# Big Boys not paying their fair share?



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

Took a stroll at my marina today, and went out on one of the big boys' docks, where the 45 ft to 60 ft+ boats live. Sometimes I like to see how the other 1% lives....

Here in CT, boat registration is annual. It is a flat $75 fee, regardless of boat size (once you hit the minimum stds). Registrations run April to April, and once paid, you get a sticker of the proper color with the year noted. Registrations paid in '16 are a bright blue with the number "17" on them, so it's easy to see who is up to date with their registration fees. 

Anyway, I noticed that of about 20 boats on the big boy dock, only one had a valid registration sticker. Many of them had stickers that were at least three years out of date. Some had no stickers at all.

I realize that some of these boats may have been transients from out of state (indeed, a few had NY hailing ports on the transom), and at least one looked like it might still be fitting out for the season (no sails yet). But still.... Everyone on my dock (max length of 25 ft) has a valid sticker on the bow now. I mean, its July 4 already. 

I'm going to try and remember to keep an eye on this and see if those stickers show up later in the year. In the meantime, is this a phenomenon that you see in your areas too?


----------



## travlin-easy (Dec 24, 2010)

Keep in mind that more often than not, most of the so called "Big Boys" NEVER leave the dock, thus the chances of them being checked for up to date registration stickers ranges from slim to none. Many of these boats are just summer homes and waterside weekend cottages in the shape of a boat.

Gary


----------



## Sailormon6 (May 9, 2002)

The fact that their boats don't display the sticker doesn't mean they haven't paid. The state mails a renewal notice to my home, out of state, and I pay for the renewal, and they send the new sticker to my out of state home. When I come here for the summer, I sometimes forget to bring it. Then I buy a replacement sticker, which means that I actually end up paying more to comply with the registration law than you. At least once I didn't get around to attaching my replacement sticker until long after July 4. (I have also been guilty of procrastinating in applying my sticker to the boat.) It's possible that some rich people might not be as diligent as me in buying a replacement sticker. 

They should, of course, pay for and affix their sticker, but your conclusion that they are too cheap to pay for them isn't supported by facts. 

I would guess that the more likely scenario is that they were neglectful in some regard, and not merely cheap. FWIW, I'm not rich, but I've met some rich people and have found them generally to be considerate, generous people, outside of the business arena, of course.


----------



## Turnin Turtle (Jun 25, 2016)

how about the essentially abandoned in place boats?... 

The ones that are awaiting the marina getting a lien vs back slip fees (and other overdue charges) so they can auction them off. (however its handled in the state)
Nobody is paying for anything on them. They're just taking up space.


----------



## senormechanico (Aug 20, 2012)

State registration requires numbers on the bow and a sticker.
Coast Guard Documentation does not.
I suspect they are registered with the latter.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

I've never failed to pay my state registration fees, in addition to being USCG documented. It's not made clear that the reg sticker needs to be applied at all. I get around to adhering it to the mast every so often. 

I hate these 1% threads. They are about 1% fair and accurate.


----------



## wsmurdoch (Jan 23, 2007)

Note the Caymen Island flag on Fountainhead. I think Mark Cuban lives in Dallas Texas.








Few Big Boys are US documented much less US state registered.


----------



## paulk (Jun 2, 2000)

Many states, CT included, charge a usage fee for boats that are in their waters for more than a certain period of time. In CT, AFAIK it applies to ALL boats, regardless of where they're registered: out of state , documented with the Feds, or foreign. The fee is supposed to help pay for things like pumpout stations and marine police. It is up to the Harbormaster of each port to keep an eye on the boats using his or her harbor and keep tabs on them, so that the state does indeed collect what it is due.(CT Harbormasters are appointed by the Governor, so despite having a local role, they are responsible to the state.) If you suspect boats in your harbor aren't paying their fair share, call the Harbormaster.


----------



## aeventyr60 (Jun 29, 2011)

Minnewaska said:


> I've never failed to pay my state registration fees, in addition to being USCG documented. It's not made clear that the reg sticker needs to be applied at all. I get around to adhering it to the mast every so often.
> 
> I hate these 1% threads. They are about 1% fair and accurate.


What makes you think you are a big boy?:captain:


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Think Conn. and MA have shot themselves in the foot.

Walk my dock where I'm the smallest boat and get to chat with the owners. One is from R.I. and the rest from MA and Conn. Some drive 2-3h just to leave their home state of record. I'm on other people's boats and something needs attention. We divert to R.I. not Conn. nor MA. That's where the skilled services are. AND THE MARINE JOBS. 

Gov't income wise those two states were extremely dumb. They screwed the small boat crowd with sales and use taxes for short money. The larger boats just moved to R.I. or if in transit go there. 

They lost all the income/real estate/households goods sales taxes that boat builders, yard workers,sailmakers, riggers, electronics guys would pay. Net lost of gov't income to Conn. and MA. Huge gain to R.I. Just dumb as the marine industry jobs and even the chandleries have left Conn/MA and moved to R.I.

Sad gov't has little or no understanding of basic economics and just screws the small guys. As they say it's expensive to not be rich.


----------



## MarkofSeaLife (Nov 7, 2010)

mstern said:


> Took a stroll at my marina today, and went out on one of the big boys' docks, where the 45 ft to 60 ft+ boats live. Sometimes I like to see how the other 1% lives....


I love strolling the Big Boys Docks... Because I can see how the 1% contribute disproportionately highly to the rest of the community, industry, economy!


----------



## twoshoes (Aug 19, 2010)

Ironically, one only needs to have an income of around $33,000 USD a year to be a global 1%er, or a total net worth of $770,000.

Making the 1% cut in just the US is a bit harder at a yearly income of $430,000 USD.


----------



## blt2ski (May 5, 2005)

Locally the Dept of Revenue gets a key to ALL the docks from the Port office, goes and walks the dock. Your July1 to June 30 sticker had better be on the boat, or you are automatically fined. This is usually done in the mid august to early sept time frame. Does not matter how big or small your boat is.

Marty


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

mstern said:


> ?....went out on one of the big boys' docks, where the 45 ft to 60 ft+ boats live......





aeventyr60 said:


> What makes you think you are a big boy?


Never said I was, but this is how the OP defined it in the opening post.

What makes you think you are clever?


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

mstern said:


> Took a stroll at my marina today, and went out on one of the big boys' docks, where the 45 ft to 60 ft+ boats live. Sometimes I like to see how the other 1% lives....
> 
> Here in CT, boat registration is annual. It is a flat $75 fee, regardless of boat size (once you hit the minimum stds). Registrations run April to April, and once paid, you get a sticker of the proper color with the year noted. Registrations paid in '16 are a bright blue with the number "17" on them, so it's easy to see who is up to date with their registration fees.
> 
> ...


Relatively new to America are you? lol


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

wsmurdoch said:


> Few Big Boys are US documented much less US state registered.


Actually most of the American owned mega-yachts we see down here are indeed documented. Many are using places like the Marshall Islands because of their favorable tax laws, but they are documented.
Documentation is not something one should consider giving up unless you are willing to take a considerable hit, should an American wish to buy your boat.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

CT led the way back in the early 70's when they started arresting yachts with bogus Delaware registrations that were on long-term berths. They literally had the tax men walking the docks, and if a yacht had a Delaware registration...The registered owner got a nastygram and a bill telling them to either "Pay up or prove it".

I doubt the CT taxmen have gotten stupid or slack after they led the country in collections.

What you can SEE on a boat means next to nothing. Mark Cuban's yacht, with a foreign flag, probably is titled to a corporate LLC which is a full and legitimate business headquartered there. And that's why he's got the billions so few of us here can match or beat.

Form an LLC, have it buy a big yacht, move it around and use it for business purposes (entertaining clients, holding charity junkets, making it available as a perq for your best football players and their agents, etc.) and yes, it can be a perfectly legal and proper way to use the vessel.

Boats at the dock? You know that by-now-hackneyed DHS story? "If you see something, say something." Send a written query into your state registration/tax department questioning the large number of apparently improperly registered vessels at the dock, and someone will get around to it.

May not earn the love of your neighbors, though. They just might buy out the marina and toss you out.

Just don't make the mistake of thinking all those apparently wealthy people are also so dumb they'd be flagrantly violating petty registration laws. SOME of them are way smarter than that.


----------



## Skyeterrier (Feb 11, 2016)

I'm going to guess that this issue of enforcing current registration varies widely by locale. I've been in the same pricey SoCal marina for almost 20 years now and I get the impression enforcement of this issue is generally lax where I am. There are definitely high dollar big boys in my neighborhood but I never bother to walk over there, but I've seen plenty of vessels fancy and humble with expired registrations all around me, sometimes by a couple of years, all over the marina although most people are current. I will admit to having been one of those from time to time, although I'm going with the USCG documentation system now. So at least in my marina there doesn't seem to be much enforcement, particularly if the vessels don't get underway. I'm going to guess the managers of our marina don't care too much as long as your slip fees keep coming in and you aren't making trouble in other ways.


----------



## aloof (Dec 21, 2014)

If you sand off and paint over that state number on the bows then the non-sailors that do the dock-walk assume you are USCG documented. State number and old sticker...duh...bad. The secret of the 1%'ers? Cheat. One of the most famous 1%'ers didn't even bother to pay the registration for his Boeing jet...


----------



## Sailormon6 (May 9, 2002)

aloof said:


> If you sand off and paint over that state number on the bows then the non-sailors that do the dock-walk assume you are USCG documented. State number and old sticker...duh...bad. The secret of the 1%'ers? Cheat. One of the most famous 1%'ers didn't even bother to pay the registration for his Boeing jet...


