Tax Implications For Cruising The Pacific Northwest

[chinacowboy]

I think the confusion is in the wording:

Visits of 60 days or less
You don’t need a permit to be on Washington waters for up to 60 days, as long as your boat:
Is currently registered in another state or
Has a current U.S. Coast Guard documentation paper

WA State Licensing (DOL) Official Site: Boats: Visiting Washington waters

I think this should read visits 60 days or less in a 12 Month Period


As it does here:

USE TAX EXEMPT
Temporary use may not exceed 60 days
during any continuous 12-month period
RCW 82.12.0251(1)

https://dor.wa.gov/sites/default/files/legacy/Docs/Pubs/Misc/VesselsNonresidents.pdf


Again, I think this discrepancy arises from the DOL and DOR interpretation of the law. For this use case the DOR interpretation of 60 days in a 12 month period would take priority. I think Twisted Tree is correct.

 

[BandB]

One of the problems is, as pointed out by others, there are two issues, registration and use tax. In our case, the use tax issue was settled at the time of purchase, as Florida sales tax was paid. Ultimately, it seems far more complicated than it should be. We will worry about it next time we come to the West Coast, although I am sure by then they will exchange the rules a dozen times. On the side of being safe, I would follow twistedtree's recommendations unless I received other information from someone in a position to merit trust.

 

[twistedtree]

Just proof you'd spent at least one day and one night elsewhere and were entering from out of state.

It's interesting that in South Florida we have an equivalent situation for all those who have foreign flagged vessels. They must leave the country to get a new cruising permit annually. I have a captain friend who took two one night trips to Bimini only a couple of weeks ago, just to return and get new cruising permits. 50 mile trip and one night out of the country is all it takes for that.

Now, I do know people who face similar rules in the SE with GA, SC and NC as they cruise and resolve them by short trips out of the state in question before they reach the 60 or 90 day limit of the state. So what we were told on WA made sense to us since it's consistent with these states. They keep the marina bills from the other states handy and present them if questioned, which is rare.

As to the WA situation, definitely radical differences between what you've been told and we've been told. We were never checked or asked any questions by anyone in the state so cannot tell you what the reaction would have been to our trips so no prove they would have agreed with the interpretation we were given.

I'm curious who provided this interpretation? Was it from any official source, not that it would ultimately make any difference?

 

[twistedtree]

One of the problems is, as pointed out by others, there are two issues, registration and use tax. In our case, the use tax issue was settled at the time of purchase, as Florida sales tax was paid. Ultimately, it seems far more complicated than it should be. We will worry about it next time we come to the West Coast, although I am sure by then they will exchange the rules a dozen times. On the side of being safe, I would follow twistedtree's recommendations unless I received other information from someone in a position to merit trust.

Again, based on what I've encountered, and not necessarily correct... but having paid FL sales tax doesn't get you out of the WA Use Tax obligation. All it does is reduce the WA tax bill by the amount paid to FL. Your FL tax was presumably capped ($18k, or something like that?). WA wants 8% to almost 10% of the boat's value depending on where you are located, and you would be liable for the difference owed to WA. And unlike many other states, it doesn't matter how long you have owned the boat. You still owe the tax when the WA laws trigger. Many states exempt you if you have owned the boat elsewhere for some amount of time.

 

[twistedtree]

These two interpretations of spending 60 days at a time in WA is exactly why we left. You could be happily cruising thinking you are in full compliance, then suddenly find you owe hundreds of thousands of dollars. That's a really high risk game to be playing.

 

[JustBob]

As TwistedTree points out, it is a quagmire here in WA state (I am a resident). One of my neighbors, very smart guy, bought a Nordhavn and kept it out of state, not paying the tax. He did spend a year in Mexico. But most of the time when not cruising BC/AK waters, it was on the dock on Vancouver Island.

