1st overnite

I flew with a check airman recently who seemed to be fairly well informed about what happened. Based on what he said, what these guys were doing was wrong, they were warned about it and didn't change anything. If that's true and they are guilty of fraud, I'm not sure it's the unions job to defend these guys. Didn't we all sign something back in basic indoc about fraudulent behavior? I can't remember for sure, but I remember being warned.

Tom a Hawk

so since the tax thing seems to be no big deal, what are the bigger issues with being based overseas? mostly curious about cgn.

golfandfly

I heard they took the money and didn't move their families to the domicile. It seems pretty clear to me.

No one has been forced into a FDA. Don't like the deal, don't bid it. I think the deal stinks, therefore, I wouldn't bid it.

There are just a few ways to get fired at Fedex. Gawking at women at the Tucson hotel, or not being honest with their money. Sounds like these guys weren't being honest. Sorry, I don't feel sorry for them...

Underdog

Sky,

I agree the pilot receives zero benefit from the foreign income tax exclusion. However, if you take the housing allowance, you need to qualify for that exclusion as if you are the beneficiary because the company is supposed to get that monetary benefit. That, in essence, is what tax equalization is all about. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that why the company has you sign the document?

Therein lies the problem. Now the company has a vested interest in whether or not the pilot is following the guidelines surrounding the foreign earned income tax exclusion. One problem is the numerous interpretations of our tax code. I recall flying with a pilot years ago, who, along with a handful of other pilots, were claiming the foreign earned income exclusion. He lived abroad in a house that he had purchased. All of his trips were international trips. The problem was, he was domiciled in the states. And, although he felt his audit was unjustified, he lost his battle and was forced to work many years beyond the "normal" retirement age, in order to pay back the hundreds of thousands of dollars he owed. This sounds quite familiar with what I'm now hearing with HKG.

Unfortunately, very little was said to pilots beforehand, with the exception that you need to move your family if you take the housing allowance. Almost nothing was said by our union. I'm guessing the future of our FDA's will eventually see the elimination of tax equalization, at least as it is currently proffered. Things are so muddled up now it's ridiculous, as so many have found out. I hope the union will step up and vigorously fight for our pilots, versus the "lip service" they have demonstrated, both past and present towards FDA's.

Popeye

I think there was plenty said to anyone willing to listen "beforehand". The FDA LOA's were well vetted. Some of the membership was more than vocal about the mis-givings of the LOA. Issues like Tax Equalization, residency, household goods shipping limits, housing/rental allowance, dependant schooling and ground transportation issues to name a few, and I'm not even interested in the domicile. What was left for the union to do for those that voted FOR the LOA and then volunteered to BID it, teach them to read and comprehend the details that they agreed to?

If their error was one of stupidity, that's not likely to get them terminated. If their error was one of fraudulence then that is a different story. As we just said to our out going LEC reps, "Thank you, good bye. Now let's move on!"

DLax85

+1

Moderators...please resurrect that thread.

Woodro

Since I'm only a prospective FedEx pilot and do not have access to the FDA LOA, can someone correct my interpretation of the rules.

1. When working and living in the FD one is taxed just like one would be as if working in the U.S? After reading the IRS web site, $ 92,900 of your income is excluded if you meet the Bona fide residence criteria. Is FedEx making you sign a statement that you will not clam what the IRS says you are entitled to?

2. If you are not allowed to claim the $ 92,900 exclusion, is the company offsetting this through the additional housing allowance (I heard it is $3500) and the education benefit for the Kido’s (I heard it to be $5,000 per child), or through some other COLA type offset.

Thanks for your future kind responses and taking the time to educate a prospective FedEx pilot.

Busboy

If you stopped there, as far as taxation...You would be correct. Like you worked in the US, no exclusion.

And yes, there are living allowances and education benefits.

Woodro

Thanks for the quick response. Ouch! I wonder why you can't do what the IRS says you can do?

Are your living allowances and educational benefits excluded as income for tax purposes?

Does the LOA allow you commute from the states or say from England? My wife is British and wants to move back to England. Pretty far fetched huh!

subicpilot

It is this kind of ignorance that continues to fuel all the standard misconceptions about foreign domiciles...

Five families involved. Five different sets of unique circumstances.



The facts may or may not eventually come out, considering the company includes non-disclosure agreements in most settlements, we may never know the specifics.

Suffice to say, the situation is much more complex than you describe.

If you want a gross over-simplification, here it is:

HKG crews consider their time off theirs to do with as they please, and that includes travel where and when they wish.

FDX management feels that they are entitled to demand that HKG crews and their families spend a yet undefined portion of their time off at their "center of gravity" (a new term coined by management) which is HKG, because they are receiving the housing allowance benefit.

None of this is spelled out clearly in any document signed by any FDX crewmember in HKG.