A provision tucked into a pending federal air-safety bill is setting off a genuine partisan fight in Congress — and if you own or operate a private aircraft, it’s worth understanding regardless of where you land politically, because it directly affects how states can (or can’t) use your aircraft’s own broadcast data to bill you.
At issue is ADS-B Out, the satellite-based tracking technology the FAA has required since 2020 on most aircraft. It continuously broadcasts an aircraft’s altitude, speed, and identification number, primarily so air traffic controllers can track aircraft more precisely than radar allows. But that same broadcast data has become a tool for state and local tax collectors, who cross-reference the identification numbers against aircraft registries to identify who owns which plane — and then bill them for property, sales, and use taxes that owners have long been able to dodge simply by registering aircraft in no-tax states like Montana or Delaware.
Los Angeles County Assessor Jeff Prang says the data has been a genuine enforcement breakthrough. Since January, his office has identified roughly 1,000 additional aircraft in the county — worth a combined $3.5 billion in assessed value — that weren’t previously on the tax rolls. At California’s 1% annual property tax rate, Prang says that’s $35 million in local revenue owners had been avoiding. Before ADS-B data, his office relied on manually inventorying airfields, a method he describes as hit-or-miss: “we’re not catching aircraft that are not on the ground at that time,” and owners who get wind of an inspection can simply fly out of state ahead of it.
The House-passed version of the bill, H.R. 7613, would shut that down nationwide. It bars any government agency from using ADS-B data “for the purpose of obtaining revenue from the owner or operator” of an aircraft without the owner’s permission. The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) has pushed hard for this language, arguing the technology exists for one reason only: collision avoidance. AOPA’s Jim Coon calls the tax use a misuse of a safety tool and, further, an invasion of pilot privacy — owners equipped their aircraft with ADS-B to comply with an FAA safety mandate, not to make themselves easier to bill. FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford has echoed that position, telling lawmakers in May that the agency “frown[s] on” using ADS-B data for tax revenue collection.
The competing Senate bill, S. 2503, doesn’t include the restriction, and lawmakers are now working to reconcile the two versions. Democrats have been blunt about their objection to the House language. Rep. Laura Friedman (D-Calif.) framed it directly as a tax-avoidance carve-out for the wealthy, while Rep. Shomari Figures (D-Ala.) argued that using existing technology to collect taxes nobody disputes are legitimately owed is simply common sense. On the other side, Sen. Ted Budd (R-N.C.) has characterized the state-level practice as an abuse of federally mandated safety technology to levy “unfair, sometimes duplicative fees.”
The stakes for state budgets aren’t trivial. More than a dozen states currently use ADS-B data to aid tax collection, and Alabama’s Department of Revenue has projected the House provision would cost the state $18 million annually if enacted.
It’s also worth noting the bill’s origin: this is the broader air-safety package Congress has been working to finalize since the January 2025 midair collision over the Potomac River that killed 67 people. The tax provision is a rider on legislation whose core purpose is unrelated — which is partly why it’s been described as “little-noticed” until it started drawing organized opposition.
Why It Matters: However this shakes out, it has real consequences for anyone who owns or operates a private aircraft. If the House language survives conference, ADS-B data becomes legally off-limits for state tax enforcement nationwide — a meaningful win for owners who’ve been getting caught by expanded enforcement in states like California. If the Senate version prevails, or a compromise waters down the House protection, expect more states to follow California’s lead in using flight-tracking data to close the compliance gap. Either way, this is a bill worth tracking if you own an aircraft registered anywhere other than where it’s actually based and hangared.
Source: Provision around taxing private jets sparks partisan brawl in Congress — Politico
