US Law and cruise ships

[masspector]

I am confused. I have read threads here on CC and news articles where it seems certain US laws apply to cruise ships and some do not. Why is that?

 

For example, someone quoted a US ADA law about people booking accessible rooms like the cruise line had to follow the US ADA law.

 

Also, in the recent HAL assualt, the perp was arrested by US authorities, I assume based on breaking a US criminal law.

 

If this is the case then why do the cruise lines not have to follow US minimum wage and tax laws? I do not get to pick and chose which laws I want to follow as a citizen, why should they as US based corps? And if they are not US based then why are they allowed to only follow some US laws?

[beachbum53]

I am confused. I have read threads here on CC and news articles where it seems certain US laws apply to cruise ships and some do not. Why is that?

 

For example, someone quoted a US ADA law about people booking accessible rooms like the cruise line had to follow the US ADA law.

 

Also, in the recent HAL assualt, the perp was arrested by US authorities, I assume based on breaking a US criminal law.

 

If this is the case then why do the cruise lines not have to follow US minimum wage and tax laws? I do not get to pick and chose which laws I want to follow as a citizen, why should they as US based corps? And if they are not US based then why are they allowed to only follow some US laws?

 

For your first two questions, I believe it has to do (at least in part) with the ship's home port, whether it's the U.S., Italy, Greece, or where ever. As to your question regarding wages and income tax, that has to do with where the ship's registry is. Since most cruise ships are not registered in the U.S., they are not subject to U.S. laws pertaining to wages and taxes.

[njhorseman]

US laws apply to foreign flagged ships only circumstances where US laws and regulations specify that they apply. If there are no US laws or regulations covering a specific situation, the cruise ship is subject to the laws of their flag country and international maritime law, not US law.

 

The United States Supreme Court ruled a few years ago that certain ADA provisions apply.

 

The reporting of crime is based on US laws stating how and to whom they must be reported.

 

There are no US laws requiring foreign-flagged cruise ships to follow US minimum wage laws or tax laws, so the laws of the flag country apply.

[CruiseIreland]

I am confused.

Also, in the recent HAL assualt, the perp was arrested by US authorities, I assume based on breaking a US criminal law

 

A crime against any US citizen, wherever in the world committed, can be investigated by US law enforcement(FBI). Apparently, the victim in the HAL case is a US citizen. If US employment law applied to cruise lines, fewer of us could afford to cruise. Ken

[cruiseryyc]

With regard the recent HAL incident, I believe the crew member was arrested by US authorities because the first port of call after the incident, was in the US.

[cherylandtk]

The first port was Roatan, Honduras where the pax was disembarked and flown to the US. The FBI is investigating because it was an attack on a US citizen. As noted on the news article on CC "The FBI is investigating the attack under the special territorial and maritime jurisdiction, a legal code that gives the Bureau jurisdiction over crimes committed against a U.S. citizen even if the crime occurs in international waters. Investigators from the FBI as well as Customs and Border Protection and the Broward Sheriff's Office met the ship when it returned to Port Everglades in Fort Lauderdale on Sunday, February 16, according to FBI Special Agent Michael D. Leverock."

Edited February 21, 2014 by cherylandtk

[navybankerteacher]

I am confused. I have read threads here on CC and news articles where it seems certain US laws apply to cruise ships and some do not. Why is that?

 

For example, someone quoted a US ADA law about people booking accessible rooms like the cruise line had to follow the US ADA law.

 

Also, in the recent HAL assualt, the perp was arrested by US authorities, I assume based on breaking a US criminal law.

 

If this is the case then why do the cruise lines not have to follow US minimum wage and tax laws? I do not get to pick and chose which laws I want to follow as a citizen, why should they as US based corps? And if they are not US based then why are they allowed to only follow some US laws?

 

The cruise lines only follow the US laws they are required to observe. US labor laws do not fall within that sphere. In fact, you are not required to follow US laws when you are not in the US: buying and smoking Havana cigars, for example (or certain other smoking materials), drinking liquor if you are under US age, etc.

[Capt_BJ]

in many cases what happens is the US says ....

 

this is the way we are going to play the game OR you will not be allowed to load passengers in a US port . . .

