This is very funny - Road taxes and electric cars?

[ripvanwinkle]

This is very funny - I just heard the Oregon Legislature is proposing a road tax on electric vehicles. Since they don't buy gas, they don't pay the gas tax which is used for roads.
I thought the whole idea of electric cars was to remove ourselves from the fossil fuel crutch and help the enviroment.
www.leg.state.or.us/11reg/measures/hb2300.dir/hb2328.intro.html

[henryclay]

How do you pronouce conundrum?

[floridayankee]

Mar 29, 2011 19:09:10 GMT -5 ripvanwinkle said:

This is very funny - I just heard the Oregon Legislature is proposing a road tax on electric vehicles. Since they don't buy gas, they don't pay the gas tax which is used for roads.
I thought the whole idea of electric cars was to remove ourselves from the fossil fuel crutch and help the environment.

It is. Just because we remove ourselves from the fossil fuel crutch and help the environment, it doesn't mean we will remove our government from their crack like addiction to the gas tax dollars. Think smoking. Everybody knows it's bad for people to smoke. Everyone knows it also harms non-smokers. Still, government will not outright declare smoking illegal because they rely on the tax dollars the smokers fork over to feed their addictions.

[Angel!]

Electric vehicles still need paved roads to drive on.

[ugonow]

That is why they call them highway taxes,not gas taxes.

[973beachbum]

Mar 30, 2011 12:33:52 GMT -5 Angel! said:

Electric vehicles still need paved roads to drive on.

Where I live they need bridges too. and the transportation "trust fund" in NJ is funded from the gas tax. As we wean ourselves from gas we would need a new source of revenue to keep our roads and bridges maintained.

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

Where I live they need bridges too. and the transportation "trust fund" in NJ is funded from the gas tax. As we wean ourselves from gas we would need a new source of revenue to keep our roads and bridges maintained.

Well the two main highways, the Turnpike and Parkway are tolled....


Hey, anyone every wonder why in New Jersey, drivers park their cars in the driveway... but we drive our cars on the Parkway?

[Deleted]

wacca, wacca, wacca

[floridayankee]

Mar 30, 2011 12:52:37 GMT -5 Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ said:

Hey, anyone every wonder why in New Jersey, drivers park their cars in the driveway... but we drive our cars on the Parkway?

And why they have highways when they're sitting on the ground?

[floridayankee]

Mar 30, 2011 12:33:52 GMT -5 Angel! said:

Electric vehicles still need paved roads to drive on.

EV's can't drive on gravel?

[floridayankee]

It needs to be noted that this applies to "high mileage veicles", not just EV's. This includes gas/electric hybrids as well.

SECTION 2. { + Vehicle road usage charge. (1) Except as
provided in subsection (2) of this section, the registered owner
of an electric motor vehicle or plug-in hybrid electric motor
vehicle shall pay a vehicle road usage charge.
(2) A lessee of an electric motor vehicle or plug-in hybrid
electric motor vehicle shall pay a vehicle road usage charge.
(3) A person subject to the vehicle road usage charge shall pay
0.6 cents per mile for metered use of the highways in Oregon.
(4) This section does not apply to a vehicle dealer that holds
a certificate issued under ORS 822.005. + }

It's way too soon to make this move as I really doubt that there are enough of these vehicles out there to make for much of a financial windfall for the state, but a new tax like this in a down economy just may make a difference on whether or not to purchase these vehicles. You don't encourage green technology by finding new ways to tax the people that already pay premium to buy the product in the first place.

Stupid move IMHO.

[ChiTownVenture]

Mar 30, 2011 13:33:55 GMT -5 floridayankee said:

It needs to be noted that this applies to "high mileage veicles", not just EV's. This includes gas/electric hybrids as well.