About 6 years into this he wanted some work done by a Seattle yard. He researched the situation extensively, and got an opinion from a CPA (probably should have gone to a tax lawyer). He proceeds.

As you can imagine it doesn't end well. The state comes after him for the entire sales tax amount he never paid. And yes they get it from him.

I want to keep my boat here, and cruise here as well, so I'm going to pay the sales tax. The amount of sales tax is a small portion of what I have saved in income tax by living here vs where I came from.

Pretty much any tax authority I have ever dealt with refuses to put anything in writing about what they will or will not do. Obviously there are statutes and codes. Just ready to be perverted. It's really no fun at all.

 

[twistedtree]

As TwistedTree points out, it is a quagmire here in WA state (I am a resident). One of my neighbors, very smart guy, bought a Nordhavn and kept it out of state, not paying the tax. He did spend a year in Mexico. But most of the time when not cruising BC/AK waters, it was on the dock on Vancouver Island.

About 6 years into this he wanted some work done by a Seattle yard. He researched the situation extensively, and got an opinion from a CPA (probably should have gone to a tax lawyer). He proceeds.

As you can imagine it doesn't end well. The state comes after him for the entire sales tax amount he never paid. And yes they get it from him.

I want to keep my boat here, and cruise here as well, so I'm going to pay the sales tax. The amount of sales tax is a small portion of what I have saved in income tax by living here vs where I came from.

Pretty much any tax authority I have ever dealt with refuses to put anything in writing about what they will or will not do. Obviously there are statutes and codes. Just ready to be perverted. It's really no fun at all.

If you are a resident, which your neighbor presumably is, tax is immediately due as soon as you bring the boat into WA. No 60 days, just sudden death. I know someone else who got bit by this, and it was on an order $4m-$5m boat, so a big tax bill. All the visitor rules are for non-residents only.

 

[koliver]

"Pretty much any tax authority I have ever dealt with refuses to put anything in writing about what they will or will not do. Obviously there are statutes and codes. Just ready to be perverted. It's really no fun at all."

The CRA (Canada Revenue Agency) will give you a ruling any time you ask. This approach eliminates the uncertainty. Your tax agencies will probably do the same if you ask.

 

[tiltrider1]

If you are an out of Washington State resident and your boat is titled and regisgtered out of state here is the law.


When to register your boat

You must title and register your boat in Washington State:

• Within 60 days of moving to Washington with the boat.
• Within 15 days of buying the boat, if you live in Washington and bought the boat in another state.

Registration requirements

Unless specifically exempt, you must meet all Washington state registration requirements when using a documented vessel on Washington waters. This means you must register your boat in Washington:

• Within 60 days of moving to Washington with the vessel.
• Within 15 days of buying the vessel, if bought it in another state and you live in Washington.

Exempt vessels

• Military vessels
• Public vessels of the United States or the American Red Cross.
• Vessels owned by a state, county, or city and used for governmental purposes.
• Vessels with a marine document as a vessel of the United States that are primarily engaged in commerce, including:
  • Tugs
  • Barges
  • Charter vessels (bare vessel charters or timeshare vessels)
• Vessels issued a United States Customs Service Cruising License or registered in another country.
  • Vessel is exempt from registration only for the first 60 days of use.
  • On or before the 61st day of use on Washington waters, the owner must obtain a vessel visitor permit as required under RCW 88.02.610.
• A vessel primarily engaged in commerce that is owned by a resident of a country other than the United States.
• Vessels registered in another state.
  • Vessel is exempt from registration only for the first 60 days of use.
  • On or before the 61st day of use on Washington state waters, the owner must obtain a nonresident vessel permit as required under RCW 88.02.620.
  • If the principal place of use changes to Washington, the vessel must be registered in Washington.

RCW 88.02.620

Nonresident vessel permit. (Effective until July 1, 2026.)



