Back to Squawk list
  • 26

Atlas Air refuses to repay US bailout funds

Atlas Air is having a good year financially compared to passenger airlines that are hurting because of COVID travel restrictions. It isn't apologizing for bailout money it received from the U.S. government. ( 更多...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

Highflyer1950 7
So just classify the $406 million as income and tax them on it?
matt jensen 3
works for me

[This poster has been suspended.]

[This poster has been suspended.]

Bill Ross 3
No need to yell
Greg S 1
It's a little more complicated than that:
David Ingram 12
Everyone that wrote and passed that bill was a lawyer of some sort. Sounds like more of "Lets just get this passed and we can read it later. Re-elect NOBODY!
Mitch Mackrory 4
I agree. The airline did nothing wrong. The problem was the politicians focus on getting pork into the bill without paying attention to important details like this. We need term limits and honest politicians (I know that's an oxymoron now, but that needs to change).
jmilleratp 6
Term limits for all.
Bernie20910 3
Agreed! "Politician" should never be a career.
Bill Ross -1
Back on track, stick with the article
Ed Kostiuk 10
"We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it."

Her words, not mine
Kevin Keswick 5
Why would an all cargo qualify for covid relief? The grounding of most passenger jets meant a reduction of air freight capacity so it was obvious that Cargo airlines would have more business than they could handle.
Eric Kulisch 2
It probably wasn't readily apparent to Congress at the time - this was March, remember, that cargo would take off, although probably obvious as you say; cargo airlines lobbied for aid too and then the law probably had loopholes that didn't nail down exclusions
ADXbear 4
Where do I get free money
jmilleratp 1
Become a corporation.
David Cochrun 3
Just because you can do it doesn't make it right. It may not be illegal but it isn't ethical.
Last time I looked, they have an operating certificate. Yep, theirs was issued on Feb. 23, 1973. According to the FAA database, they have 43 B-747s and 35 B-767s. How long would Atlas be able to stay afloat with their 78 planes on the tarmac? So, revoke the operating certificate until they agree to repay. If they don't like it, let them go to court, and it will be addressed in 3 or 4 years. Meanwhile, their planes sit on the ground.
Greg S 11
That would also be illegal. I don't get why people so easily slip into authoritarianism. Do you want the government to obey the rule of law, or do you want it to ignore the law and just act according the whims of the mob? It's one or the other.
Bernie20910 -3
Where I grew up, if you went and borrowed money and didn't make your payments or repay it completely a couple of guys with baseball bats gave your kneecaps a "reminder". Very seldom did anyone not repay, and if they didn't? Well, you know that term, "getting stiffed"? Guess where it came from and what it referred to...

Sigh, I miss Brooklyn sometimes...
bigkahuna400 2
I like that idea !!
jbermo 0
Should read -theirs was issued on Feb. 23, 1993.
bigkahuna400 4
Simple, just cut them out of any gov't contracts. Period
Greg S 4
That would be illegal.
Bernie20910 0
Not if you made repayment of the funds a bid requirement.
Greg S 2
That would also obviously be illegal.
jmilleratp 2
Ha! Taxpayer money go bye bye. What else is new?
Greg S 2
This is not Atlas' fault, this was just legislative malpractice as usual by the US Congress.
Terry Briggs 1
May Atlas reap as they have sown.
darjr26 1
I know a 747 is big, but that paint scheme makes it look huge!
Leo Larkin 1
Why the hell go after them? After all, they are transporting those illustrious Chinese made masks and PPE that we in the US can not seem to make ourselves. Probably faster delivery than by know ..Slow boat to/from China. Legislation in DC probably let US industry offshore yeeears ago. Cargo is only delivering what the US ought have been doing already
WhiteKnight77 1
Congress is the body that passed such laws that allowed for manufacturing companies move offshore and then wonder why we have no one making the needed PPE for this here in the States. That it has to be shipped somehow to the US from that offshore manufacturing facility means it needs to be shipped as fast as possible.

Congress should be happy that at least there are companies that can do such, even if they are making some profit.
Blake Van 1
Let's see... i lost everything, job, home, money living in vehicle no gas, winter now, food stamps stopped by Trump, getting hard to find food. No healthcare access. Homeless shelter are covid-19 Camps.. 2B$ airlines Fu#x this political economy Shit!!!
HP Baumeister 1
I did not get any funds - reason given (think about that!!!):
- I used a VoIP- phone number (!!!)
- “ there was something wrong with my account number” (which I use since 10+ years)).
Of course, they did not tell me any of that until they had run out of funds....
This was all a munchin/trump hoax!
Jaina Brown 1
Atlas was granted 406Million towards payroll but their hard working pilots are only paid 50% of the industry standard? Said funds were not needed as business is booming?

As a tax payer, they should return the money on principle, regardless of laws, rules or what ever. Then give their employees a profit sharing raise.
patrick baker -3
the 406 million is not earned income, and it is not classical revenue, but the IRS and the Treasury department may have some ideas on getting payback: conficsate an airfreightor or two or three, resulting in revenue losses. That will get every player in the situation and their attention. Get the FAA to revoke a few airworthiness certificates, and then step back and watch what happens. Should be amusing....
Silent Bob 19
On what grounds? We can argue till the cows come home about whether it's ethical to keep the money, but the fact is the gov gave them the money essentially no strings attached. Maybe it's just 20/20 hindsight, but they (gov) could've very easily put conditions on the funds such as revenue or demand, so that if it turned out they really didn't need the money they would have to give it, or at least some of it back. You can't just put the toothpaste back in the tube and change the rules after the fact.
Eric Kulisch 3
I think you're right. If they truly violated the House wouldn't be politely asking for the money back, they'd be coming after them. Rush to get out a bill and not enough conditions - possibly because Trump administration didn't want lots of conditions on much of the CARES Act. Wanted Mnuchin at Treasury to have maximum freedom to dispense money.
Highflyer1950 3
well, they tax lottery winnings and that’s not earned income, to my knowledge. However, good point.


還沒有帳戶嗎? 現在就註冊(免費),設置諸多客制化功能、航班提醒等等!