davis Lock were maintained for emergencies, most of what the MacArthur Lock can accommodate could go through here when traveling light, easing waits if either of the other active locks went down.

Yet the system has at least 10 complete choke points elsewhere that would seem to shutter a lot more business than the Poe Lock would, if any single one of them had a long closure.

Guess I don't get it. Nice to see Great Lakes shipping get some attention, but I believe this is a luxury more than a true necessity, and that the money would be better spent elsewhere such as addressing the dredging backlog around the Great Lakes.

[RCRVRP]

The Harbor Maintenance Tax is a business operating tax. As such, shipping company's get to deduct this fee 100 % when they file their yearly Federal Income tax report. Their annual cost to use the locks and harbors actually becomes ZERO !

I don't know details of the harbor maintenance tax but I know this.
If an expense is deducted on your business tax form it does not mean the amount of the deduction is deducted from the taxes owed. The deduction is deducted from the total income that is subject to taxes. Thus for example if your business is in a 30% tax bracket a tax deduction of $100 saves you $30. 30% of $100.

A tax deduction is not a tax CREDIT.

[Guest]

The Harbor Maintenance Tax is a business operating tax. As such, shipping company's get to deduct this fee 100 % when they file their yearly Federal Income tax report. Their annual cost to use the locks and harbors actually becomes ZERO !

[ed]

The US does charge all ships-shipping companies to use the Soo locks. The Harbor Maintenance Tax is a fee collected from users of the maritime transportation system in order to fund the Army Corps of Engineers’ operation and maintenance activities. In the Great Lakes, these activities include regular dredging of harbors, maintenance of breakwaters, and operation of the Soo Locks.

If this is true - then why does the congress have to O K the funding for a new lock at taxpayer expense. The money to build this new lock should all ready be available thru this Harbor Maintenance Tax ! The U S taxpayer is once again being hood winked into paying for big business. It's high time the users pay their fair share!

[Guest]

Exactly what I have said for years Ed as far as the New Soo Lock and the fact that the users should have to put up the money and pay for using it. I agree with you and your comments as many I have talked to about the Soo Locks project agree "Why should we have to foot and pay the bill out of our pockets when we will never be the ones using this new lock?" The shipping firms and the companies should be the ones to pay for the New Soo Lock as they are the ones constantly using it! I've often told people "That is does not make any sense whatsoever that the Soo Locks Do Not charge any tolls for any vessel to use it regardless of the vessel or its size yet at the Welland Canal and the Seaway Locks they do charge a toll for any craft to use it. When I was at the Soo this year in August, many were in shock when I explained to them that there are No Tolls for any craft to use the Soo Locks! I have told many people about how IMO they should charge a toll for all crafts to use the Soo Locks and then the money from the tolls could then be collected and used maybe for the funding of the New Soo Lock in part but again that's just my theory and opinion only so do not start a firestorm or a tongue lashing on my comments although many do agree when I tell and explain it to them that the users should be the ones to have to fund and pay for it not us taxpayers.

The US does charge all ships-shipping companies to use the Soo locks. The Harbor Maintenance Tax is a fee collected from users of the maritime transportation system in order to fund the Army Corps of Engineers’ operation and maintenance activities. In the Great Lakes, these activities include regular dredging of harbors, maintenance of breakwaters, and operation of the Soo Locks.

[Bookworm]

In reading this thread, two thoughts come to mind. Does your hypothetical proposal call for charging all users of all locks to pay a fee or only for using the proposed new lock? And, currently, Mac Lock closes early at the end of the shipping season and opens later when the new season begins. When the Mac is closed, all traffic goes through the Poe, so it really isn't fair to point to the two major companies as reaping the benefits of not having to pay a user fee.

[The Schipper]

The Soo Locks are covered by a law that has been on the books for a long time that requires all inland waterways in the US shall be free of tolls.

[Denny]

Exactly what I have said for years Ed as far as the New Soo Lock and the fact that the users should have to put up the money and pay for using it. I agree with you and your comments as many I have talked to about the Soo Locks project agree "Why should we have to foot and pay the bill out of our pockets when we will never be the ones using this new lock?" The shipping firms and the companies should be the ones to pay for the New Soo Lock as they are the ones constantly using it! I've often told people "That is does not make any sense whatsoever that the Soo Locks Do Not charge any tolls for any vessel to use it regardless of the vessel or its size yet at the Welland Canal and the Seaway Locks they do charge a toll for any craft to use it. When I was at the Soo this year in August, many were in shock when I explained to them that there are No Tolls for any craft to use the Soo Locks! I have told many people about how IMO they should charge a toll for all crafts to use the Soo Locks and then the money from the tolls could then be collected and used maybe for the funding of the New Soo Lock in part but again that's just my theory and opinion only so do not start a firestorm or a tongue lashing on my comments although many do agree when I tell and explain it to them that the users should be the ones to have to fund and pay for it not us taxpayers.

[Ed]

It is time to let the users pay for the new lock, NOT the U S taxpayer. I've heard the argument that the users already pay a tax. If that was correct, the congress would NOT have to O K the money in their next budget. The money to build the lock would already be available. The U S taxpayer should not have to pay for a project that will probable run over budget - as most federal projects usually report. This project is designed to help big business - not the U S taxpayer.

[Guest]

There is no longer such thing as fiscal restraint in Washington or logic and reason among the populace. Our grand kids are doomed with or without the new lock.

[Hobieone]

In another thread about the Escanaba docks and shipping thru there, some very learned opinions are expressed (thanks for those) and some observing a general decline of Lakes tonnage; i.e. coal fading as a viable energy source and steel production continuing to move towards electric arc furnaces. There was even a mention of some of the footers being retired and scrapped in the 10+ yr horizon.
So, with those considerations, the fiscal state of the federal government being what it is, do we really need to spend a Billion bucks of what is essentially a BACKUP to what is already there ? I understand the cutting back of wait times and the potential disruption of a long term outage of the Poe, but a billion $ could buy ALOT of business interruption insurance for Interlake and ASC.
Maybe I'm too fiscally conservative, but my grandkids don't need another $billion on their account.