SECTION 2. { + Vehicle road usage charge. (1) Except as
provided in subsection (2) of this section, the registered owner
of an electric motor vehicle or plug-in hybrid electric motor
vehicle shall pay a vehicle road usage charge.
(2) A lessee of an electric motor vehicle or plug-in hybrid
electric motor vehicle shall pay a vehicle road usage charge.
(3) A person subject to the vehicle road usage charge shall pay
0.6 cents per mile for metered use of the highways in Oregon.
(4) This section does not apply to a vehicle dealer that holds
a certificate issued under ORS 822.005. + }

It's way too soon to make this move as I really doubt that there are enough of these vehicles out there to make for much of a financial windfall for the state, but a new tax like this in a down economy just may make a difference on whether or not to purchase these vehicles. You don't encourage green technology by finding new ways to tax the people that already pay premium to buy the product in the first place.

Stupid move IMHO.

It's actually a smart move, the Federal tax credit is most likely far more than the state tax will be. This allows the state to recover tax money paid to the federal government.

Also it is much easier to impose a tax early on when the technology is still new, then to try and impose it later.

I'm more interested in the debate about how this tax will be charged. I've read suggestions of a flat tax, or the government tracking the miles you drive the car and charging a tax based on those miles. Tracking the miles seems a bit intrusive especially when you consider the fact that insurance companies have talked about installing GPS in cars to accurately track the miles driven each year. Just how would the government track the miles, and what else would they use that data for?

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

Also it is much easier to impose a tax early on when the technology is still new, then to try and impose it later.

Yeah, good idea. Let's kill research and development of clean enery autos. I'm in.


I'm more interested in the debate about how this tax will be charged. I've read suggestions of a flat tax, or the government tracking the miles you drive the car and charging a tax based on those miles. Tracking the miles seems a bit intrusive especially when you consider the fact that insurance companies have talked about installing GPS in cars to accurately track the miles driven each year. Just how would the government track the miles, and what else would they use that data for?

Don't worry, the govt has plenty of creative ways to devise new and insidious ways to tax the populace. I think it would be much easier to raise this sort of tax almost at will only because raising the per gallon tax is to visible. Also, removing this tax from being paid at the pump, will open the door to a means-tested tax on auto usage.

You are a genius Chi.

[Angel!]

Mar 30, 2011 14:02:44 GMT -5 ChiTownVenture said:

I'm more interested in the debate about how this tax will be charged. I've read suggestions of a flat tax, or the government tracking the miles you drive the car and charging a tax based on those miles. Tracking the miles seems a bit intrusive especially when you consider the fact that insurance companies have talked about installing GPS in cars to accurately track the miles driven each year. Just how would the government track the miles, and what else would they use that data for?

They would likely track miles. Oregon did a test program of this several years back.

www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/RUFPP/docs/RUFPP_finalreport.pdf?ga=t

This appears just to be implementing the tested program. Also, it might be worth noting that if you pay the mileage based tax, then you are refunded the state gas tax.

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

This appears just to be implementing the tested program. Also, it might be worth noting that if you pay the mileage based tax, then you are refunded the state gas tax.


Of course you are leaving out the part of this being a progressive tax... you know...means tested.

[ChiTownVenture]

Mar 30, 2011 14:13:35 GMT -5 Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ said:

Also it is much easier to impose a tax early on when the technology is still new, then to try and impose it later.

Yeah, good idea. Let's kill research and development of clean enery autos. I'm in.


I'm more interested in the debate about how this tax will be charged. I've read suggestions of a flat tax, or the government tracking the miles you drive the car and charging a tax based on those miles. Tracking the miles seems a bit intrusive especially when you consider the fact that insurance companies have talked about installing GPS in cars to accurately track the miles driven each year. Just how would the government track the miles, and what else would they use that data for?

Don't worry, the govt has plenty of creative ways to devise new and insidious ways to tax the populace. I think it would be much easier to raise this sort of tax almost at will only because raising the per gallon tax is to visible. Also, removing this tax from being paid at the pump, will open the door to a means-tested tax on auto usage.

