• 04 Feb 2009 at 3:30 PM

Bank of Amerillwide Grounded

All US Airways All The Time!

”As part of an ongoing cost reduction effort we have been scaling back on our use of corporate aircraft including selling three aircraft we own and the Merrill Lynch helicopter,” Bank of America spokesman Scott Silvestri said.
Bank of America is the owner of nine planes, including four Gulfstreams, FAA records show. The company acquired brokerage Merrill Lynch & Co. in January.
Chief Executive Ken Lewis is required to use company aircraft for personal trips. In 2007, his personal use of company jets totaled $127,643, according to a March 2008 filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Separately, Charlie Gasparino reports that Ken Lewis will be stripped of his love shack in the Time Warner Center.
BofA to Sell 3 Corporate Jets, Merrill Helicopter [AP]

Comments (38)

  1. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 3:33 PM

    Required, huh.
    Lots of arm-twisting involved, I imagine.
    Fucking prick. Enjoy your $500k you loser.

  2. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 3:35 PM

    Who is ‘love shake’?

  3. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 3:36 PM

    @1 – if that’s the first time you’ve heard of a CEO being required to use company jets for personal travel, then your naivete is apparent.

  4. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 3:38 PM

    @2- ‘love shack’ refers to the corporate apt. BAC had in the time warner center.

  5. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 3:40 PM

    oh gnoes, not the MerrillCopter!

  6. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 3:42 PM

    Any tax attorneys out there? If KL is required to use the company jet for personal travel, is the cost of the trip taxable as his personal income? Or not?

  7. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 3:45 PM

    6, no dumbass it’s a capital gain.
    –Chuck Rangel

  8. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 3:54 PM

    Hmmm, who do you think would give Ken Lewis a mortgage on a new apt in New York? I know I wouldn’t!
    And, man, that’s going to be one tough co-op board interview! (“And, Mr. Lewis, what do you do for a living? I see. And is your bank profitable? … Mm hmm. And how would you assess your job security? Mm hmm. Yes, well we’ll get back to you.”)

  9. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 3:56 PM

    BAC a $4.63!!! KL may need the Merrill copter to get the fuck out of Dodge – I mean Charlotte.

  10. Posted by Anal_yst | February 4, 2009 at 4:00 PM

    anyone know any details on the TWC place(s)?

  11. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:00 PM

    #1 i believe that the 500k cap only applies to new tarp money-no comp restrictions associated with what they have already received

  12. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:02 PM

    MER sucks dick

  13. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:04 PM

    @11 – I believe the original TARP funding has loose language in it about comp to the top 3 execs only being deductible up to $500k. If I recall though, there are Grand Canyon-sized loopholes available to be driven through.

  14. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:04 PM

    @12 Yes, BAC sure did pay alot for that blowjob.

  15. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:07 PM

    And there is a huge market to sell that junk into.

  16. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:11 PM

    christ, what a boring article, who gives a sh*t?
    Must do better

  17. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:12 PM

    What is the resale value for a slightly used ’05 WIDECLOPTER?

  18. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:12 PM

    @7 – Yes, fucknuts, it is taxable income.

  19. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:16 PM

    @7 – see here: http://www.gkglaw.com/Publications/aviation%5CArticle%2011.doc
    “Almost anything an employee receives, as compensation is taxable. This includes non-cash benefits that an employee receives for free or for a reduced price. To the IRS, an executive’s personal travel on a company aircraft is just another form of compensation. The same is true for travel by an executive’s family or guests. As far as the IRS is concerned, the executive can pay fair market value (i.e., charter cost) for the travel or the value of the travel can be considered as a taxable fringe benefit and the value added to the executive’s income.”

  20. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:17 PM

    @17 FTW

  21. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:17 PM

    @7
    I hope you hire H&R Block to do your taxes this year, because you clearly don’t know what the hell you are talking about.

  22. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:18 PM

    @7 – I get it and think that is the best comment on this thread. It’s nice to be on the buyside huh?

  23. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:18 PM

    @20 … Man, Galland Kharesch … either someone is in airplane finance or law … or you got really lucky snagging the website of a great, but not well known, aviation finance firm. Good work.

  24. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:19 PM

    I thought KL used the company bass boat for all of his personal travel

  25. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:22 PM

    @ 6, etc — if it’s for “convenience of the employer” then it’s not taxable income. They’d rather have their CEO working and not sitting around some airport bar hitting on Icelandair hostesses.

  26. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:26 PM

    I just hired Dylan ‘The TaxSlayer’ Ratigan to do my taxes and my gourd flute for one low low price.

  27. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:28 PM

    Christ, but that was a boring article.
    Must do better

  28. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:28 PM

    @20
    Interesting, but the jerk is “forced” to use company craft for personal travel. I was questioning whether the “forced” qualifier would really make it a taxable fringe benefit. (Of course his astronomical compensation will make it a non-issue for him, as he gets more than enough to pay taxes on this travel. Or he could say that he was on a business trip anyway, to schmooze with clients, like in Aspen, or St. Bart’s. Wait, can’t land a corp jet in St. Bart’s.)

  29. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:30 PM

    @24 – Thank you. I am good with due diligence and internet research. I also have my CPA and DON’T work for the SEC.

  30. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:35 PM

    @29 – Good question for sure. But it is most definitely taxable, regardless of the requirement.

  31. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:37 PM

    @26
    Exactly, that’s how it would be reported and his perk is tax free (to him). Not too familiar with Icelandair hostesses, though. Hot?

  32. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:41 PM

    Now how did Gasbagool get the Love Shack tidbit, unless…………is this the road he is going down????????

  33. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:43 PM

    @25 – Thank you. I needed a good laugh.

  34. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:48 PM
  35. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:51 PM

    actually, for the “convenience of the employer” doctrine to apply, the activity has to be related to a furtherance of the business, at least collaterally, tax attorney, @24.

  36. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 4:59 PM

    Very good @37. That’s why these finance guys pay good money for the professionals to do their taxes (except for TurboTax Tim).

  37. Posted by guest | February 4, 2009 at 10:01 PM

    Buyers market in secondhand jets. Too bad no matter how cheap you get one they still cost $2K+/hour to operate.

  38. Posted by guest | February 5, 2009 at 7:48 AM

    Great reporting by Hedda Gasparino. How come CG isn’t reporting on the scandal that everyone at CNBC is talking about. THE FORCED RESIGNATION OF JONATHON WALD AND THE ETHICAL SCANDAL SURROUNDING HIS DEPARTURE. WHERE IS GASPARINO WITH THIS TIDBIT??? NO ONE TALKING ABOUT THIS AT ELAINE’S OD SAN PIETRO???? HUBRIS!!!!
    CG, ANY GE TARP MONEY USED TO PAY FOR YOUR MARTINI’S AT NIGHT??? GUARENTEED BOMBSHELL

Leave a comment

You can log in with your account or comment as a guest below.