Speaking of people who think they don't have to follow rules, please confine your political talk to the PRWG forum.


----------



## wsmurdoch (Jan 23, 2007)

capta said:


> Actually most of the American owned mega-yachts we see down here are indeed documented. Many are using places like the Marshall Islands because of their favorable tax laws, but the are documented.
> Documentation is not something one should consider giving up unless you are willing to take a considerable hit, should an American wish to buy your boat.


So you are saying that M/Y Fountainhead flying a Cayman Islands flag with a home port of George Town and a radio call sign of ZCTU3 is documented with the US Coast Guard and pays property taxes on the boat to a US jurisdiction just like I do with my Coast Guard documented with a boat home port in NC, USA?

In the Bahamas most of the large yachts flew flags from the Marshall Islands, Bermuda, Cayman Islands, with a smattering of Panama, Trinidad, and others.

I notice that the bigger boat in the thumb of post 11 of this thread has a Marshall Islands flag.


----------



## seaner97 (May 15, 2011)

Hmmm... Maybe I should take my sticker out of my glove box and put it on the boat sometime. Seems to be pissing people off in the south.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

wsmurdoch said:


> So you are saying that M/Y Fountainhead flying a Cayman Islands flag with a home port of George Town and a radio call sign of ZCTU3 is documented with the US Coast Guard and pays property taxes on the boat to a US jurisdiction just like I do with my Coast Guard documented with a boat home port in NC, USA?


No, I don't think I was saying that, but maybe I'm really stupid and that's what I was saying.
Certainly, if a boat doesn't have it's registration in the US or an American territory, I would have no way of knowing the nationality of the owner, now would I? duh


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

MarkofSeaLife said:


> I love strolling the Big Boys Docks... Because I can see how the 1% contribute disproportionately highly to the rest of the community, industry, economy!


Reminds me , a while ago my buddy and I are sitting in a waterfront bar across from my marina and he is seriously trying to pick up our waitress - his mistake was bragging that we had a sailboat was docked " right over there". When she looked, my boat was hidden behind some big yachts.

He then had to sheepishly admit that it was " so small you can't see it" -she said that was not a phrase she liked to hear! LOL

:cut_out_animated_em:laugh


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

I think one of the members from a mid-Atlantic state had mentioned, about 3 years ago, that all the marinas there were simply required to submit a list of the long-term contracts every year to the taxmen. Saves the tax men from having to walk the docks and take notes. The presumption being, if you have a marina contract for more then 90 days, your vessel is in-state and you owe state fees on it. With an annual contract, even more so.
Of course that doesn't prove anything except "Do you come here often?" and you wanted to great rate, but taxmen don't have to prove anything, they can accuse and seize and then it is your problem to prove otherwise when you do get to court.
So even in Cali, if a marina operator or local tax office was turning a blind eye? That's not the official State attitude there. Or pretty much anywhere. 

Don't want to pay taxes? OK, just get ordained and make your boat into a house of worship. Mark Cuban, eat your heart out. It costs less then flagging the boat in Timbuktu.(G)


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

When I started this thread, I had no intention of bringing in Mark Cuban's megayacht, Donald Trump's private jet, or anything remotely like them into the discussion. I wasn't wondering if the super-rich were engaging in tax scams, taking advantage of every loop hole, or skirting the rules; I just assume they are. I really wanted to know if my decidedly limited sample of "big" boats was indicative of a trend where people with relatively big boats (the size I don't own but see all the time) are avoiding paying their really small boat registration fees.

Maybe my mistake was calling them the "big boys"?


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

mstern said:


> ...... I really wanted to know if my decidedly limited sample of "big" boats was indicative of a trend where people with relatively big boats (the size I don't own but see all the time) are avoiding paying their really small boat registration fee.......


I don't think there is any distinction between the relative number of registration cheaters, big and small. By your definition of "not big", some of those small folks post on this site all the time, looking for ways to cheat the tax man.


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

Minnewaska said:


> I don't think there is any distinction between the relative number of registration cheaters, big and small. By your definition of "not big", some of those small folks post on this site all the time, looking for ways to cheat the tax man.


You're probably right; the distinction between the two is probably not great. But I have to wonder at those folks who can afford a million dollar toy but balk at paying a $75 fee to register it.


----------



## wsmurdoch (Jan 23, 2007)

capta said:


> Certainly, if a boat doesn't have it's registration in the US or an American territory, I would have no way of knowing the nationality of the owner, now would I? duh


We have taken our boat to the Bahamas each of the last 9 years leaving after Christmas in January and returning in June. Usually the serious yachts are on charter, but on occasion the owners are aboard. We have met them in the Florida ICW, on the beach on Shroud Cay, in the bar at the Staniel Cay Yacht Club, at the weekly fund raiser BBQ for the local school at Staniel Cay, and at the Chat and Chill in George Town. They have uniformly been extremely nice people, pleasant, and easy to get along with as have their crews. Of course, lacking that, "Google is your friend."

Irish Eyes to the Bahamas


----------



## Sailormon6 (May 9, 2002)

mstern said:


> You're probably right; the distinction between the two is probably not great. But I have to wonder at those folks who can afford a million dollar toy but balk at paying a $75 fee to register it.


You're assuming they're balking at paying the fee. You have no idea why they aren't displaying the sticker. People here have suggested a number of reasons why they wouldn't be displaying the sticker that have nothing at all to do with them "balking at paying the fee." You're not listening. For some reason that is no doubt personal to you, you prefer to think that they're just cheap.


----------



## capta (Jun 27, 2011)

wsmurdoch said:


> the serious yachts QUOTE]
> I do believe you and I have a very different idea of what the 'big boys' are.


----------



## chef2sail (Nov 27, 2007)

mstern said:


> Took a stroll at my marina today, and went out on one of the big boys' docks, where the 45 ft to 60 ft+ boats live. Sometimes I like to see how the other 1% lives....
> 
> Here in CT, boat registration is annual. It is a flat $75 fee, regardless of boat size (once you hit the minimum stds). Registrations run April to April, and once paid, you get a sticker of the proper color with the year noted. Registrations paid in '16 are a bright blue with the number "17" on them, so it's easy to see who is up to date with their registration fees.
> 
> ...


Could it be they are documented vessels and therefore would no have registration stickers


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

Sailormon6 said:


> You're assuming they're balking at paying the fee. You have no idea why they aren't displaying the sticker. People here have suggested a number of reasons why they wouldn't be displaying the sticker that have nothing at all to do with them "balking at paying the fee." You're not listening. For some reason that is no doubt personal to you, you prefer to think that they're just cheap.


I am listening. In fact, I think if you had carefully read the original post, you would have seen that I myself offered a number of explanations as to why they might not be displaying registration stickers. I do not prefer to think of those owners as cheap; I agree that it is unfair to make generalizations about large groups of people. Again, if you reread the original post, I think you will see that was asking if others had noticed a similar phenomenon in their areas.


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

chef2sail said:


> Could it be they are documented vessels and therefore would no have registration stickers


I must admit that I didn't think of this explanation before you and others here suggested it. But I thought that USCG documented yachts were required to display their USCG registration numbers? A number of the boats I saw had state registration numbers on the bow, along with long-expired state registration stickers; no other numbers.


----------



## Maine Sail (Jan 6, 2003)

chef2sail said:


> Could it be they are documented vessels and therefore would no have registration stickers


My AB inflatable and Maritime Skiff both get state registered and display registration stickers.. Our sailboat is documented and as such displays nothing.

The town gives me an excise tax sticker that I promptly stick in the chart table as the marine patrol and USCG could care less that my town excise tax has been paid. I suspect in many states, with a documented vessel, there is no requirement to both show a registration sticker when the vessel is documented.


----------



## aeventyr60 (Jun 29, 2011)

In Washington state a square decal is required on both sides of the bow, showing you have paid the 1/2 of one percent hull value as the state registration fee. A nasty decal with some super strong adhesive. Must have peeled off 15 stickers when I painted the boat.


----------



## JimsCAL (May 23, 2007)

mstern said:


> But I thought that USCG documented yachts were required to display their USCG registration numbers?


No. The number is number is permanently displayed somewhere inside the boat, but not outside like state registration numbers. Each state has different rules regarding state registration of documented boats and if a sticker has to be displayed. My boat is documented and NY also requires registration. I do not get a number from the state but do get stickers I must put on the bow.


----------



## olson34 (Oct 13, 2000)

JimsCAL said:


> No. The number is number is permanently displayed somewhere inside the boat, but not outside like state registration numbers. Each state has different rules regarding state registration of documented boats and if a sticker has to be displayed. My boat is documented and NY also requires registration. I do not get a number from the state but do get stickers I must put on the bow.


Similar to Oregon. 
All boats here are required to display a state registration sticker that covers two years at a time. The boats with a valid Federal Documentation number only have to attach the state registration sticker on both sides aft, by the stern. Documented vessels do have to have their name and port displayed, also.

The other (99% ! ) of us do have to have our state registration numbers along with the Year stickers, on the bows.

The County Sheriff river patrol deputies are entitled to walk our docks and ticket for missing stickers as well as board boats while under way. 
Those guys are lucky to have time to walk a dock, what with being short handed for routine patrol and regular involvement in SAR in the busy season.

Loren

ps: we have no sales or "use" taxes in Oregon. Only the state income tax, plus property taxes on "real property".