(1) A vessel owner who is a nonresident person must obtain a nonresident vessel permit on or before the sixty-first day of use in Washington state if the vessel:
(a) Is currently registered or numbered under the laws of the state of principal operation or has been issued a valid number under federal law; and
(b) Has been brought into Washington state for personal use for not more than six months in any continuous twelve-month period.
(2) In addition to the requirements in subsection (1) of this section, a nonresident vessel owner that is not a natural person may only obtain a nonresident vessel permit if:
(a) The vessel is at least thirty feet in length, but no more than one hundred sixty-four feet in length;
(b) No Washington state resident is a principal, as defined in RCW 82.32.865, of the nonresident person; and
(c) The department of revenue has provided the nonresident vessel owner written approval authorizing the permit as provided in RCW 82.32.865.
(3) A nonresident vessel permit:
(a) May be obtained from the department, county auditor or other agent, or subagent appointed by the director;
(b) Must show the date the vessel first came into Washington state;
(c) Is valid for two months; and
(d) May not be issued after December 31, 2025, to a nonresident vessel owner that is not a natural person.
(4) The department, county auditor or other agent, or subagent appointed by the director must collect the fee required in RCW 88.02.640(1)(i) when issuing nonresident vessel permits.
(5) A nonresident vessel permit is not required under this section if the vessel is used in conducting temporary business activity within Washington state.
(6) For any permits issued under this section to a nonresident vessel owner that is not a natural person, the department must maintain a record of the following information and provide it to the department of revenue quarterly or as otherwise mutually agreed to by the department and department of revenue:
(a) The name of the record owner of the vessel;
(b) The vessel's hull identification number;
(c) The amount of the fee paid under RCW 88.02.640(5);
(d) The date the vessel first entered the waters of this state;
(e) The expiration date for the permit; and
(f) Any other information mutually agreed to by the department and department of revenue.
(7) The department must adopt rules to implement this section, including rules on issuing and displaying the nonresident vessel permit.
[ 2015 3rd sp.s. c 6 § 802; 2011 c 171 § 133; 2010 c 161 § 1027.]
NOTES:
Expiration date—2017 c 323; 2015 3rd sp.s. c 6 §§ 802-805: "(1) Sections 802 and 804, chapter 6, Laws of 2015 3rd sp. sess. expire July 1, 2026;
(2) Section 803, chapter 6, Laws of 2015 3rd sp. sess. expires January 1, 2026; and
(3) Section 805, chapter 6, Laws of 2015 3rd sp. sess. expires January 1, 2031." [ 2017 c 323 § 302; 2015 3rd sp.s. c 6 § 2303.]

Effective dates—2015 3rd sp.s. c 6: See note following RCW 82.04.4266.

Findings—Intent—Tax preference performance statement—2017 c 323; 2015 3rd sp.s. c 6 §§ 802-805: See note following RCW 88.02.640.

Intent—Effective date—2011 c 171: See notes following RCW 4.24.210.

Effective date—Intent—Legislation to reconcile chapter 161, Laws of 2010 and other amendments made during the 2010 legislative session—2010 c 161: See notes following RCW 46.04.013.

 

[tiltrider1]

(5)(a) The amount of the nonresident vessel permit fee is:
(i) For a vessel owned by a nonresident natural person, twenty-five dollars; and
(ii) For a nonresident vessel owner that is not a natural person, the fee is equal to:
(A) Twenty-five dollars per foot for vessels between thirty and ninety-nine feet in length;
(B) Thirty dollars per foot for vessels between one hundred and one hundred twenty feet in length; and
(C) Thirty-seven dollars and fifty cents per foot for vessels between one hundred twenty-one and one hundred sixty-four feet in length. The fee must be multiplied by the extreme length of the vessel in feet, rounded up to the nearest whole foot.
(b) The fee must be paid by the vessel owner to the department. Any moneys remaining from the fee after the payment of costs to administer the permit must be allocated to counties by the state treasurer for approved boating safety programs under RCW 88.02.650.
(c) A nonresident vessel owner that is not a natural person may not obtain more than two nonresident vessel permits under RCW 88.02.620 within any thirty-six month period.

