Punishment Tax for Hybrid Owners

[corncobs]

If you combine those two ideas the mileage tax should be based on the average MPG for this class. If your car achieves less you pay more if you get better MPG you pay less. That should be enough incentive to buy more fuel efficient which brings up the average and the tax gets readjusted.

 

Just like the window sticker for the fuel efficiency and energy efficiency compares to the average of the car class.

 

Should be simple and fair but probably not for politicians.

[acdii]

What about farm equipment? They should also pay their fair share, they use the roads too, and you should see some of the damaged done by their equipment. Gouges in the roadbed, edges busted up, shifting and uneven surfaces.

 

No new taxes until the current taxes are accounted for and used where they were supposed to be used in the first place is how I see it. They should ALL be fired!

[terryb]

 

Living in TX where there is a similar proposal on the books I can answer your question, from my perspective anyway. Tax credit is Federal, EV tax is state. I know there may be some states on the list considering this that also offer a state income tax credit for the vehicles so one size does not fit all. I'm not at all surprised that TX would do this being an "oil" state. Also being predominantly right-wing, anything that can be done to sink something the "big government" is trying to do is up for consideration.

 

I can't say that I am totally opposed to this type of fee. I will agree that it makes sense since my car using the roads for 12,000 miles per year generates less revenue to repair those roads through use of less gas. But that argument only works if the gas tax monies are actually being used for public road repair and not just ending up in the general fund where other items could tap into it.

 

My biggest issue is being singled out as an PHEV owner. I'm up for doing my fair share. But what about everyone using public transportation? I'm not familiar with how it works for public transportation with regard to the gas tax for road maintenance. Does the city pay this tax on the fuel consumed by buses? If so, is it an appropriate ratio compared to the number of fewer vehicles potentially using/wearing down the roads?

 

I don't have all the answers but the way this is coming off is that PHEV and EV drivers are being singled out as a Band-Aid on the larger problem. People trying to drive less or more efficiently to save money yet the expense to maintain the infrastructure continues to remain stagnant or rise and cannot be fulfilled by the shortfall of revenues. Another example of how government, big and small, still has not learned how to adapt.

My information so far is that the legislation is an increase across the board in the vehicle registratin fee of $30. The funds to be used for road work.

[acdii]

My information so far is that the legislation is an increase across the board in the vehicle registratin fee of $30. The funds to be used for road work.

Across the board is better than singling out individual types. Ours went up here too, cost $103 to renew each car.

[terryb]

Across the board is better than singling out individual types. Ours went up here too, cost $103 to renew each car.

I think it will take me up to $83.

[hybridbear]

In MN license registration taxes are based on value of your vehicle. More expensive vehicles cost more when new and each subsequent year. Once the base value for your vehicle gets below a certain amount the registration tax drops to about $45 per year. On our FFH the first year cost over $400, next year should be over $300 still. Our 2006 Accord Hybrid cost over $100 for registration when it was a 6 year old car in 2012 whereas our 2003 Saab 9-5 Aero was only $60, which is still not the cheapest rate.

[hybridbear]

Exactly! If the goal of the tax is to improve roads and encourage less gas consumption then gas tax is the best tax. If it is to encourage less driving then a per mile tax is best. Gas tax seems to be the most fair since it encourages people to buy more fuel efficient vehicles AND drive less by encouraging people to reduce their gas consumption

 

Sure, but in that case the tax system doesn't stimulate energy efficiency and less oil dependency. If you pay by the mile, what incentive would you have to buy an efficient car and actually use less gas?

[djminfll]

It cost me $403 to register my FFH on 2/18, having a new license plate issued. The plate has to be renewed on my birthday, which is 6/6. So it cost $403 for 3.5 months, then a new registration fee of $73 for another year. My previous car was a 2007 Volvo S60, and I believe it cost the same to renew annual registration for that car which was only worth about $10K when I sold it in March.

[jeff_h]

Exactly! If the goal of the tax is to improve roads and encourage less gas consumption then gas tax is the best tax. If it is to encourage less driving then a per mile tax is best. Gas tax seems to be the most fair since it encourages people to buy more fuel efficient vehicles AND drive less by encouraging people to reduce their gas consumption

 

That may sound reasonable except when it comes to commercial vehicles like plumbers, electricians, Fedex, etc that drive a lot of miles in the course of their everyday work. We've already seen some of these services put a "fuel surcharge" on their costs - having a mileage tax would probably prompt each of these types of business to place a "distance surcharge" as part of their price structure, which I don't think many would like.