----------



## RichH (Jul 10, 2000)

By federal law pertaining to USCG documentation, it is illegal to display or have a state _registration_. In this situation the boats name and hailing port on the aft of the boat is the required 'registration' identification. As previously stated in another posting, the federal documentation number is permanently affixed somewhere on/near the_ inside_ of the starboard bowl; and, all that is required is to carry onboard the current (yearly) documentation certificate.

If a state then also applies 'taxes' to boats, and the boat is under federal documentation, and a 'tax sticker' is required to be used/displayed, these state 'stickers' are considered proof of payment of state excise/use tax - and are NOT state registrations. In some states, 'the custom' is to place the excise/use 'sticker' on the mast of a sailboat or midships/'cross tree' of a powerboat; or increasingly, there is NO 'sticker' issued at all, just a tax receipt that should be carried when underway.

The general increasing trend for many states is to no longer use 'tax stickers' on boats, automobiles and other over the road vehicles, etc. due the large amount of theft of these stickers especially for those vehicles located or principally used in or near large cities. All that is required is for the 'registration card' to be carried. The reason is that the administrational costs by many states to continually replace such stolen 'stickers' is not worth the cost to produce them in the first place, as such on balance is an economic deduct of the expected revenue.


----------



## JimsCAL (May 23, 2007)

RichH said:


> If a state then also applies 'taxes' to boats, and the boat is under federal documentation, and a 'tax sticker' is required to be used/displayed, these state 'stickers' are considered proof of payment of state excise/use tax - and are NOT state registrations. In some states, 'the custom' is to place the excise/use 'sticker' on the mast of a sailboat or midships/'cross tree' of a powerboat; or increasingly, there is NO 'sticker' issued at all, just a tax receipt that should be carried when underway.


The piece of paper I have from NY for my documented Cal 33 clearly says "New York State Boat Registration". The only difference between it and the one I have for my dinghy is that it says "Nontransferable" whereas the dinghy registration says "Transferable". I assume that's because NY does not issue boat titles but recognizes the USCG documentation acts as the title. The instructions that came from NY clearly state that the registration stickers must be placed on the bow, just like non-documented boats. Boats found without a valid sticker are subject to a fine.


----------



## nhsail (Aug 7, 2000)

Most states have attempted to tax boats, some have succeeded. CA has a real estate approach, where you pay an annual assessment to the county. With a documented vessel, you don't need to have a state sticker, and most boats over 30 feet will be documented. Some vessels will be registered to ports of convenience and there's the example of John Kerry who was a MA senator and kept his 70' Hinckely in RI.


----------



## sailpower (Jun 28, 2008)

In FL the sales/use tax is capped at a onetime 18k so not much reason to spend a bunch of money annually trying to avoid it via foreign flag.

There are other reasons to consider a foreign flag for a mega-yacht such as Fountainhead. Crew requirements/obligations are big ones.

The Cost of American Megayacht Ownership


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

An unexpectedly varied response! Thanks to all.

In Connecticut, the yearly sticker is to show that you've paid your yearly state registration fee. It has nothing to do with the value of the boat, nor is it related to a property tax. We pay property taxes to the town of residence on personal property; the amount of the tax is based on the value of the property. As of now, the only two things that I know of that are taxed this way are residences and cars. There was a proposal to add boats to that list a few years ago, but it failed.

But getting back to the original subject (the "big" boats that displayed no registration sticker): without interrogating the owners, it seems I'll never know the full story. As I said before, some had way out of date CT stickers, some had nothing. A couple of those with no sticker had NY home ports listed on their transoms. If I'm reading some of the responses correctly that could mean that the owner is USCG documented but violating NY law by not having their NY sticker showing. There are about a dozen other possible scenarios too, ranging from he's fully paid up but just hasn't affixed his sticker yet, to he just doesn't bother paying his fees to wherever he should. Too much trouble for me to think about. And to the poster who suggested I contact the tax authorities and ask them to investigate: not my thing. This is one of the biggest and nicest marinas in eastern Connecticut. I imagine if the state Department of Revenue Services was inclined to investigate this problem anywhere, they'd cover this marina. I doubt they will anyway. They'd have to catch a lot of unpaid registrations at $75 a pop to make it worthwhile to send a guy on the road for this.

I wonder if there are any statistics or studies out there concerning compliance with registration laws?


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

If a boat owner lives in NY, but keeps their boat in CT and never brings it to NY, then no NY registration or NY tax is due. The documented hailport neither causes, nor avoids any taxes or local registration requirements. It's all a matter of the boat's actual location, when determining registration requirements. States may send a letter asking for proof, based on the owners address or hailport, but that's it. 

In RI, the registration form has a box you check to identify that you are federally documented. You pay the same fee, you just aren't issued bow numbers. The driver of state registration is strictly the amount of time the boat is in the state, which each state defines differently for it's own residents and non-residents.

I did know of one boater, who lives in Mass, but bought a brand new boat and kept it in RI. They paid to federally document their boat, when they bought her, but never registered it and didn't realize they were required to. When we got to talking about it one night, they went right out and did so.

The snotty assumptions that folks that buy $1mm boats are trying to avoid a $75 fee are getting old. Some people just make mistakes, big and small boats alike. Assuming they are being nefarious is far more condemnable.


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

Minne: If you were referring to me as one who makes the "snotty", "condemnable" assumption about the folks with $1M boats, I have to disagree. I do not assume that they are trying to get out of paying their fees; I believe I have acknowledged that there are a multitude of potential explanations why their boats don't display state registration stickers. People do makes mistakes, people can be sometimes less than diligent; and sometimes they are just lazy. I do however believe that it is a possibility that they are just not paying. I do think less of those that deliberately do not pay. And I really think less of someone who can afford a $1M yacht and chooses not to pay a $75 fee.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

mstern said:


> .....I have to wonder at those folks who can afford a million dollar toy but *balk* at paying a $75 fee to register it.





mstern said:


> Minne: If you were referring to me as one who makes the "snotty", "condemnable" assumption about the folks with $1M boats, I have to disagree. I do not assume that they are trying to get out of paying their fees....


You specifically said "balk" at paying their fees. That was an assumption and, yes, I found it snotty.



> I do however believe that it is a possibility that they are just not paying.


I'm sure some intentionally avoid their fees and taxes. It just has nothing to do with the size or cost of their boat.



> I do think less of those that deliberately do not pay. And I really think less of someone who can afford a $1M yacht and chooses not to pay a $75 fee.


A cheat is a cheat. I don't choose to discriminate between the two boat costs. You do.


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

Just a question - if the boat is never operated, does it have to be registered? Do they go out? Because then I would guess the police and CG would stop them. One ticket is going to make the registration sticker seem cheap.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Sal Paradise said:


> Just a question - if the boat is never operated, does it have to be registered? Do they go out? Because then I would guess the police and CG would stop them. One ticket is going to make the registration sticker seem cheap.


I'm sure each state defines this themselves, with some having no clarification. Nevertheless, I'm willing to bet that being in the water typically qualifies, whether one leaves the slip or not.

I have heard of States that do not consider being on the hard to trigger various fee/tax timelines.


----------



## seaner97 (May 15, 2011)

Minnewaska said:


> Sal Paradise said:
> 
> 
> > Just a question - if the boat is never operated, does it have to be registered? Do they go out? Because then I would guess the police and CG would stop them. One ticket is going to make the registration sticker seem cheap.
> ...


My bet- they're like me. They paid. It's in the glove box, or a filing cabinet or somewhere else. They're just busy and sticking a sticker on isn't top priority. One year I did starboard only because port blew away when I peeled it. I think I have 2011 in the nav station. Most places aren't going to hassle you if you can produce it. Especially if you're documented, which most high end boats are. Mine is because I don't have to put 3" high letters all over her that way. If I had a sailing pizza I might not bother with documenting.


----------



## dinosdad (Nov 19, 2010)

I know in the spring I've seen the Groton police boat making the rounds through the mooring fields on the mystic river looking at stickers , not sure if they go into the marinas themselves , but at that time of the season a lot of the mooring field boats get a few days to outfit before going to the moorings and I know I've forgotten my stickers three weekends in a row one year ( even had it on my checklist of things to bring , funny I never forget the item marked "beer"), but I always have them on before I'm on the mooring ...


----------



## IStream (Dec 15, 2013)

mstern said:


> Minne: If you were referring to me as one who makes the "snotty", "condemnable" assumption about the folks with $1M boats, I have to disagree. I do not assume that they are trying to get out of paying their fees; I believe I have acknowledged that there are a multitude of potential explanations why their boats don't display state registration stickers. People do makes mistakes, people can be sometimes less than diligent; and sometimes they are just lazy. I do however believe that it is a possibility that they are just not paying. I do think less of those that deliberately do not pay. And I really think less of someone who can afford a $1M yacht and chooses not to pay a $75 fee.


The title of your thread is "Big Boys not paying their fair share?" No matter what you may think now, you were making the assumption at the start.


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

hellosailor said:


> Just don't make the mistake of thinking all those apparently wealthy people are also so dumb they'd be flagrantly violating petty registration laws. SOME of them are way smarter than that.


I just looked at the CT DMV web site. I read that all boats over 19.5 feet and in state longer than 60 days must buy a registration sticker, even CG documented boats. I didn't read it but I am sure that you have to put the sticker on the boat.

I'd say that unless they arrived AFTER May 6, they ARE flagrantly violating the law - de facto. That said - in my experience working for extremely rich people - they probably can't be bothered and when stopped they would vehemently protest that they didn't know it was expired or didn't know they had to buy a sticker or both. Ignorance is truly bliss. 
Either that or the boats are forgotten and never go out of the marina.

