Rare Mary229 Posted December 22, 2020 #76 Share Posted December 22, 2020 2 minutes ago, HappyInVan said: The PVSA loophole is a compromise. Recognizing the American public's desire for cheap cruises, and the reality that cruise companies don't pay American income taxes on their profits. Nor do non-American employees. I think the PVSA was not in response to cruise lines as it was enacted in 1886. Laws can indeed change and protectionist laws should always be up for review, IMHO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare HappyInVan Posted December 22, 2020 #77 Share Posted December 22, 2020 2 minutes ago, Mary229 said: I think the PVSA was not in response to cruise lines as it was enacted in 1886. Laws can indeed change and protectionist laws should always be up for review, IMHO The PVSA was intended to protect American jobs and maintain a viable merchant fleet. The PVSA loophole is a compromise in response to leisure cruising at low prices. The alternative is to eliminate the loophole. To require a minimal American staffing on ships that have a domestic itinerary. Like the river cruise boats. Hope this helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CruiserBruce Posted December 22, 2020 #78 Share Posted December 22, 2020 11 minutes ago, HappyInVan said: Weird! I'm sure that we discussed this in detail on these forums. The PVSA protects American jobs. Cruise companies employ third world employees for low low wages. Book profits offshore where they ignore American employment laws. The PVSA loophole is a compromise. Recognizing the American public's desire for cheap cruises, and the reality that cruise companies don't pay American income taxes on their profits. Nor do non-American employees. The "loophole" that allowed "service calls" was removed at the request of a cruise line, NCL. Now cruise lines want the loophole back in? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare Mary229 Posted December 22, 2020 #79 Share Posted December 22, 2020 29 minutes ago, HappyInVan said: The PVSA was intended to protect American jobs and maintain a viable merchant fleet. The PVSA loophole is a compromise in response to leisure cruising at low prices. The alternative is to eliminate the loophole. To require a minimal American staffing on ships that have a domestic itinerary. Like the river cruise boats. Hope this helps. I understand what the PVSA is, it can be repealed. It is a protectionist piece of legislation. I hope this helps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare HappyInVan Posted December 22, 2020 #80 Share Posted December 22, 2020 (edited) 3 hours ago, Mary229 said: I understand what the PVSA is, it can be repealed. It is a protectionist piece of legislation. I hope this helps Let's look at the details, and compare the Alaska versus Caribbean itineraries. The regulations allow exemption from PVSA (U.S.-built, owned, and documented) on the Alaska itinerary if just one stop is made in Canada. The other 6/7 of the itinerary is in American waters! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_Vessel_Services_Act_of_1886 By comparison, the Caribbean itinerary has 7/7 nights offshore. Entry to an American port is solely to load and unload passengers. Similar to the situation for flights to/from international destinations. The PVSA clarifies the situations when domestic itineraries should be subject to American laws. IMO, there should be a test for domestic 'content'. Rather than repeal the PVSA, an American should be asking why foreigners (without work visas) are allowed to work in American waters for 6 consecutive days? That said, it is debatable whether ships must be American built. IMO, it does not matter where a ship is built, as long as the corporate owner resides in the USA and is subject to American laws and taxation. It will be pointed out that foreign ships need to be certified to operate in Americans waters. Will be inspected by Coast Guard etc. So, it is a complex situation. Edited December 22, 2020 by HappyInVan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevingastreich Posted December 23, 2020 #81 Share Posted December 23, 2020 6 hours ago, CruiserBruce said: The "loophole" that allowed "service calls" was removed at the request of a cruise line, NCL. Now cruise lines want the loophole back in? The situation has changed. The time is ripe to revisit this outdated "Act". The ball is already rolling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevingastreich Posted December 23, 2020 #82 Share Posted December 23, 2020 23 hours ago, Lady Arwen said: I’m honestly at a loss for words right now. Good luck, I think. Thank you. Please donate to the cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare Lady Arwen Posted December 23, 2020 #83 Share Posted December 23, 2020 12 hours ago, kevingastreich said: Thank you. Please donate to the cause. I’ll get right on that. You sound like someone else right now who is also asking folks to donate “to the cause”. A better cause is helping people pay their rent and putting food on the table. This thread has become so ridiculous and I’m done with it. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevingastreich Posted December 23, 2020 #84 Share Posted December 23, 2020 2 hours ago, Lady Arwen said: I’ll get right on that. Much appreciated, especially in light of the fact that modifying the PVSA to eliminate port stops in Canada, while a boon to the Alaska Cruise Season, does nothing for Canadian tourism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now