|
|
 |
Responding to this message posted on the comment board by Scott:
Comment by: Visitor (6/23/2007 9:21:30 AM) So it does appear from the conflicting federal laws that the Marshall Island corporation would have prevented Washington from collecting their sales or use tax regardless of how long you stayed in state? Am I reading the correctly? If the corporation is already formed, what are the remaining issues with Marshall Island registration? - Scott
Scott: I am not an expert in this area, and I am not an attorney. The document I posted has the best information I've seen as to what is possible in the state of Washington. I would caution anyone reading any of this to seek accurate information (if it exists) from their own lawyer.
From my understanding, you are correct: If I do an offshore registration, I would not be taxed in Washington State. The filings I did with the state were for the purpose of getting an official answer from the state on this.
There are costs associated with offshore registration. I would need to form the offshore corporation. This corporation then needs to file tax returns in the foreign country. When the boat enters the US, it has to go through customs clearing, as though it were a foreign boat entering the US. Some states have restrictions on how long a foreign boat can reside within the state, and charge fees for cruising permits. These cruising permits sometimes are difficult to obtain, expensive, and put restrictions on what you can do. They sometimes require advance notification before the boat is moved. I've heard horror stories of boats being charged multi-thousand dollar penalties for moving their boat between ports, and not notifying customs 72 hours in advance.
My understanding is that some of the extra headache of being foreign flagged is as a result of Homeland Security. Since 9/11, the US is tracking foreign vessels moving in US waters closely. In our case, if the boat was going to be used in the Pacific NW for most of its life, foreign flagging would be a nightmare. We move regularly back and forth across the Canadian border. This would mean frequent interaction with customs. Similarly, we're not the type of people to sit still, and don't like to hold to a precise schedule. This makes it difficult to constantly need to report our movements to the authorities.
My mood varies from day to day as to what we'll do. Given our cruising schedule, and that our boat is out of the US for most of the next 10 years, here's what I am planning (which could still change):
- US Flag the vessel
- Document it with the US Coast Guard
- Spend a few weeks in Washington State, and only register with Washington State if it can't be avoided. If it is true that I have 45 days to register, then almost certainly this won't be an issue.
- I do not plan to pay annual registration fees to Washington. On our 62, I stopped paying once we left the state. I am not sure if there will be a penalty for the years we missed if the boat re-enters the state 10 years from now. I don't think there is... (but, there might be!)
Ken W
| Williams, Ken |
2007-06-23 10:11:29
|
| Thanks for the document, Ken. The letter from your attorney included everything I thought I understood about foreign yacht ownership and the specified allowances made for cruising within US waters. What is so bothersome is that citizens are required to pay the additional costs of hiring an attorney just to point out what a state agency should already know. Even having to go to the lengths of providing the supporting case law and reiterating the state's own laws. My wife and I have enjoyed living here in WA the last three years and I'm thankful that our dealings with any WA agencies have been very limited and routine. But then again, your dealings with Sans Souci should have been routine as your letter clearly points out. | Dray, Patrick |
2007-06-23 01:20:40
|
Patrick:
I updated my posting on the "what's new" page, and put a link to the actual paperwork I filed with the state of washington there. I don't believe anything in it is confidential (or, at least I hope not...) The document does a far better job than I could do of spelling out the issues. Anyone reading it should keep in mind that this is a Washington state document. It has no relevance outside Washington State, and it isn't even clear that it has any relevance within Washington State.
As to our schedule: The boat is arriving later than we had planned. Due to this, we've canceled our Alaska plans for this year. Our new plan is to save Alaska for next summer, and just hang out between Roche Harbor and the northern tip of Vancouver Island. A friend is circumnavigating Vancouver Island, and we might also consider this. Overall, my plan is to focus on shaking down all of the systems on the boat, and on getting comfortable with the boat, before the run to Costa Rica this winter. I think we'll stick close to home, and just focus on learning the boat. In October we'll ship the boat (via Yacht Path) to Ensenada, to position for start of the Fubar.
With this as our plan, I'll actually be in the state under 45 days, which may solve my problem. I'm not 100% sure, but hopefully this will save me a lot of money.
As to if I could have just kept the boat out of Washington, and avoided tax all together: I don't know. My guess is "absolutely", but I'm not positive. As silly as it sounds though, I have a slip at Roche Harbor I've been paying for, for the last three years, and will probably continue to pay for, for many years to come. It took several years to get the slip, and I may never get it back if I give it up. I'll be darned if my new boat isn't going into that slip for at least a few weeks!