DMV: Frequently Asked Questions on Boat Registrations


----------



## RichH (Jul 10, 2000)

I'll bet anyone 'the farm', that 99% of boaters who travel between and 'visit' other states already know that every damn individual state (and sometimes counties, cities, etc.) has(have) laws and exclusions of tax burdens placed on 'visiting' boats/cars/trucks/personal aircraft and that these tax (and 'registration' etc.) laws differ widely from state to state. 
The 'exclusions' are generally termed '*grace periods*', wherein these state/county/city/local tax burdens for temporarily transiting through _with_ personal property to another state are excused for a relatively short period of time. After the 'grace period' expires the 'visitor' must pay the 'differential' (what was originally paid to the 'home' venue versus the 'new' venue) tax burdens on such personal property ..... especially if the 'home state', etc. applies no or less taxes.

Simple speak: if one takes valuable personal property (typically boats/autos/trucks/airplanes/RVs/'trailers', etc.) into another state, exceeds the 'grace period', that person then *owes the difference in taxes already paid* in the 'home state' to the 'new' state. Some states, municipals, etc. do not apply differentials !!!!!! 
Go to State Boating Information Home - Government Affairs - BoatUS ..... click on the state you wish to travel to or through and look for "REGISTRATION GRACE PERIOD" AND "CREDIT FOR TAX PAID IN ANOTHER STATE" .... However, this listing is only for state statutes and does not include county and municipal, etc. etc. etc. taxes owed, if applicable - such as _ad valorum_, personal property tax, etc. etc. etc. owed to counties/cities, etc.

FWIW - Now you can begin to appreciate that approximately 60-70% of all yearly income (GDP) of the _aggregate average_ of individuals is required to be handed over to 'total collective/combined government' in the US --- your 'fair share', when calculated on a GDP per capita per _total_ government revenue basis.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

I know when I got my first boat that was CG documented and brought it to MA that didn't require State registration of CG documented boats, that I was surprised to arrive at the boat one weekend and had a note from the harbormaster about paying a mooring permit fee (on top of the amount I paid to the marina for the mooring). I didn't know there was a Town fee (there's 2 really an excise tax AND yearly fee). I wasn't trying to get out of anything, I just didn't know.

Every State has different rules and it isn't reasonable to expect boaters to know them. Heck if you do a search a lot of time on the State requirements you still can not figure it out.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Sal Paradise said:


> ....I didn't read it but I am sure that you have to put the sticker on the boat.
> 
> [snip]
> 
> I'd say that unless they arrived AFTER May 6, they ARE flagrantly violating the law - de facto. ......


You "didn't read it" (ie found no evidence), but are sure you are right?? That's interesting.

Then you drew the conclusion of a flagrant violation (ie obvious), when you couldn't even find the rule written in the first place. That's your definition of obvious?

Where specifically does your crystal ball say the sticker is to be displayed, if you didn't read that it's display was even required?

Geesh.


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

IStream said:


> The title of your thread is "Big Boys not paying their fair share?" No matter what you may think now, you were making the assumption at the start.


Actually, no. You may have missed the question mark in the original title. I was stating the proposition as a possibility, not stating a definitive opinion. I was certainly thinking then (as now) that it is a possibility that some of the owners were deliberately or carelessly failing to pay. However, in my original post and in subsequent posts, I acknowledged other explanations are just as possible.

I'm actually finding the responses that deal with the multitude of potential state taxes and fees and their juxtaposition with USCG documentation as more interesting than my original question. I've learned quite a bit. Thanks to all for chiming in with your state's rules, and to those of you with USCG documentation.

One other thing I learned: in clicking on the link provided by Sal, I learned that the CT registration fee is not a flat amount unrelated to boat size. I have always thought so because I saw my long-ago dock neighbor's registration, and his fee (for a boat bigger than mine) was the same as mine. I used to wonder why people bothered with going through the hoops to get federal documentation, but now that I see the state charges a hefty registration fee for a bigger boat, I'm clearer on why USCG documentation is a valid alternative.


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

Come on Minnewaska, don't leave us hanging!!!!Tell us about the rule that says you don't have to put the sticker on but are still legal!!!! Do it!!!! 

Or be a big ***** and don't answer that challenge.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Maybe the problem is that instead of putting the sticker where they tell you to, too many people want to tell them where to put the sticker :Luxury:


----------



## travlin-easy (Dec 24, 2010)

Minnewaska said:


> You "didn't read it" (ie found no evidence), but are sure you are right?? That's interesting.
> 
> Then you drew the conclusion of a flagrant violation (ie obvious), when you couldn't even find the rule written in the first place. That's your definition of obvious?
> 
> ...


In Maryland, there are directions, including a drawing, on the back side of the stickers, telling you exactly where they must be displayed and when. I thought this was pretty much the same in every state.

Gary


----------



## senormechanico (Aug 20, 2012)

I like THIS sticker.


----------



## aeventyr60 (Jun 29, 2011)

travlin-easy said:


> In Maryland, there are directions, including a drawing, on the back side of the stickers, telling you exactly where they must be displayed and when. I thought this was pretty much the same in every state.
> 
> Gary


Geesh, you mean we actually have to RTFM on sticker placement? Will wonders never cease.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Minnewaska said:


> I'm sure each state defines this themselves, with some having no clarification........





Sal Paradise said:


> Come on Minnewaska, don't leave us hanging!!!!Tell us about the rule that says you don't have to put the sticker on but are still legal!!!! Do it!!!!
> 
> Or be a big ***** and don't answer that challenge.


Sal, exactly where did I make the claim you are hanging on? I said that some states don't clarify whether or where the sticker needs to be displayed on a documented boat. Then you claimed you were convinced that CT does, even though you never found any evidence to that effect. Maybe they do, maybe they don't. However, you simply proved the point I made above that displaying the sticker lacks clarification.

Your last sentence pretty much sums up your character, doesn't it.


----------



## caberg (Jul 26, 2012)

Oh come on, it takes about 2 seconds on Google to find "clarification" that even federally documented vessels in CT must actually stick the registration sticker on their boat. (I know governments sometimes defy logic, but it seems axiomatic that a sticker shall be stuck to the boat.)



> Documented vessels and vessels numbered by another state, which are moored, docked or operated more than 60 days in Connecticut in any calendar year, must obtain a Connecticut Certificate of Decal from DMV and display a current Connecticut validation decal (but not a Connecticut registration number) on both sides of the bow.


http://www.ct.gov/deep/lib/deep/boating/boating_guide/part3.pdf


----------



## RichH (Jul 10, 2000)

aeventyr60 said:


> Geesh, you mean we actually have to RTFM on sticker placement? Will wonders never cease.


"In Maryland, there are directions, including a drawing, on the back side of the stickers, telling you exactly where they must be displayed and when. I thought this was pretty much the same in every state."

FWIW - in Maryland the 'use' sticker for documented boats can be placed 'anywhere' from on or forward of amidships as per MD § 8-712.1.: 
_Display of sticker
(d) The Maryland use sticker [on documented boats] shall be displayed on or about the forward half of the vessel._
Can be on windows, bow, topsides, cabin, etc. The most common/customary placement location in MD is on the base of the mast.
By statute it could also be placed near the top the mast, as many did in protest to the Ted Kennedy 'Luxury Tax' stickers in the early 1990s.


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

I think Minne is just trolling me, for unknown reasons. It might have to do with cultural sensitivities to the term " big boys" or "the 1%". Or maybe he doesn't admire me because of my low economic status,or perceived liberal values but - I really don't care. I'm here to learn. 

What bothers me is people trolling or wasting my/our time pretending to not understand something simple just to piss off the others on a thread. That goes to character and it is something I will never do. That's why I posted the CT DMV link and tried to bring some information into the conversation.


----------



## aeventyr60 (Jun 29, 2011)

*(d) The Maryland use sticker [on documented boats] shall be displayed on or about the forward half of the vessel.
*

Geez, on those big boy boats it could be lost to the casual observer. Surely the tax guys must have a better eye for the all the miscreants out there. If I'm wandering around looking at boats, the last thing I'd think about was somebody's tax sticker. Isn't there a Hinkley around to look at?


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Sal Paradise said:


> I think Minne is just trolling me, for unknown reasons. It might have to do with cultural sensitivities to the term " big boys" or "the 1%". Or maybe he doesn't admire me because of my low economic status,or perceived liberal values but - I really don't care. I'm here to learn.


Responding to your post is hardly trolling. I see you've moved on from the actual subject matter and prefer to discuss my motives. We were discussing how you drew a firm conclusion, without finding the actual evidence. Despite the fact that another poster did so and determined your hunch was correct, we were discussing how you drew your conclusion without it. Then you referenced some claim I never made, but seem to have moved on, when called on that too?

I have no idea what your economic status or political bias may be. How would I? Although, I have this hunch that you enjoy showing up, when the 1% criticism is raised. You tell me.

Intentional derogatory references to big boys or the 1% are rude and will illicit response. This is not a safe space.



> What bothers me is people trolling or wasting my/our time pretending to not understand something simple just to piss off the others on a thread. That goes to character and it is something I will never do.


I take it you're referring to the OP pretending not have intentionally criticized most owners of larger vessels? Or did that point of view have your sympathy, so you didn't mind that it may piss off others?


----------



## seaner97 (May 15, 2011)

Can we flush this one to the sewer now?