 

For example the US has no authority to perform many of the inspections performed on cruise ships but does have the authority to prohibit loading passengers or cargo in a US port. Any commercial vessel that calls in a US port can be inspected for pollution laws and basic safety for example but a cruise ship gets more attention. If the cruise ship wants to load passengers they must pass USCG inspection which is basically applying the SOLAS recommendations and covers things like the safety drill; and allow the 'food and kitchen' inspections so often read about. But many things are NOT inspected - for example there is no US authority so far as the medical care staff or facilities . . .

 

A recently added requirement after an incident requires certain type of crimes to be reported and permit investigation. What will happen as a result of the investigation can vary but going as far back as the early 70's and smuggling drugs at sea, if the investigation produces strong evidence of a crime there is rapid negotiation at the State level to the flag state of the ship, often resulting in authorizing or even REQUESTING the US take law enforcement action - sometimes to enforce US law, and other times to arrest and detain for flag state action. This is how the US Coast Guard arrests non US citizens found in possession of drugs on the high seas . . . via a standing treaty with the country or a case by case authorization. This is how I found myself on the stand in a Bahamas court testifying as the arresting officer, a US Coast Guard Officer with temporary authority vested by the government of the Bahamas, to make arrests in Bahamian waters on their behalf . . . .

[Hlitner]

There are several different federal laws and regulations. The case law on the ADA and cruise ships is quite interesting. Although it has been held that the ADA applies to foreign flagged (that would be nearly all cruise ships) sailing in US waters, that seems to have tempered by statements that it applies only as long as it does not interfere with the normal operations of a ship. Bottom line is that most ships now try to accommodate some disabled but they are not fully compliant with the ADA.

 

The issue of the HAL crewman being arrested and turned over to the FBI is the result of another federal law (supported by the courts) which gives the Federal Government and FBI jurisdiction over crimes committed against US Citizens in international waters.

 

And there are quite a few other laws like the PVSA (Passenger Vessels Services Act) that also impact on cruising in or out of the USA.

 

Hank

[Gunner22aa]

Cruiseryyc has it right. Under maritime law the first port of entry after a crime is committed has jurisdiction over the crime. Had it been China the US would have had no say in the matter. As to the USA claiming jurisdiction it is totally up to the other country to waive or not their right to proceed with trial and conviction. Any countries laws are enforceable within their boundaries including claimed off shore waters but no further.

Edited February 21, 2014 by Gunner22aa

[navybankerteacher]

Cruiseryyc has it right. Under maritime law the first port of entry after a crime is committed has jurisdiction over the crime. Had it been China the US would have had no say in the matter.

 

Not so. The fact that the crime was committed against a US citizen does involve US authorities - typically the FBI. This was the case when the honeymooner went over the side from a Royal Caribbean ship in the Mediterranean a few years ago.

[Capt_BJ]

Not so. The fact that the crime was committed against a US citizen does involve US authorities - typically the FBI. This was the case when the honeymooner went over the side from a Royal Caribbean ship in the Mediterranean a few years ago.

 

which resulted in a new US regulationrequiring INVESTIGATION clearance ... and if you don't want to play, stay away from US ports.

 

This 'incident' caused visibility and an attempt to change things ... but if you go back and read the congressional testimony you will begin to appreciate the issues of jurisdiction .....

 

The FBI does not have arrest authority outside of the US

 

What US law enforcement agency does? (there IS one)

 

Let's flip the page

 

A citizen of XXX is on a US flagged ship and is subject to a crime. So the Navy of XXX can stop the ship and conduct an investigation and make arrests? Or the authorities of XXX can make arrests when the ship arrives in Ft Lauderdale?

 

Enquiring minds want to know . . .

[Cruzman]

To the OP; have you not noticed that our own gov't has for some time, chosen which parts of which laws to enforce. Try Obamacare, border enforcement to name a couple. Why not include maritime law?

[masspector]

To the OP; have you not noticed that our own gov't has for some time, chosen which parts of which laws to enforce. Try Obamacare, border enforcement to name a couple. Why not include maritime law?

 

This.

 

Thank you for making my point. Thank you for all of the other replies as well. It is a point of jurisdiction, as others have pointed out. If cruise ships want to carry US passengers from US ports, they should obey ALL US laws as any US corporation must. I am sure Walmart would love to pay $2/hr and not pay corporate income taxes, but they cannot. Why should cruise companies? I know they are following the laws as written but it is just another example of special interest loopholes due to strong arm lobbying. Not sure why the cruise industry would have so much clout with Congress.