 

[tiltrider1]

A natural person is presumed a resident if the natural person meets at least two of the following conditions:
(a) Maintains a residence in this state for personal use;
(b) Has a Washington state driver's license or a Washington state resident hunting or fishing license;
(c) Uses a Washington state address for federal income tax or state tax purposes;
(d) Has previously maintained a residence in this state for personal use and has not established a permanent residence outside the state of Washington, such as a person who retires and lives in a motor home or vessel that is not permanently attached to any property;
(e) Claims this state as his or her residence for obtaining eligibility to hold a public office or for judicial actions;
(f) Is a custodial parent with a child attending public schools in this state.

 

[twistedtree]

Those are indeed the laws, but refer back to post #11 on the conflicting interpretations and implementation of those laws within the WA DOR. It all seems pretty clear, at least it did to me, until I had entered and departed the state multiple times over the course of several years, and used repair affidavits several times. After the first letter from the DOR followed by a phone call, it became very clear that it was actually very unclear, and that's when I started getting spooked.

But reading the laws again does remind me that boats titled to individuals are treated differently from boats titled in an LLC or Corporation. WA is understandably trying to prevent residents from dodging the tax by placing ownership in a non-resident LLC, and enjoying the exemptions of a visiting non-resident boat. These laws changed in 2015 to be more flexible for LLC owned boats, but you need to demonstrate that all the LLC owners are non-residents, and need to get approval in advance to get a visitor's permit. I also see something new which is that you are limited to two extension permits in a 3 year period. So LLC-owned boats are still at a distinct disadvantage when it comes to visiting WA.

 

[Crusty Chief]

And that folks is why we use the 60 day rule with regards to traveling through Washington and will continue to exercise that rule for other states, such as California.
Hope that rule applies in foreign countries also. Will see.

 

[BandB]

And that folks is why we use the 60 day rule with regards to traveling through Washington and will continue to exercise that rule for other states, such as California.
Hope that rule applies in foreign countries also. Will see.

Actually California is much different and that one is more clear than Washington, although can be challenging. California does not require registration for a documented vessel. Also, California exempts vessels currently and lawfully numbered (registered) by another state that are principally used outside California.

Now comes the issue of property tax in California. It's handled on a county by county basis but is charged on all boats there on January 1 and, at least in some locations, the tax collectors are very diligent in checking marinas. Boats can be at yards getting worked on and they'll be assessed there. You can have a boat slip and it can be empty and the boat in Mexico but the boat will be assessed based on the slip and "situs." California assessors are also famous for looking at documentation. Here's from Sacramento's site in that regard,

A documented vessel is assessed at the "place of documentation" unless it is kept elsewhere and notice of this fact has been sent to the Assessor of the county in which it is documented.​

Now, what is place of documentation? Oh that gets to be quite an argument. Most often the mailing address used.

Now that brings us to the boat just passing through as we were doing one January 1. Many will tell you that if it's there it must pay. However, the law doesn't read that way and we met with and got a written confirmation from San Diego that our boat would not be subject to their tax as it arrived on December 15 and would be leaving on January 8 and was on a transit from Washington to Florida. We even gave a copy to the marina to give to the assessor when he showed up.

So forget all you learned about Washington and generally California is much more lenient. Just be aware of the January 1 pitfall.

Otherwise in most states, 60 days is the number. In some 90 days is the number. Still check though for each state.

I haven't found an issue in any country as most require some form of cruising permit and it's validity is made clear as to how long. Others make it clear upon entry.

 

[BandB]

And that folks is why we use the 60 day rule with regards to traveling through Washington and will continue to exercise that rule for other states, such as California.
Hope that rule applies in foreign countries also. Will see.

But the 60 day rule you're using may not be safe in Washington depending on frequency of trips.