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

caberg said:


> Oh come on, it takes about 2 seconds on Google to find "clarification" that even federally documented vessels in CT must actually stick the registration sticker on their boat. (I know governments sometimes defy logic, but it seems axiomatic that a sticker shall be stuck to the boat.)
> 
> http://www.ct.gov/deep/lib/deep/boating/boating_guide/part3.pdf


Seriously, if you could use your Google-fu on Rhode Island, it would solve an ongoing discussion. I've tried, without success, but it could be me. On the other hand, I've noticed almost no documented vessels display the sticker.

I do, figuring it can't hurt. I place them at each side of the mast base, but I've never found instructions. I have 6 documented vessels surrounding me at the marina. I'm the only one with the sticker showing, although, I know two of my friends have paid for sure. I just never engaged in the discussion, with the others. I believe 99% just pay the fee and stick them in the drawer as evidence they've paid.


----------



## RichH (Jul 10, 2000)

Actually, this whole thread has minimal value other than perhaps to stir-up 'envy'. 
The 'big boys' if they want to, and many do, only have to briefly remove and relocate their boats to another state or go out beyond the 3 mile limit and document that removal by receipted purchase in that other state or by documented navigation log, etc. to establish 'removal', reenter ..... and 're-start the _grace period_ all over again'.

Just look what happened in the Annapolis area a few years ago when Maryland proposed large personal property taxes on the 'big boys' .... they simply (briefly) left or threatened to leave the area and the local marine industry immediately began to suffer, immediately followed by the tax revenue receipts from the local 'marine and complimentary industry' taking a nose dive. The proposal was then immediately 'squashed' due to the re-projected impending gross loss of 'revenue'. 
Just ask yourself why Rhode Island has such a large amount of boats and vibrantly thriving marine industry in comparison to the adjacent states where 'taxes' are seemingly becoming 'the most important product'. Its the very same reason why emigration of residents and businesses out of the entire northeast is quite rapidly increasing, and many parts of the Southeast and Mid-atlantic now increasingly speak with _'non-rhotic'_ 'Noo Yawk' or 'Baaaahston' accents. ;-)


----------



## seaner97 (May 15, 2011)

RichH said:


> Actually, this whole thread has minimal value other than perhaps to stir-up 'envy'.
> The 'big boys' if they want to, and many do, only have to briefly remove and relocate their boats to another state or go out beyond the 3 mile limit and document that removal by receipted purchase in that other state or by documented navigation log, etc. to establish 'removal', reenter ..... and 're-start the _grace period_ all over again'.
> 
> Just look what happened in the Annapolis area a few years ago when Maryland proposed large personal property taxes on the 'big boys' .... they simply (briefly) left or threatened to leave the area and the local marine industry immediately began to suffer, immediately followed by the tax revenue receipts from the local 'marine and complimentary industry' taking a nose dive. The proposal was then immediately 'squashed' due to the re-projected impending gross loss of 'revenue'.
> Just ask yourself why Rhode Island has such a large amount of boats and vibrantly thriving marine industry in comparison to the adjacent states where 'taxes' are seemingly becoming 'the most important product'. Its the very same reason why emigration of residents and businesses out of the entire northeast is quite rapidly increasing, and many parts of the Southeast and Mid-atlantic now increasingly speak with _'non-rhotic'_ 'Noo Yawk' or 'Baaaahston' accents. ;-)


That certainly is one of the downsides of 'states' rights'. When you have such disparate incentives located close to one another, and don't think about the loopholes well, you get that sort of 'playing in the margins', particularly by those that are either pre-disposed to or are used to doing that.


----------



## senormechanico (Aug 20, 2012)

Washington State did the same thing about twenty years ago.
They imposed a 10% "Luxury Tax" on larger boat manufacturers.
The whole marine industry took a nosedive until the political critters finally rescinded it.


----------



## caberg (Jul 26, 2012)

Minnewaska said:


> Seriously, if you could use your Google-fu on Rhode Island, it would solve an ongoing discussion. I've tried, without success, but it could be me. On the other hand, I've noticed almost no documented vessels display the sticker.
> 
> I do, figuring it can't hurt. I place them at each side of the mast base, but I've never found instructions. I have 6 documented vessels surrounding me at the marina. I'm the only one with the sticker showing, although, I know two of my friends have paid for sure. I just never engaged in the discussion, with the others. I believe 99% just pay the fee and stick them in the drawer as evidence they've paid.


This study guide for an RI boating course states that documented vessels must display the validation sticker. The specific requirement is, I am sure, there somewhere -- either by statute or DEM rule.



> Documented vessels used primarily in Rhode Island must be registered with the state also. The documentation number will be used as the registration number. The vessel must display the validation decals issued by the state on each side of the vessel where most visible.


https://www.boat-ed.com/rhodeisland...and-Registering-Your-Vessel/101041_700086938/


----------



## RichH (Jul 10, 2000)

seaner97 said:


> That certainly is one of the downsides of 'states' rights'. When you have such disparate incentives located close to one another, and don't think about the loopholes well, you get that sort of 'playing in the margins', particularly by those that are either pre-disposed to or are used to doing that.


Darwin fully explained this: "survival of the fittest". Applies to economics, too.
When states no longer are 'competitive', people simply vote with their feet, etc. NYC/North Jersey area has lost about 5 million 'taxpayers' in the past decade.


----------



## aeventyr60 (Jun 29, 2011)

*"Intentional derogatory references to big boys or the 1% are rude and will illicit response. This is not a safe space."
*

Guess your neighbors are ok with these types of big boys:

http://www.yachts123.com/2010/08/politics-in-yachting-john-kerry-causes-a-row/


----------



## IStream (Dec 15, 2013)

mstern said:


> Actually, no. You may have missed the question mark in the original title. I was stating the proposition as a possibility, not stating a definitive opinion. I was certainly thinking then (as now) that it is a possibility that some of the owners were deliberately or carelessly failing to pay. However, in my original post and in subsequent posts, I acknowledged other explanations are just as possible.


I didn't miss it, it's right there in my quote of the thread title. A question mark is a very small fig leaf that doesn't cover the assumption behind the title. By your logic, you'd be okay with me starting a thread titled, "Does user mstern cheat on his taxes?"


----------



## seaner97 (May 15, 2011)

RichH said:


> Darwin fully explained this: "survival of the fittest". Applies to economics, too.
> When states no longer are 'competitive', people simply vote with their feet, etc. NYC/North Jersey area has lost about 5 million 'taxpayers' in the past decade.


Competitive means different things to different people. I look at the Forbes rankings for 'business friendly' and the bottom half of the list is mostly the nice places to live. Hamilton would look at this and argue that it is a failure of the Federal government to regulate interstate commerce adequately.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

caberg said:


> This study guide for an RI boating course states that documented vessels must display the validation sticker. The specific requirement is, I am sure, there somewhere -- either by statute or DEM rule.
> 
> https://www.boat-ed.com/rhodeisland...and-Registering-Your-Vessel/101041_700086938/


Thanks. Closest thing I've seen to date. But still haven't seen anything from the State itself and one can't expect boaters to check a random study guide.

No wonder most don't display the sticker.


----------



## RichH (Jul 10, 2000)

seaner97 said:


> Competitive means different things to different people. I look at the Forbes rankings for 'business friendly' and the bottom half of the list is mostly the nice places to live. Hamilton would look at this and argue that it is a failure of the Federal government to regulate interstate commerce adequately.


Hamilton was federalist who advocated immense central government control.

I prefer Jefferson who countered (and was 'predominant' - for about 225 years) Hamilton by advocating a stronger representative republic - something to do with a more open, decentralized 'democracy', with the representatives of 'the people' in control of a minimal/restricted central authority. Something to do with freedom and pursuit of happiness, opportunity, and preservation of individual & property rights.

It does look like Hamilton 'won' after all, after ~225 years, huh?


----------



## caberg (Jul 26, 2012)

Minnewaska said:


> Thanks. Closest thing I've seen to date. But still haven't seen anything from the State itself and one can't expect boaters to check a random study guide.
> 
> No wonder most don't display the sticker.


Oh for crying out loud! Here is the regulation. It's not very hard to understand. Although most people would just assume that when the state gives you a sticker for your boat, the state wants you to actually stick the sticker on your boat.



> When a vessel has been documented by the U.S. Coast Guard, the vessel must follow federal laws and regulations with regards to the display of documentation numbers, and the assigned registration decals must be placed on each side of the forward half of the vessel where the decals are distinctly visible. It is acceptable for a documented vessel to place the registration decal in an area other than the hull of the vessel. For example, a window or the windshield may be used.


http://www.dem.ri.gov/pubs/regs/regs/enforce/boats14t.pdf


----------



## seaner97 (May 15, 2011)

RichH said:


> Hamilton was federalist who advocated immense central government control.
> 
> I prefer Jefferson who countered (and was 'predominant' - for about 225 years) Hamilton by advocating a stronger representative republic - something to do with a more open, decentralized 'democracy', with the representatives of 'the people' in control of a minimal/restricted central authority. Something to do with freedom and pursuit of happiness, opportunity, and preservation of individual & property rights.
> 
> It does look like Hamilton 'won' after all, after ~225 years, huh?


At least on Broadway.
I think we've actually had a relatively good balance over the first 180. I'm not sure that Jefferson was predominant, and certainly Hamilton won out in the initial formation of the government. Even Jefferson used Hamiltonian ideas during his presidency. It's only recently (1980-present) that the debate has become more binary again, and Jeffersonians have a habit of picking his words, yet ignoring his actions. He was far more complex than what he said, particularly when parsed.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

Funny the things that will get fought over and start a pissing battle on a forum. Stupid little things that should be let go, but are instead treated like they truly are important items for a side to "win".

