IDK just like you don't know the dynamics of Delta's agreement with Georgia to begin with. Do you? Of course not. Delta has the leverage is the point. Not the point on which state could give them the best unknowable deal at the exact airport. You seem to completely miss the only point I have tried to make to create a false one. It's what you do.
The only one threatening to screw with the status quo is the Ga grand stander.
I think you are afraid of Delta exposing the NRA's lack of power.
So the point that Delta is paying 14% more in fuel tax in GA means?
That happens in big business everyday. This is not some exception because of the situation.
First Delta has $40 million a year option. That is how much they could save in state fuel tax alone by moving. Throw in some land, and hangers, who know what could happen.
First Delta has $40 million a year option. That is how much they could save in state fuel tax alone by moving. Throw in some land, and hangers, who know what could happen.
First Delta has $40 million a year option. That is how much they could save in state fuel tax alone by moving. Throw in some land, and hangers, who know what could happen.
The irony here. A liberal talking about evil taxation.Why? 1% fuel tax compared to 15%. What is your basis for this claim?
![]()
We already do. It's called 'tankering'. We carry more fuel than needed from outstations that have cheaper fuel into other stations in order to buy less at the hub. We have a whole division that monitors this.They're not moving. Worst case for Delta is they arrange as much fuel possible elsewhere, limiting what they buy in GA.
The irony here. A liberal talking about evil taxation.
The city of Atlanta has been gouging Delta for years on fuel There is nothing new here. We haven't left for years and we certainly won't go to NY over $40 million. (If I were a Georgia politician, I wouldn't count on any discounts going forward though - jmho, I don't speak for the company) It (the gouging) was a player in Delta's decision to buy their own refinery a few years back. (which has been very interesting to say the least) Just to put this in a little perspective, Delta Air Lines burns more fuel than the entire country of Denmark.
As my widget brother (he'll get that) said elsewhere, our campus there is huge. We aren't going anywhere over a measly $40 million. That alone is probably the value of the real estate we own there if I were to guess. My bet is that the politicians will quietly back off of this eventually and DAL will go back to granting whatever discount they pulled. It just won't make the drive by.First Delta has $40 million a year option. That is how much they could save in state fuel tax alone by moving. Throw in some land, and hangers, who know what could happen.
There is no leverage here due to taxation. Sorry to burst that bubble. It's $40 million. We probably spend that on deicing fluid.
The closing paragraph of this article pretty much hits the nail on the head:
"Still, in my view, the most telling aspect of the lieutenant governors post is the way it affirms the charge that corporate tax cuts arent an economic policy, so much as a form of legal bribery: If Casey Cagle believes that the primary beneficiary of the jet-fuel tax cut isnt Delta but rather, the people of Georgia why would he inflict harm on his own constituents just because hes offended by the airlines public-relations strategy? And if he doesnt believe the people of Georgia stand to benefit from giving Delta a $40 million tax cut, then why did he ever support that giveaway in the first place?"
GOP: No Tax Cut for Delta Until It Gives Discounts to NRA