 

[Crusty Chief]

Our general rule is-
Try not to spend any more than 60 days in the state in a year. So far we have done well in achieving that rule.
Also, we base the first day in the state when we dock in the state for the first time. We found that Washington state marinas in general are required by the state to record each vessel that pays moorage. One exception to this is a marina operated by a Native community. They dont have to follow the reporting rules and most dont.
So glad Alaska doesn’t have such rules, they welcomed us with open arms and as a result, willingly supported each community.
Each time we checked into Canada thru customs (very easy process, compared to US) we were granted up to 180 days.
It really is a shame that states are so tax hungry towards non-residents, I would spend more and stay longer if it were not for this. This would be an interesting topic or poll item in another thread.

 

[twistedtree]

Our general rule is-
Try not to spend any more than 60 days in the state in a year. So far we have done well in achieving that rule.
Also, we base the first day in the state when we dock in the state for the first time. We found that Washington state marinas in general are required by the state to record each vessel that pays moorage. One exception to this is a marina operated by a Native community. They dont have to follow the reporting rules and most dont.
So glad Alaska doesn’t have such rules, they welcomed us with open arms and as a result, willingly supported each community.
Each time we checked into Canada thru customs (very easy process, compared to US) we were granted up to 180 days.
It really is a shame that states are so tax hungry towards non-residents, I would spend more and stay longer if it were not for this. This would be an interesting topic or poll item in another thread.

Our approach was similar. We limited time in WA to 60 days of use per year, with the anniversary on the day we entered WA for the first time. If we left the boat unused, we left it with a marine service company along with a list of projects, and filed work affidavit(s) to cover that time. There are no rules about how long the work list has to be, nor how long the service organization can take to do it. At times we would return to the boat and use it for some amount of time. We counted those days towards our allowed 60 days of use. A such, I believe we were 100% compliant by all interpretations.

After filing the first Affidavit on the third year doing this, I got a letter from the DOR with a multiple choice questions. Paraphrasing, my choices were:

1) I have paid WA taxes, and here is my receipt

2) I have paid taxes elsewhere, and here is my receipt.

3) I have not paid taxes and here is my check.

It was one of those "have you stopped beating your wife" questions. That's when the conversation started with them, and they started throwing out all sorts of rules, regulations, and procedures that are not documented or published anywhere. I referred her back to the actual laws that I was following, and asked where her interpretation was documented since I though I was following all the published rules.

They eventually went silent on me, which brings up another thing we experienced. The DOR will never acknowledge or tell you that you are in compliance. They just won't assert your are not in compliance. They always leave the door open to reassert non-compliance.

 

[BruceK]

This extraordinary discussion of fiscal uncertainty, doubt,potential liability and resulting anxiety has to be the result of conflicts caused by State raised taxes. I imagine it applies to a lot more things than boats. Yet your States are federated(I think) into the United States of America, which I think also raises taxes. If taxes of this type were only raised federally....

 

[Insequent]

When I bought my boat in Edmonds in 2012 one broker advised me to just go the 60 day route. His view was that I could then visit Canada for one day and re-enter WA for another 60 days. And repeat again. He had another take that I have not noticed discussed above, and that is a boat listed for sale does not need to comply with the time limits. He said that he changes his own boat often, flipping them to some extent, and any boat he owns is also listed for sale. It was implied that he is not paying any tax on these boats.

Another broker and I discussed the tax situation on a boat I was interested in. In that case the owner (non-US citizen, like myself) had not, and was not, paying any tax, and had been there for a number of years in a quiet little marina. The broker was perplexed as to how the guy was getting away with it. Just lucky I think, and I suspect the State has likely upped their performance/compliance/enforcement since then.