I wonder if some of you are really married to each other and are keeping it secret?


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

IStream said:


> I didn't miss it, it's right there in my quote of the thread title. A question mark is a very small fig leaf that doesn't cover the assumption behind the title. By your logic, you'd be okay with me starting a thread titled, "Does user mstern cheat on his taxes?"


For some reason beyond my understanding, you have chosen to assume that I did not intend for that question mark, nor the writing in the actual post, to mean what it says. I've reread my original post and my follow ups, and I don't think I could be clearer on what I wrote. By sheer chance, I noticed something that I thought interesting: a concentration of large boats didn't have valid registration stickers. I wondered why.

In my original post, I wondered if it was because they were transients and therefore wouldn't have a CT sticker; I also thought that at least one of the boats looked like it was just launched and therefore wasn't fully outfitted (including affixing the sticker) for the season. I also wondered if they just weren't paying their fees. All reasonable guesses to my way of thinking. And, in line with the question I posed in the title, I asked if any of you noticed the same thing in your marina. No general indictment of the "rich"; no blanket condemnation of those who own larger boats. None stated; none intended. For those of you who inferred that is what I meant or implied, all I can say is that you are wrong. For crying out loud, all of us who own sailboats are wealthy by virtually anyone's measure (anyone except maybe other yacht owners).

And IStream, if you titled a thread "Is mstern cheating on his taxes?" that would be a personal attack, and no, I wouldn't be ok with it. Apples and oranges. On the other hand, if you started a post that asked if Oday 23 owners (a group that I belong to) fail to pay their taxes, included a listing of why you thought it was true, included a recitation of some alternative explanations, and maybe asked others for their opinions, then, yes, I wouldn't be "ok" with it; "ok" in the sense that I'd think you were within your rights to post it, not that I'd agree.


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

seaner97 said:


> Jeffersonians have a habit of picking his words, yet ignoring his actions. He was far more complex than what he said, particularly when parsed.


Well said. The Louisiana Purchase was not the act of a "true" Jeffersonian.


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

Don0190 said:


> Funny the things that will get fought over and start a pissing battle on a forum. Stupid little things that should be let go, but are instead treated like they truly are important items for a side to "win".
> 
> I wonder if some of you are really married to each other and are keeping it secret?


I really have to start keeping my "interesting" observations to myself....


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

caberg said:


> Oh for crying out loud! Here is the regulation. It's not very hard to understand. Although most people would just assume that when the state gives you a sticker for your boat, the state wants you to actually stick the sticker on your boat.
> 
> http://www.dem.ri.gov/pubs/regs/regs/enforce/boats14t.pdf


While I would like to thank you for identifying this (on your second try), I will bet you wouldn't have put it this way to my face, tough guy.

Still, I see very few stickers on doc boats and I've never once heard of an enforcement action. Perhaps this is form over substance.

Nevertheless, I appreciate the reference. I know many that will find it fascinating.


----------



## IStream (Dec 15, 2013)

mstern said:


> And IStream, if you titled a thread "Is mstern cheating on his taxes?" that would be a personal attack, and no, I wouldn't be ok with it. Apples and oranges. On the other hand, if you started a post that asked if Oday 23 owners (a group that I belong to) fail to pay their taxes, included a listing of why you thought it was true, included a recitation of some alternative explanations, and maybe asked others for their opinions, then, yes, I wouldn't be "ok" with it; "ok" in the sense that I'd think you were within your rights to post it, not that I'd agree.


The fact that you viewed that hypothetical as a personal attack regardless of the presence of the question mark validates my point. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, perhaps a better thread title would've been "Why do so many big boats seem to lack current registration stickers?"


----------



## caberg (Jul 26, 2012)

Minnewaska said:


> While I would like to thank you for identifying this (on your second try), I will bet you wouldn't have put it this way to my face, tough guy.
> 
> Still, I see very few stickers on doc boats and I've never once heard of an enforcement action. Perhaps this is form over substance.
> 
> Nevertheless, I appreciate the reference. I know many that will find it fascinating.


Er, you're welcome, sort of, _tough guy_?


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Stickers are ugly.

Have R.I. Sticker and numbers on dinghy but not on boat.dinghy is ugly. In my eyes boat is beautiful. Boat is documented and registered but don't want stickers on it. Do have the gov't pump out sticker and the pump out flag but only by necessity as I do want to get pump outs. If I could would just fly flag when necessary but they insist on the decal being shown as well. 

As to Hamilton and Jefferson, unfortunately seems irrelevant. Taxation should be to raise funds not change behavior as both understood it. Federal government should protect the common weal not legislate morality. Behavior harmful to others hence the commonweal being illegal is congruent to their thinking. Hate crime, blanket bigotry etc. being illegal is congruent control of your own body ??? Again something both would agreed with. Both current major party candidates suggest interventions that would be abhorrent to both J&H.
Johnson/Weld come closest to the constructs of both of their (J&H) thinking. A sad state of affairs.

The unintended consequence of citizens United and the backlash to it.


----------



## xort (Aug 4, 2006)

Pump out flag? A pair of ****** tighties with a big skid mark?


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Beyond electing felons RI occasionally does boater and environmentally sensible things. They used some fed money to have harbomasters give out flags to slipped and moored vessels for a reasonable fee (~100 bucks). You put out a flag on the day you're assigned. A pump out boat comes by and does it thing. No midnight dumping. No tying up the fuel dock. Smart as I've been the cell pool harbors like in Roadtown and Nanny Cay and that's no fun.
BTW cotton kills. No ****** righties for me and the baby wipes work great. 😄Try them mikey.


----------



## mstern (May 26, 2002)

I have a portable head on my boat, so no holding tank, but Connecticut maintains a fleet of pumpout boats and stations that are free to use. The fleet and stations are located all across the Sound and up the CT River. Just hail the boat on the radio, and they will come and "relieve" you of your burden. No tighty ****** flag necessary.

ArcGIS Web Application


----------



## xort (Aug 4, 2006)

The sucker is coming today at noon.

Pumpout boats are common, its the flag thing that is new to me. 

Martin county Fl will go anywhere in the county to pump you out, free, with a big sign No Tipping! But pumping overboard there would probably improve their water quality.

Cotton kills? What?


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Cotton when wet draws the heat out of your body unlike wool or other animal based clothes. Synthetics are commonly engineered to retain heat but allow moisture to transpire. Phrase from my Boy Scout days was "cotton kills".
Advantage of flag system is they do their thing regardless if there's someone on the boat efficiently not wasting their time.
They also can be raised on VHF like Conn/MA/Maine


----------



## zeehag (Nov 16, 2008)

my boat is federally documented annually. 26 usd. i donot state register my boat as that is unnecessary.
as my boat is essentially 47 or so feet overall, i am included in big boys???? ha h aha ha ha 


i believe there are 2 or 3 states ¨illegally¨ requiring state registration IN ADDITION TO federally documenting. 
so, if the big boys are allegedly not in compliance with STATE registration, could it possibly be due to the fact that paying twice for same ownership papers is ridiculous? or are we in the criminal category as evaders???? ha h aha ha ha ha ha


----------



## xort (Aug 4, 2006)

Cotton bad, got it. Wifes silky panties a good option?

Pumpout boat of newport sucks... $5 per every 10 gallons!! Your tax dollars not at work. Good way to encourage dumping overboard.


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

zee you are not in the state for 60 days or more so you do not need a sticker,


----------



## northernsquirrel (Oct 26, 2015)

This is a fun thread for a couple of reasons. Observing your country from outside (Canada) I am struck with several things. In the land of the free, it seems there are many different levels of government trying to curtail the freedom(s) you so rightly cherish. Although I am no fan of some forms of licences and "taxes" , the imposition of some fines and punishments seems rather heavy-handed. and without recourse until you go through court. I also can't blame most people's desire to make sure that the tax man gets the least out of your wallet. That I think is universal. I am also struck by some persons' level of greed and how they are not interested in the common good. Just taking care of themselves.

I apologize a bit for the thread hijacking, but I think it speaks to the psychology at work here.

If I may, make some observations on the 1% crowd. certain of my inlaws are very successful businesspeople. I am the poorest of the lot, a double board certified specialist medical doctor. I am out-earned by them ten, twenty fold or more. I pay way more taxes than they do. I am a 1% er and so are they. I will pay for grandfather's meal, one brother in law might, the other will attempt to make grandpa pay for his. Grandfather is retired and on a pension. All of us pay the regular fees, licences, etc as required by law. So I don't know if paying a mandatory fee is the best way to ascertain if a person is pulling their weight in society

Now this is where it becomes interesting. The most expensive fundraisers in Canada are all about politics. My kin will go to those and the cheque books are wide open. These are not cheap fundraisers, $500 a plate plus whatever they can squeeze out of you. I am a sucker for charity and good causes. I attend a number of different charity fundraising dinners for a wide cross section of causes. At most of these settings I am amongst the most "impoverished" people in the room. There are some very very well off 1% people present. 
In a room where 300-400 very well off people are gathered to support a charity, no one in the room is tight for money. I have seen the utmost tightwads come out. I have been badgered because I paid 30$ more than retail for a basket of wine. I was really raked over the coals for some train tickets because I paid 900$ for $700 retail tickets. Excuse me? how about out-bidding me? It's a charity for a local hospice for $%^&'s sakes! Now amongst the 300-400 very well off people, there will be two or three who will make some significant donation and give generously to the community. Being part of the community. And amongst a local philanthropic community of about 2,000 people, there's about the same five to twenty persons who will want to be part of something bigger. ALL the rest are concerned about the deal they can make at the charity event. I tithe, and that's not about the deal.