[hybridbear]

I'd think those companies would favor a gas tax increase over a mileage tax since they can control their gas use and lower it by buying more fuel efficient vehicles, they cannot do much to reduce the miles they drive

 

 

That may sound reasonable except when it comes to commercial vehicles like plumbers, electricians, Fedex, etc that drive a lot of miles in the course of their everyday work. We've already seen some of these services put a "fuel surcharge" on their costs - having a mileage tax would probably prompt each of these types of business to place a "distance surcharge" as part of their price structure, which I don't think many would like.

[milleron]

No, no, no, no, no to any and all ideas on increasing taxes in any way. Quibbling over the fairest way to raise the tax is like arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. If the politicians, damn their eyes, don't have enough money to pay for road repair, it's their JOB, for which they're PAID with MY TAXES, to find a way to do it with the money we're giving them, which is already scandalous. To anyone who says this approach is overly simplistic, let me point out that by just doing their job and wiping out the obscenely ludicrous set of IRS regulations (which make the founding fathers writhe in their graves) they would save enough money and produce enough additional revenue to pay for all the road repairs in the nation. Never vote for any new tax . . . unless maybe it's for a prison.

[milleron]

In MN license registration taxes are based on value of your vehicle. More expensive vehicles cost more when new and each subsequent year. Once the base value for your vehicle gets below a certain amount the registration tax drops to about $45 per year. On our FFH the first year cost over $400, next year should be over $300 still. Our 2006 Accord Hybrid cost over $100 for registration when it was a 6 year old car in 2012 whereas our 2003 Saab 9-5 Aero was only $60, which is still not the cheapest rate.

 

Well, those are excise taxes that in most states that have them take the place of some income tax or property tax. They're not claiming that all that money is earmarked for road maintenance, are they? I think that's a horse of a different color, isn't it?

[hybridbear]

 

Well, those are excise taxes that in most states that have them take the place of some income tax or property tax. They're not claiming that all that money is earmarked for road maintenance, are they? I think that's a horse of a different color, isn't it?

In MN they claim that all money from sales tax on new/used cars and from yearly license/registration taxes goes to road maintenance and public transportation. I believe here these funds do not go to the state's general fund. When the recession hurt car sales and lowered the sales tax revenue the state received from car sales then the funding to road construction and public transit was considerably cut.

 

MN has some of the highest taxes in the US. Our sales tax is currently at 6.5% on cars but closer to 8% on everything else. Income taxes here are quite high and property taxes are how the county/city governments get their money. The state government doesn't collect property taxes.

[acdii]

only 6.5%? 7% and 8%+ on all else here. Chitcago is 10.5%! I bought a coffee, cost 1$ had 11 cent tax.

[hybridbear]

only 6.5%? 7% and 8%+ on all else here. Chitcago is 10.5%! I bought a coffee, cost 1$ had 11 cent tax.

 

In downtown Mpls the sales tax is above 10%. Statewide sales tax is 6.5%. In Hennepin county, where we live, there have been added sales taxes to pay for sports stadiums which increase our tax rate. Then within Minneapolis proper the tax rate is even higher because the city has added addition sales taxes to pay for city projects. Within Minneapolis proper the sales tax is 7.775%, in the suburbs within Hennepin county it is 7.275%. Taxes on alcohol, tobacco, rental cars and hotels are much higher, closer to 15%.

[mokee]

MN has some of the highest taxes in the US.

 

Minnesota, like Illinois, is a progressive state.

Edited May 5, 2013 by mokee

[GrySql]

then gas tax is the best tax. a per mile tax is best.

I tend to disagree, there is no such thing as a 'best' tax.

 

'A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well.'

[hybridbear]

Article about this very topic

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1083898_the-gas-tax-system-is-broken-are-electric-cars-at-fault

 

I find it interesting a comment posted by a reader saying they could tax tires since everyone needs tires. The problem with that is that the cost of tires would then become astronomical.

 

Suppose you buy tires every 60,000 miles. In 60,000 miles a person driving the approximate fleet average of 25 MPG would have purchased 2,400 gallons of gas. If the needed revenue would raise gas taxes to approximately $.50/gal nationwide that would mean a "tire tax" of $1200 per set or $300 per tire!! That seems like a good idea until you examine the numbers, then you see it doesn't work.

 

One concern about a per mile tax is that it could become a big bill all at one time for motorists. Suppose the government is looking to replace gas taxes with a per mile tax based on needing the equivalent of $.50/gal in taxes. If a gallon of gas gets you 25 miles on average that would amount to $.02/mile in taxes. That means that a motorist driving 12,000 miles per year would be charged $240/year. Another issue with per mile taxes is about who gets the money...right now if you are driving on MN roads you are likely buying gas in MN and thus paying MN gas taxes. If you drive across the country and stop and buy gas in various states along the way then you are contributing money to each state who's roads you used. If a per mile tax is collected by your home state then some states could suffer if they are a popular tourist destination, but who's home drivers do not drive a lot of miles.