I decided to take the $500 one year permit option, available only at time of purchase, via the marine title company I used. I intended to leave well before the year was up but had no fixed date in mind. I ended up doing a longer refit than initially planned. Timing got tight, and I tried to use the repair affidavit route to get an extension to the one year period. No dice. One year was it, no extension possible. So the pressure was on to splash, get to Canada, and not come back to WA for 2 years. Nuts, really. My refit paid lots of sales tax in WA, and had I been able to stay longer there would have been additional R&M and thus more sales tax etc for WA.

 

[twistedtree]

When I bought my boat in Edmonds in 2012 one broker advised me to just go the 60 day route. His view was that I could then visit Canada for one day and re-enter WA for another 60 days. And repeat again. He had another take that I have not noticed discussed above, and that is a boat listed for sale does not need to comply with the time limits. He said that he changes his own boat often, flipping them to some extent, and any boat he owns is also listed for sale. It was implied that he is not paying any tax on these boats.

Another broker and I discussed the tax situation on a boat I was interested in. In that case the owner (non-US citizen, like myself) had not, and was not, paying any tax, and had been there for a number of years in a quiet little marina. The broker was perplexed as to how the guy was getting away with it. Just lucky I think, and I suspect the State has likely upped their performance/compliance/enforcement since then.

I decided to take the $500 one year permit option, available only at time of purchase, via the marine title company I used. I intended to leave well before the year was up but had no fixed date in mind. I ended up doing a longer refit than initially planned. Timing got tight, and I tried to use the repair affidavit route to get an extension to the one year period. No dice. One year was it, no extension possible. So the pressure was on to splash, get to Canada, and not come back to WA for 2 years. Nuts, really. My refit paid lots of sales tax in WA, and had I been able to stay longer there would have been additional R&M and thus more sales tax etc for WA.

I'm sure lots of people get away with lots of stuff.

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

Our approach was similar. We limited time in WA to 60 days of use per year, with the anniversary on the day we entered WA for the first time. If we left the boat unused, we left it with a marine service company along with a list of projects, and filed work affidavit(s) to cover that time. There are no rules about how long the work list has to be, nor how long the service organization can take to do it. At times we would return to the boat and use it for some amount of time. We counted those days towards our allowed 60 days of use. A such, I believe we were 100% compliant by all interpretations.

After filing the first Affidavit on the third year doing this, I got a letter from the DOR with a multiple choice questions. Paraphrasing, my choices were:

1) I have paid WA taxes, and here is my receipt

2) I have paid taxes elsewhere, and here is my receipt.

3) I have not paid taxes and here is my check.

It was one of those "have you stopped beating your wife" questions. That's when the conversation started with them, and they started throwing out all sorts of rules, regulations, and procedures that are not documented or published anywhere. I referred her back to the actual laws that I was following, and asked where her interpretation was documented since I though I was following all the published rules.

They eventually went silent on me, which brings up another thing we experienced. The DOR will never acknowledge or tell you that you are in compliance. They just won't assert your are not in compliance. They always leave the door open to reassert non-compliance.

You my friend are on their naughty list. Be carful. I got busted and it was a 15K boat bill. What was more disturbing one of my "friends" turned me in. My lawyer told me I should have gone to Alaska first before entering the Columbia River...

 

[dhays]

I would like to just point out, that while the confusing mix of RCWs and WACs in Washington State is a real pain for a few boaters, it is a very minor issue for the DOL and DOR.

It would be wonderful if the governor could create a task force to look at all the WACs and RCWs affecting boaters like ourselves and propose changes in the laws that would reconcile and simplify them. I don't think there would actually be opposition to the idea. However, time, money, and energy are always at a premium. I don't think that the problems of a few boaters trying to get out of paying a use tax are ever going to be important enough for the state to make the effort.

As others have pointed out, I do think that to a small extend, the confusion creates lost business opportunities for WA. Again, it isn't big enough issue to warrant attention.