I have met some gentle and wonderful people who happen to be rich. I have also met some tightwads that would make Ebenezer Scrooge look generous!
I have one charity for dog rescue where most of the people are definitely middle class.Now there, people will give with their hearts and their soul and will give, give, give. They want to be part of this. I find the contrast between that event and the previous ones in question to be galling. These people don't have a hundredth or thousandth of the disposable income of the wealthy, and yet they will give till it physically hurts them. They want to participate.

So now, with that background, you might be able to answer the question for yourselves as to whether the big boys always carry their weight. It is not my experience that that is the case.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

northernsquirrel said:


> .....ALL the rest are concerned about the deal they can make at the charity event. ......


I've seen this too. I went to an auction and won the first couple of auctioned prints as the only bidder!

I think it's regional. In the city, I see big dollar charity events, where the uber-rich class do outbid each other, just for the status of folks seeing the kind of coin they can drop. They seriously outbid the value. In a more rural setting, I personally donated an item to be auctioned at a charity event and it (along with everything in the auction) sold for less than it's fairly liquid value. I was put off, because I would have substantially preferred to have kept my item and just given them the money they sold it for.

There was a psychological difference in the crowd. In the over-bid crowd, all were being egged on to pony up for the cause. In the under-bid crowd, you would have been chided, if you over paid, so people don't do it. The over-bid crowd was substantially more wealthy, just in a different setting.



> I have met some gentle and wonderful people who happen to be rich. I have also met some tightwads that would make Ebenezer Scrooge look generous!


Me too, but equally distributed among all economic classes.


----------



## seaner97 (May 15, 2011)

You've just made the argument for taxes.


----------



## nhsail (Aug 7, 2000)

"Taxes"*are requisite:
the first question is how much, 
the second question is from whom?

you can spend (and every civilization has) years debating both questions, and figuring out how to distribute them to maximize the collection at minimum cost and perceived pain. (and soaking the relatively few rich, is efficient, and only pisses off a relatively few people)

* "Taxes" are defined as the involuntary transfer of resources from a private individual or corporation/association to a public entity, including sales, VAT, excise, income, real estate, registration fees, special occupational taxes, insurance, and licenses.

You might omit from "taxes" all voluntary daily use fees or tolls, and any explicit admission "fees" that are a reasonable direct payment for value received even if paid to a public institution.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

Unfortunately due to the complexity of the US tax code once again it's expensive to be poor. The 1%er with their smart accountants and tax lawyers are able to legally minimize their tax exposure. The middle and lower classes cannot. Given much of the poor don't end up paying much the burden is borne by the disappearing middle class. 
The orginal intent of using taxes to raise revenue has been lost. The current use of taxes to modify behavior allows these deductions and credits. Another reason to vote Libertarian as both trump and biliary will protect their 1% er peer group. I'm an independent and don't agree with many features of the libertarian platform but at present seems the only avenue to restore orginal principles. 

Any one who as ever worked in a restaurant knows the middle class not the rich tip the best. Ask around kennebunkport about the bushes. May get an unflattering view of the family. You know you are with rich people when they see no need to carry any actual money.


----------



## ccriders (Jul 8, 2006)

outbound said:


> I'm an independent and don't agree with many features of the libertarian platform but at present seems the only avenue to restore orginal principles.


And what would you call original principles?
If they are the principles of New England cod fishermen in a protracted conflict with the English King and his vassals, then surely they do not serve us well today when multinational corporations are the dominant social/economic organization. 
Today every one quotes Jefferson; Rs, Ds as well as Libs. So the above observation to not take what he says, but what he did as gospel is a valid observation. 
I haven't the slightest idea of how to solve the taxation problem, but I really feel for my children and the extreme burden they carry, especially compared with the really rich fat cats. We have been on a tax reduction bent for decades now and every year I pay more in taxes. It's got to be a bait and switch scheme.
Why isn't this thread in off topic?


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

'Cause it's fun.
Here we have town meetings. Still taxes go up. The very wealthy donate their mansions and land to the church, audabon, nature conservatory etc. and pay no taxes. Even the estate has it pegged to avoid real estate taxes.
It's expensive to be poor.


----------



## zeehag (Nov 16, 2008)

Sal Paradise said:


> zee you are not in the state for 60 days or more so you do not need a sticker,


i am documented federally i donot ever need a sticker from a state.
sales taxes paid and everything.


----------



## Sal Paradise (Sep 14, 2012)

Zee
I thought you (or your boat at least ) were permanently south of zee border?

I guess the upshot of this thread is that a law passed in Ct states documented boats have to buy a sticker - and put it on!! - if they are in state more than 60 days. I don't think it is always sales tax thing, more like a fee.

This isnt a " safe space " so I have to provide you with proof or face the wrath of Minnewaska.

_"Documented vessels and vessels numbered by another state, which are moored, docked or operated more than 60 days in Connecticut in any calendar year, must obtain a Connecticut Certificate of Decal from DMV and display a current Connecticut validation decal (but not a Connecticut registration number) on both sides of the bow."_

http://www.ct.gov/deep/lib/deep/boating/boating_guide/part3.pdf


----------



## xort (Aug 4, 2006)

That is the law in most every state.

What often gets mixed in is the placement of the state registration NUMBERS and LETTERS. Documented boats MUST NOT place state reg NUMBERS on the boat but state reg STICKER is perfectly acceptable and usually REQUIRED.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

zeehag said:


> i am documented federally i donot ever need a sticker from a state.


not true, it depends on the State


----------



## aeventyr60 (Jun 29, 2011)

Don0190 said:


> not true, it depends on the State


I took my boat off the state registration roles years ago..I'm offshore and couldn't give a hoot about some states need for a few extra boat bucks. You keep on paying those fee's don..make yourself feel good.


----------



## zeehag (Nov 16, 2008)

when i reviewed the requirements and such in fine print form documenting my boat, i did read the fine print. 
as a direct result i willnot even consider a visit to those states demanding illegality, which is posting both state and fed ownership on same craft. sorry. 
those greedy and law breaking states donot need my dough.
i already paid my sales taxes, and i donot need to feed state coffers the redundant taxes they insist upon. 
ever. 
that is my choice owning a federally documented craft of a nation which still offers me as a citizen mebbe 2 remaining rights, this being one. 

as for my physical location, that is of no ones business, as it is irrelevant. i am a citizen of usa and own a usa federally documented sailing craft. the only drawback to this set up is the fact that in the event that usa govt grew a wild hair and decided my boat is what they need for something, then we would be bound to perform that service.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

aeventyr60 said:


> I took my boat off the state registration roles years ago..I'm offshore and couldn't give a hoot about some states need for a few extra boat bucks. You keep on paying those fee's don..make yourself feel good.


I feel great currently as I have my boat in a State that does not require registration of a documented boat. But when I move to a different State that does I will do so. When I am move again and no longer required to I wouldn't register my boat.

So enjoy your little man victory and fee for not doing the same. But I bet it is that you can not read and think past a chance to make a snipe attack.


----------



## zeehag (Nov 16, 2008)

Don0190 said:


> I feel great currently as I have my boat in a State that does not require registration of a documented boat. But when I move to a different State that does I will do so. When I am move again and no longer required to I wouldn't register my boat.
> 
> So enjoy your little man victory and fee for not doing the same. But I bet it is that you can not read and think past a chance to make a snipe attack.


 for whom are you trolling? ?? you are the only snipey one i have read so far.


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

if you say so

BTW - if you are not in the US you don't really have anything to offer in this thread


----------



## seaner97 (May 15, 2011)

I thought you retired. Shouldn't you be in a better mood now?


----------



## Don L (Aug 8, 2008)

seaner97 said:


> I thought you retired. Shouldn't you be in a better mood now?


I'm in a good mood, that's why I didn't write what I really thought!


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Federal documentation is not exactly analogous to State Registration. As Zee points out, documentation is an ownership record, by which liens may be filed. It is a much better analogy to State Title, to which liens can be filed. Absolutely, you can't have both a documented vessel and a State Title. Federal documentation is typically required by lenders, so that they have one stop shopping to determine current and past liens.

Registration is better defined as a permit to use one's vessel within a State waters for more than a defined period of time, most often something like 60 or 90 days. If you aren't there, you never have to register, regardless of how you titled the vessel.

It only gets complicated when some States allow the registration to be the title document. Although, in those I'm more familiar with, the registration can only be used as title for boats that are generally too small to be documented, like one's dinghy.

And, I took another look. There are 6 boats around me that are documented. I'm now the only one that is displaying the state sticker. I caught four of them and they all acknowledged they are fully paid up. They have zero intention of applying the sticker to their boat and all of us have been around for decades. No one ever recalls an enforcement action. All my research proves is that the visual is no indication, whatsoever, that the big boy are not paying their fair share.


----------



## seaner97 (May 15, 2011)

Minnewaska said:


> Federal documentation is not exactly analogous to State Registration. As Zee points out, documentation is an ownership record, by which liens may be filed. It is a much better analogy to State Title, to which liens can be filed. Absolutely, you can't have both a documented vessel and a State Title. Federal documentation is typically required by lenders, so that they have one stop shopping to determine current and past liens.
> 
> Registration is better defined as a permit to use one's vessel within a State waters for more than a defined period of time, most often something like 60 or 90 days. If you aren't there, you never have to register, regardless of how you titled the vessel.
> 
> ...