[Capt_BJ]

wanna guess what your 7 day cruise price will increase by if the line must pay US Union prices????

[Gunner22aa]

If cruise ships want to carry Canadian passengers from Canadian ports they should obey our laws and those from China who get on there as well as all other foreign passengers (I boarded in China) then become subject to all Chinese laws on board. As much as I love my friends from south of the 49th your laws only apply to me when I'm in your country as do my laws apply to you when your in mine. You do not rule the planet.

[njhorseman]

This.

 

Thank you for making my point. Thank you for all of the other replies as well. It is a point of jurisdiction, as others have pointed out. If cruise ships want to carry US passengers from US ports, they should obey ALL US laws as any US corporation must. I am sure Walmart would love to pay $2/hr and not pay corporate income taxes, but they cannot. Why should cruise companies? I know they are following the laws as written but it is just another example of special interest loopholes due to strong arm lobbying. Not sure why the cruise industry would have so much clout with Congress.

 

You might want do a little research on the corporate income tax issue. Many large US corporations....much larger than any of the cruise lines, often pay little or nothing in federal income taxes. (think of names like GE...and Apple Computer, which has some well-publicized tax avoidance schemes) It's a function of the tax code, not of any great influence or clout that the cruise industry has. The cruise industry is just taking advantage of the same tax code as GE, Apple, etc.

[masspector]

wanna guess what your 7 day cruise price will increase by if the line must pay US Union prices????

 

Not sure what you mean by Union prices, I assume pay, but other tourism companies like US hotels follow US wage laws and I do not see them going out of business or out of reach of average consumers.

 

I bet if you took what we pay as "mandatory tips" and add it to the base pay it is close to or at minimum wage. Just quit calling it mandatory tips and put it in the price of the cruise. The cruiser pays either way.

[masspector]

You might want do a little research on the corporate income tax issue. Many large US corporations....much larger than any of the cruise lines, often pay little or nothing in federal income taxes. (think of names like GE...and Apple Computer, which has some well-publicized tax avoidance schemes) It's a function of the tax code, not of any great influence or clout that the cruise industry has. The cruise industry is just taking advantage of the same tax code as GE, Apple, etc.

 

It is my understanding, based on some industry articles that I read that cruise lines do not use tax loopholes, they are just flat out not required to pay corporate income taxes because of the way they are set up.

 

This is a quote from this article http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2...-industry.html

 

"Cruise lines gain another enormous advantage by registering as a foreign corporation. The Internal Revenue Code exempts any income from airlines or ships from taxation as long as the foreign nation gives the same benefit to American corporations. Neither Liberia nor Panama nor any other open-registry country levies a corporate income tax.

 

This business model is every corporation’s dream. Indeed it has been so successful that Carnival and Royal Caribbean have been able to buy out their smaller competitors while expanding their fleets with new ships. Today the two firms account for 66 percent of the global market; Carnival at 45 percent and Royal Caribbean at 21 percent."

 

Do airlines do this? I have never heard of it from airlines.

Edited February 22, 2014 by masspector

[dsrdsrdsr]

The FBI does not have arrest authority outside of the US

 

What US law enforcement agency does? (there IS one)

 

Let's flip the page

 

A citizen of XXX is on a US flagged ship and is subject to a crime. So the Navy of XXX can stop the ship and conduct an investigation and make arrests? Or the authorities of XXX can make arrests when the ship arrives in Ft Lauderdale?

 

Enquiring minds want to know . . .

The FBI may not have arrest authority outside the US, but that doesn't mean they can't investigate the crime. If, say, I'm wandering down the streets of Syria and spot a few American tourists, and gun them down, then I have committed a crime under US law. I mazy get away with it while in Syria, but if I come to the USA I won't be able to claim immunity.

 

As to the OP, a lot of the reason for different laws is because of where the activity takes place. Employment of the crew takes place on board ship and therefore is subject to US land-based rules. Wheras booking the cruise takes place in the USA and therefore is subject to ADA rules.