 

Either way the system is broken. I think that we should be rewarded for buying a more fuel efficient vehicle and thus paying only about $.01/mile on average in gas taxes. People with the means and circumstances to buy a PHEV or a BEV should be also rewarded for their decision to help the environment. Raising the gas tax is then the best option

[acdii]

Harumph!

[B25Nut]

"Raising the gas tax is then the best option"

 

I feel this is correct and is the only logical option, but we have to watch it doesn't get out of control. The proposed Climate Protection Act of 2013 will impose a $20 "fee" on every ton of CO2 produced. That works out to about a 30 cent tax on each gallon of gas. The $20 increases to $34.50 over ten years, which is about 52 cents per gallon. Every other aspect of our lives that uses petroleum based products will also have a similar increase. The bill also gives a dividend to every household, so those that are non-productive will see it as free money to buy more of their stuff.

[revelated]

My cousin was paid to test a device that tracked mileage and location purposed for charging road taxes on a per mile basis. Charging by the mile IMO seems fairer than by the gallon of fuel. My auto insurance rates were charged the same way. I did a vehicle health report, and the mileage was forwarded to the insurance company. I would assume that the above device would be standard equipment on new cars at some point in the future. I'm not fond of the idea that mileage and location are tracked, but like or not it is happening already.

Agree ONLY if every red cent is put towards road/freeway improvements and necessary expansion. If they take the money and dump it towards buses (who share the same screwed up roads) or questionable projects i.e. toll roads or anything else that doesn't benefit the common driver, then I don't agree.

 

Washington State for example puts more money to mass transit than the road system. The net effect is that there's a ton of expansion causing horrible traffic conditions, and a bunch of hippies who sue for every project that involves trees getting cut down, so the 405 as an example looks like a mountain path rather than a major freeway.

[rico567]

I've seen versions of this thread on other forums. Due to cars in general getting better mileage, and the proliferation of hybrids, the amount of revenue for highways (which comes in large part from motor fuel tax) has declined. There's been a lot of complaining in this thread, now let's see some creative solutions. Tax per mile is just saying "universal toll roads." Although there's nothing particularly creative about it, the first decent roads in this country (think colonial times) were toll roads. A "turn-pike" was the pole lowered across the road until the toll was collected. And given the condition of our highway infrastructure, folks, something's gotta give. And who more appropriate to pay than the users?

 

The following is a bit off-topic, but digressions are my specialty. You have been warned, so read no further unless you're interested.

 

We visited Italy for some weeks last October and November, driving quite a few miles during that time (although other miles were spent on the train, which is better). A lot of the urban driving we did was in sunny Campania (think Naples), in which most of the city streets and a lot of what pass for freeways are a nightmare. If you haven't been there and experienced it, it's useless writing about the whole scenario. Think extremely congested urban areas with bipolar drivers, and someone has ripped out most of the stoplights and traffic signs. It's a tragedy of a commons (you can Google that) writ large.

Then, for contrast, there's the big A1 autostrada that runs longitudinally from Naples all the way up North. We drove that from north of Orvieto to Naples, a couple hundred kilometers, in a new Renault Megane diesel. The entire highway experience on the A1 was just the same. It was like everything was brand new. Not a single chuckhole, not even perceptible dividers on the pavement, just smooth, seamless, comfortable travel. The rest areas were clean, plenty of parking, and even featured restaurants with good food! Why this night-and-day difference? It's a la carte travel, baby. When we got off, it was € 21 (about $25) for that 200 kilometers. You pay for what you get, and you get what you pay for.

Edited May 12, 2013 by rico567

[acdii]

I dont mind paying tolls as long as traffic flows well and the roads are smooth and well cared for. When I drove from IL to PA, most of it was via the tollway and it was all smooth sailing. When the Toll money goes 100% towards the roadway, then I have 0 issues paying it. This is why I am 100% against any NEW taxes, PERIOD. When the taxes actually are put INTO the pool that is only used to maintain the roads, then its a non issue, but we are talking about the government who pisses money away and steals it from other funds.

 

They would think twice if it all came out of their pay.

Edited May 13, 2013 by acdii

[jeff_h]

It's a la carte travel, baby. When we got off, it was € 21 (about $25) for that 200 kilometers. You pay for what you get, and you get what you pay for.

 

...where hybrids and conventional cars paid the same rate?

[acdii]

For that I really dont think it matters which type of car it is, although car and a truck should pay different rates based on their axle load. I dont look at that as a tax, but as a usage fee. Granted, I would not want to have to pay that every day just to go to work as it would be very expensive, but if traveling across country on Interstates, it would seem fair. At least in that case the fees are paid on the actual roads being used and not in a general coffer as a gas tax or mileage tax would be. Around here not only do we pay for the roads with the gas tax, but also our property taxes have road fees tacked on.