While my suspicion is that the state tax dodgers are rare, to be accurate, what you've proved is that the people you've polled in your area say they've paid. It is possible that it's different somewhere else, and your data set isn't large enough or varied enough to truly generalize.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Minnewaska said:


> ....All my research proves is that the visual is no indication, whatsoever, that the big boy are not paying their fair share.





seaner97 said:


> ....what you've proved is that the people you've polled in your area say they've paid. It is possible that it's different somewhere else, and your data set isn't large enough or varied enough to truly generalize.


Perhaps you misread. I proved there is no correlation between seeing the sticker and whether the owner has paid. It's the scientific method to test a disqualifying event. I did not suggest I've proved how many people actually pay.


----------



## seaner97 (May 15, 2011)

Minnewaska said:


> Minnewaska said:
> 
> 
> > ....All my research proves is that the visual is no indication, whatsoever, that the big boy are not paying their fair share.
> ...


Perhaps you misread- I said your polling was too small of a sample size to prove anything other than local effect (if that). You're also assuming they told you the truth unless they produced said sticker. I don't really care, but my point was that your poll was unscientific. It is merely suggestive.


----------



## caberg (Jul 26, 2012)

Minnewaska said:


> I caught four of them and they all acknowledged they are fully paid up. *They have zero intention of applying the sticker to their boat* and all of us have been around for decades. No one ever recalls an enforcement action. All my research proves is that the visual is no indication, whatsoever, that the big boy are not paying their fair share.


Doesn't your research prove that "the big boy" consider themselves above the law?

Forgetting to apply the sticker is one thing (I'm guilty of that) -- intentionally flouting the law is another. Is it a vanity thing? The boat is too pretty for a state registration sticker?


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

caberg said:


> Doesn't your research prove that "the big boy" consider themselves above the law?


Doesn't prove it, but it's certainly a better hypothesis than the one that started this thread. It is clear, many don't feel they need to apply the sticker, the question is why. In order to prove a premise, the scientific method requires that you examine outcomes that would disapprove it. I've applied mine, so that isn't apparently a good theory that big boys (as defined in this thread), as a rule, consider themselves above the law.



> Forgetting to apply the sticker is one thing (I'm guilty of that) -- intentionally flouting the law is another.


Intentionally flouting is demonstrably overstated. First, more than one didn't even think it was actually required, which was born from the observation that so few do it. In fact, I had never seen the actual law, for a documented vessel, until linked here. One simply didn't even know he needed to register in RI, since he lived in MA and was registered there. He corrected that, when I mentioned it to him. For that matter, read the wide misunderstanding of the rules, from a variety of posters above. No flouting identified.

In fact, every State has laws that no one follows and are never enforced. There are mocking websites full of these, so I looked up RI. There is a law that requires you honk your horn, when overtaking another car on the left. By observation, everyone knows this is not actually required. One isn't flouting the law by failing to observe this one.

31-15-4



> Is it a vanity thing? The boat is too pretty for a state registration sticker?


Doesn't everyone feel registration numbers and stickers detract from the visual appeal of a boat? Does anyone think they are on the enhancing aesthetic side of the spectrum? If we've gotten used to them, that just makes us good subordinate subjects, I don't know about vanity.


----------



## seaner97 (May 15, 2011)

They definitely detract from the look of the boat. The registration numbers on non-documented boats are hideous. The stickers on the bow are bad enough, and I'd not fault anyone for not putting them on if they could get away with it.


----------



## TomMaine (Dec 21, 2010)

seaner97 said:


> They definitely detract from the look of the boat. The registration numbers on non-documented boats are hideous. The stickers on the bow are bad enough, and I'd not fault anyone for not putting them on if they could get away with it.


I guess it does bother some people but I've never documented my boats(even if they were previously). People can get weird about their boats and the status they feel from them. I just like mine because of how it performs for me. I think it's a pretty boat but I wouldn't spend extra $ on not putting Reg. #'s on it.

Because I roll and tip my hull every 3 - 4 years, I put my registration numbers on a piece of Lexan.

These reg #'s(size, visibility), are stretching the Maine rules(I don't mind doing that either  )


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

It's interesting to note basic premise of OP that stickers and numbers are decreasingly displayed as size goes up seems correct. What is contentious is the reason.
One can propose some of this is utility. Larger boats, even allowing for dock queens, are more likely to be liveaboards or actively cruising. As stationary liveaboards they are more likely to have interacted with local authorities. As active cruisers authorities are only concerned if their stay is prolonged beyond the window of fee and tax free stay. In either case stickers or number display is moot as paperwork will need to be reviewed. For those cruising beyond our shores pratique is the concern not state issues.
Given sun destroys stickers and numbers are aesethically unpleasing their absence is frequent. Small samples don't have sufficient N to draw conclusions and do not add to the conversation. Admittedly being informed of people's motivation in not displaying numbers may explain their absence in that case but beyond that is similarly uninformative. 
Reviewing my budget these issues are financially irreverent. Sales and use taxes are not. Where the big boys are not bearing their burden is more likely in this area. Regardless of where I go one virtually never sees a true big boy with US documentation let alone state registration. Would suggest it's here that umbrage be placed. Owners benefitting from US citizenship and likely having got their resources from the the US economy but incorporated and titled offshore. It's the "not for sale in US waters " crowd that are circumventing their ethical burden. View this thread as concern about acne in a patient with cancer.
Ok throw stones now.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

Just for fun, Out. As to the scientific method, it takes substantial N to statistically prove a theory. It only takes one conflicting N to disprove it outright.

My fav example...... 

Your task is to provide the theory that comports with this observed outcome of a series of number...... 2,4,8

To test your theory, you apply different series to see if they are valid.

Nearly everyone assumes the theory is a series of numbers that double themselves, so first tests are something like 5,10,20. That does comport.

Then they'll guess 3,6,12. Still confirms the correct theory as well. 

They can test thousands more of these doubling series, as well, and they are all valid. Did they prove the doubling theory? No.

The series 1,2,3 is also valid. So is 9,11,742.

The theory is simply any three numbers in ascending order. If you first tested a series opposed to your theory, it would only take one N to disprove it.

If the theory in the thread had been, "big boys most often do not display their registration sticker", you would try to find a marina where most do display them.

This theory (admittedly re-phrased) was "big boys often don't pay their registration fees". If that statement was confined to the OP's marina, one would test differently. But, as a broader stated theory, I believe it's been disproved, as many contrary examples have been provided. Acknowledging one has to trust the word of my slip neighbors, or that of the many others here, like you and I.  I also hasn't proved the theory that they do often pay, just disapproved the theory proposed.

The concept of off shore registration is a better point. Although, our boarder countries don't see it that way. They do receive revenue from these foreign registrations and have decided to be more competitive. If we lowered them here, they would come back. No doubt. I think tax competition is good, otherwise, the unrestrained taxing power corrupts. Sort of how that whole revolutionary war thing happened.


----------



## seaner97 (May 15, 2011)

Minnewaska said:


> Just for fun, Out. As to the scientific method, it takes substantial N to statistically prove a theory. It only takes one conflicting N to disprove it outright.
> 
> My fav example......
> 
> ...


No problem with this disproving the theory on your local area. Problem was on your expression of your proving your own theory with the data you had collected. Regardless, I'm inclined to believe that the large majority of all sailors pay their required fees and taxes, and the few that don't are more likely to cheat on other aspects of life as well. There is good data for that one in many other arenas. Tom- that is an elegant solution that I've never seen. Definitely stretching the letter of the law (and probably flouting its intent), but nicely done nonetheless.


----------



## outbound (Dec 3, 2012)

My understanding of the null hypothesis is a bit different. 

Outliers are permitted given the statement is considered disproven when it reaches the 5% threshold of being not least likely than not. In short 95% certainty it is not true. In our imperfect world where type one and type two errors abound and given measuring runs the risk of changing the reality even in physics best that can be ever be offered in medicine, science and engineering is probabilities. Here a correlation coefficient or a Pearson R might have been more appropriate but let's leave that aside. Believe your amusing (thank you you made me smile) example does not serve as it is mathamatical not pragmatic. 

Yes math is the underpinnings of all practical knowledge but other than in chaos theory it alone can ascribe to give absolute answers. For the rest of us probabilities must serve.


----------



## seaner97 (May 15, 2011)

Or, more succinctly, correlation does not prove causation.


----------



## Minnewaska (Feb 21, 2010)

outbound said:


> ....Believe your amusing (thank you you made me smile) example does not serve as it is mathamatical not pragmatic.....


Math is the foundation of all science, including probabilities. It's how we prove and disapprove everything.

For now, my only concern was crap wind most of the day. Actually took the dinghy on a 10nm run. Involved beers on a buddies boat. I'm easy.


----------



## nhsail (Aug 7, 2000)

About the only thing this thread has proven in over 120 posts, is that class envy is quite strong, and people are concerned that somebody else is getting away with a better deal. Explains the current political environment rather concisely. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## seaner97 (May 15, 2011)

nhsail said:


> About the only thing this thread has proven in over 120 posts, is that class envy is quite strong, and people are concerned that somebody else is getting away with a better deal. Explains the current political environment rather concisely.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I think our Canadian friend was a bit more on point.


----------