 

An equivalent would be if someone set up a Ruritanian company to run a Ruritanian restaurant in New York. If someone got ill from dodgy Ruritanian food hygiene practices, the company could be sued under US law, not Ruritanian. On the other hand, if they bought a boat and anchored outside US waters, and you took yourself there for a meal, you wouldn't get the protection of US law.

[njhorseman]

Not sure what you mean by Union prices, I assume pay, but other tourism companies like US hotels follow US wage laws and I do not see them going out of business or out of reach of average consumers.

 

I bet if you took what we pay as "mandatory tips" and add it to the base pay it is close to or at minimum wage. Just quit calling it mandatory tips and put it in the price of the cruise. The cruiser pays either way.

 

No...the "mandatory" tips, service charges, or whatever your favorite cruise line calls them wouldn't begin to cover the increased cost if US wage and hour laws applied. Crew members often work 10-12 hour days, 7 days a week for months at a time. Under US law there would be huge overtime costs and the need to employ additional crew in order to make their employment conditions legal. The unions would also require benefits such as health insurance, retirement, etc. Federal unemployment insurance taxes would have to be paid.

 

It would be a massive increase in labor costs that will come out of the pockets of cruisers, not the cruise lines.

[masspector]

If cruise ships want to carry Canadian passengers from Canadian ports they should obey our laws and those from China who get on there as well as all other foreign passengers (I boarded in China) then become subject to all Chinese laws on board. As much as I love my friends from south of the 49th your laws only apply to me when I'm in your country as do my laws apply to you when your in mine. You do not rule the planet.

 

I never said the US rules the planet. If you are in international waters you are in no one's country. Who's law do you follow? Why do cruise lines follow the no alcohol unless 21 or over when they have passengers from countries without that law? They are in the middle of the ocean, who is going to enforce the US law?

 

I agree, the root problem is the US govt, not the cruise lines. They are only doing what they can get away with, as all companies do. I just find it curious that they follow the US law on alcohol age and ADA while skirting tax and wage laws in the US.

[masspector]

No...the "mandatory" tips, service charges, or whatever your favorite cruise line calls them wouldn't begin to cover the increased cost if US wage and hour laws applied. Crew members often work 10-12 hour days, 7 days a week for months at a time. Under US law there would be huge overtime costs and the need to employ additional crew in order to make their employment conditions legal. The unions would also require benefits such as health insurance, retirement, etc. Federal unemployment insurance taxes would have to be paid.

 

It would be a massive increase in labor costs that will come out of the pockets of cruisers, not the cruise lines.[/QUOTE]

 

So in other words, we can cruise so cheap because they can legally pay the help crap?

[njhorseman]

It is my understanding, based on some industry articles that I read that cruise lines do not use tax loopholes, they are just flat out not required to pay corporate income taxes because of the way they are set up.

 

This is a quote from this article http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2...-industry.html

 

"Cruise lines gain another enormous advantage by registering as a foreign corporation. The Internal Revenue Code exempts any income from airlines or ships from taxation as long as the foreign nation gives the same benefit to American corporations. Neither Liberia nor Panama nor any other open-registry country levies a corporate income tax.

 

This business model is every corporation’s dream. Indeed it has been so successful that Carnival and Royal Caribbean have been able to buy out their smaller competitors while expanding their fleets with new ships. Today the two firms account for 66 percent of the global market; Carnival at 45 percent and Royal Caribbean at 21 percent."

 

Do airlines do this? I have never heard of it from airlines.

 

That link doesn't work, but I suspect to a certain extent they may confusing the flag countries of the ships with the cruise lines' corporate domiciles. The Saturday Evening Post is hardly a heavy-hitter in the financial news business.

 

However, if you look at one of the companies I named, Apple Computer, one the the major components of their tax strategy is to route income through subsidiary corporations domiciled in other countries, notably Ireland. The combination of US tax code and Irish tax code permits them to avoid paying taxes on a substantial percentage of their corporate income, so to that extent the cruise lines are really doing nothing more than Apple is.

[njhorseman]

 

So in other words, we can cruise so cheap because they can legally pay the help crap?

 

Yes, we have a winner!

 

PS: It's crap compared to what a US worker would make for the same number of hours, but it's not crap compared to what they would make in their home countries. That's why they take the cruise line jobs.

Edited February 22, 2014 by njhorseman