-Ken W
| Williams, Ken |
2007-06-23 00:55:56
|
| Well, getting back to the topic of this thread, I can see you've had to make a decision about documentation. It does seem very strange that "foreign ownership" would trigger WA taxes. I realize you have a home here in WA, but the ownership by a Marshall Islands corporation should take your residence out of the equation. I don't know what your actual plans are, but it sounds as if you are basically bringing the boat to WA to load up some items before heading back to Mexico. Since the delivery and commissioning has run a little long, is there the possibility of not even bringing the boat up here at this point? I think you had mentioned a summer shakedown trip to Alaska and a visit to the Poulsbo Trawler Fest, but I guess AK might be cutting it a little close now considering you'll to get back to San Diego in late October. I would imagine you will want a several days to prep before the FUBAR. Could you have transported any other personal items to California, stuck with the Marshall Islands registry and not even involved WA state? | Dray, Patrick |
2007-06-22 21:48:59
|
Thanks Peter-
Very interesting and clear the way you added to Ken's information. I imagine there are many inherent stability factors in a full displacement hull that are quickly lost when even semi-displacement is created. I am also sure there are some very interesting and complex hydrodynamic principles involved.......I will have to do some research and fun reading. All cruising is good cruising, but my family and I are forced to cruise on a schedule and ride a full displacement hull.......ugh. And it is interesting talking to all of the different sub-types of boater's, from the speed freaks, to the trawlers, and all those in between. To some, the need to always push the pace keeps them away from true full displacement hulls. I think if the ability to push the throttles is there the temptation to get there just 'a little bit sooner' will always win, and the true enjoyment of cruising is a bit lost with every increase in speed above hull speed. We are so looking forward to the freedom to slow down. Maybe I'll get some hull physics 101 from the master, Jeff, himself someday as we plan our first Nordhavn.
Could you recommend any particular books or other material on these subjects?
Thanks again. In good health,
Edward
| doctor@pearsonwellnesscenter.com
 |
2007-04-02 21:08:55
|
The Dashew's boat is VERY cool.... It's a very different philosophy than mine, but has a lot of really great ideas. It really has more in common with a motor-sailer than a power boat (light weight, narrow beam).
-Ken W | Williams, Ken |
2007-03-29 18:51:03
|
| Dashew's FPB is an interesting option that crosses oceans at 12 knots at a reasonable fuel burn. The design is radical compared to traditional trawlers but nonetheless very interesting http://www.setsail.com/dashew/do_PARADIGM.html | Evangelista, Scott |
2007-03-29 12:12:47
|
Dear Edward
As far as I know, for example, Krogen and Sparkman & Stephens have built and/or designed trawler-style vessels that can travel at single-figure knots as well as into the 20s. Only, like Ken said, the question is whether you would want to cross an ocean in one of these. Anything I have seen so far that remotely comes close to having proved their ability to go places like a Nordhavn has had a displacement hull and, therefore, travels at hull speed (which, depending on length, is actually higher than the 7 or 8 knots usually cited). I think one question that always needs to be asked is whether - and in which conditions - all these faster boats can maintain their supposedly superior speed. A Nordhavn just goes - no matter what. After all, two recently went around Cape Horn!
Peter Mueller
| Mueller, Peter |
2007-03-28 05:23:59
|
"...are there any trawler style brands that have semi-displacement ability and are still very capable of ocean crossing?..."
I don't know. There are boats like the Fleming 55, which are trawler-ish but capable of higher speed, but I wouldn't try to cross an ocean in one.
On the Nordhavn rally, one of the boats, Crosser, was capable of going 20+ knots. I remember David Stone, the owner, lobbying me to go faster. He was worried that it would be tough on Crosser to run so slow. Once in a while, Crosser would do giant loops around us, just to let the engines run faster for a bit.
So... I think faster speeds are possible, but at an enormous cost in fuel. I averaged about 8 gallons an hour, running at 9 knots, crossing the Atlantic. My guess is that a planing hulled boat might cross at 20 knots, but average closer to 75 gallons an hour or more. There are two questions here - can it be done? And, at what cost?
-Ken W
| Williams, Ken |
2007-03-24 23:03:38
|
Ken-
Death and taxes :)
Thank you for that wonderful reply on hull material differences. I think in the long run, if we are always comparing to a Nordhavn, the decision may already be made. But shopping is half the fun. I think many future 68 owners will thank you and Roberta for helping 'guide' Nordhavn to create this boat. I would have felt the same way, not to say the mid-pilot house models aren't beautiful and unique as well, but I think many will more appreciate the classic lines of the 68, 76, and 86.
Speaking with the owner of a large Grand Banks today who stated he just doesn't like being stuck at less than 10knots, are there any trawler style brands that have semi-displacement ability and are still very capable of ocean crossing?
Best.
Edward
| doctor@pearsonwellnesscenter.com
|
2007-03-24 19:25:23
|
|
|