 

[BandB]

This extraordinary discussion of fiscal uncertainty, doubt,potential liability and resulting anxiety has to be the result of conflicts caused by State raised taxes. I imagine it applies to a lot more things than boats. Yet your States are federated(I think) into the United States of America, which I think also raises taxes. If taxes of this type were only raised federally....

A lot of people push for more states rights and less federal participation. However, I think the number of states and all the conflicting laws is a real problem. That's without even getting into the laws of cities and counties. At one time the states were far apart and people didn't do a lot in multiple states, but then transportation and communication made the change. Internet is changing it more with companies like Amazon that do business in all states.

Imagine what a company like Amazon deals with just on sales tax. Every state has different rates and different laws and they have to file returns and pay in most of those states now. But it's worse. Every county has different rates in most states and sometimes cities and counties have a separate tax. So they have to report their sales by county.

Something as simple as traffic laws vary by state. Laws like age of consent laws are different by state. Look at marijuana now. The federal government says it's illegal in all situations, some states say it's legal, some say it's legal only for medical use. Then one city treats it as a ticketable offense and another treats it as arrest and jail.

In so many ways it's like traveling in 50 countries. I remember when CB radios were huge. At the time it was illegal to have one in Virginia.

People who live near state lines shop across state lines all the time to avoid sales taxes. New Hampshire gets huge business from Bostonians who cross the state line to a state without sales tax.

So, as you surmised, boating is just a small part of it. However, as you're talking taxes from $6k on a $100k boat to $60k on a million dollar boat or $600k on a ten million dollar boat it's definitely an attention catcher. When FL set the $18k limit, they picked up a lot of boats that otherwise would have been documented offshore.

Here's a small example of the situation. The cost of registering a car is very high in Mississippi, can easily run $500-$1000 per year. In TN it's around $77 per year. So a lot of people in Northern Mississippi tempted. So, for a Mississippi resident to register their car in another state when they keep it in Mississippi is a felony.

 

[BruceK]

Australia does have some state specific taxes,which vary state to state. Some are minor, some not. Some levy Land Tax on investment property and very high value primary residences in some states and not others, based on land values, it can be horrendous.
But, in the main, tax is collected federally and divided between the states, pursuant to certain guidelines,following an annual "discussion" recently likened to offering a tray of hot chips to a flock of seagulls.

 

[BandB]

Australia does have some state specific taxes,which vary state to state. Some are minor, some not. Some levy Land Tax on investment property and very high value primary residences in some states and not others, based on land values, it can be horrendous.
But, in the main, tax is collected federally and divided between the states, pursuant to certain guidelines,following an annual "discussion" recently likened to offering a tray of hot chips to a flock of seagulls.

Well, you have states, Canada has provinces. But Australia has 6 states plus some territories and Canada has 10 provinces, but we have 50 states and 16 territories.

 

[Lou_tribal]

Well, you have states, Canada has provinces. But Australia has 6 states plus some territories and Canada has 10 provinces, but we have 50 states and 16 territories.

Canada has 10 provinces and 3 territories.

L

 

[ranger58sb]

In so many ways it's like traveling in 50 countries. I remember when CB radios were huge. At the time it was illegal to have one in Virginia.

Don't remember ever hearing that. But I do know radar detectors were illegal in VA, dunno if they still are...

-Chris

 

[sunchaser]

Washington and California are not tax friendly to US boaters. They need their tax dollars to pay for unfunded state pensions

BC, OR and Mexico are US boater tax friendly, sucking boating dollars their way. Find a tax free niche and be happy. Or, bite the bullet and pay the taxes. Either way indeed works.

 

[sunchaser]

Don't remember ever hearing that. But I do know radar detectors were illegal in VA, dunno if they still are...

-Chris

Speeding is illegal in VA too.

 

[BandB]

Don't remember ever hearing that. But I do know radar detectors were illegal in VA, dunno if they still are...

-Chris

Sorry...it was radar detectors, not CB's. Now the Porsche issue makes sense as it was integrated.