You are a genius Chi.

How would this kill research and development of clean energy cars, the federal tax credit is more then what the state would be charging.

Why are we taxing road improvements in gas anyways. The tax should be on the miles driven, not the amount of gas purchased. If I have a car that guzzles gas and I only drive it around the block should I pay the same as the guy that gets 30 miles to the gallon and dives 18 hours a day?

[ChiTownVenture]

btw Savoir when I "quote" you it shows a different user name in the quotes prior to posting then what it actually posts on the board.

[Angel!]

Mar 30, 2011 14:30:33 GMT -5 Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ said:

This appears just to be implementing the tested program. Also, it might be worth noting that if you pay the mileage based tax, then you are refunded the state gas tax.


Of course you are leaving out the part of this being a progressive tax... you know...means tested.

Have you actually read that or are you just assuming? Because I have heard nothing of the sort.

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

Have you actually read that or are you just assuming? Because I have heard nothing of the sort.

You really need to chill out.

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

I see the correct screen name...

[Angel!]

Mar 30, 2011 14:42:18 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Mar 30, 2011 14:36:18 GMT -5 ChiTownVenture said:

btw Savoir when I "quote" you it shows a different user name in the quotes prior to posting then what it actually posts on the board.

That's curious. I tried it, and his name was different too.

You can change your display name to anything you want.

[ChiTownVenture]

Mar 30, 2011 14:44:23 GMT -5 Angel! said:

Mar 30, 2011 14:42:18 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

That's curious. I tried it, and his name was different too.

\ You can change your display name to anything you want.

Got it. ;D

[Angel!]

Mar 30, 2011 14:50:04 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Sorry for the modifiers to posts 21 and 22. I don't believe that info should be out there, although many can probably figure it out anyway.....

I'm just a computer hacker in the making with all my high-tech knowledge.

[floridayankee]

Mar 30, 2011 14:02:44 GMT -5 ChiTownVenture said:

Mar 30, 2011 13:33:55 GMT -5 floridayankee said:

It's actually a smart move, the Federal tax credit is most likely far more than the state tax will be. This allows the state to recover tax money paid to the federal government.

Typical government....hand you a check and shake your hand while my partner picks your pocket? lol...where do I sign up for this government sponsored bait and switch scam?

Also it is much easier to impose a tax early on when the technology is still new, then to try and impose it later.

How so? Are you assuming it's easier because there are fewer people that it effects therefore you get less pissed off constituents?

I'm more interested in the debate about how this tax will be charged. I've read suggestions of a flat tax, or the government tracking the miles you drive the car and charging a tax based on those miles. Tracking the miles seems a bit intrusive especially when you consider the fact that insurance companies have talked about installing GPS in cars to accurately track the miles driven each year. Just how would the government track the miles, and what else would they use that data for?

It says it right there in the bill. 0.6 cents per mile for metered use of the highways in Oregon. How they are going to differentiate between miles driven on Oregon highways and out of state highways is beyond me.

I still believe it's a bad idea at this time to think they will encourage people to purchase a high mileage vehicle by imposing a new tax on the use of it.

[Angel!]

How they are going to differentiate between miles driven on Oregon highways and out of state highways is beyond me.

GPS

[floridayankee]

Mar 31, 2011 10:17:49 GMT -5 Angel! said:

How they are going to differentiate between miles driven on Oregon highways and out of state highways is beyond me.

GPS

So not only will they track how many miles you travel but also where you travel (and likely times as well)? Sounds like a great incentive to go green to me!



I think I'll just opt for the gas tax tyvm.

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

So not only will they track how many miles you travel but also where you travel (and likely times as well)? Sounds like a great incentive to go green to me!

Sounds great to me... they can also automatically issue speeding tickets, because GPS can determine speed.

[fairlycrazy23]

Mar 30, 2011 14:33:26 GMT -5 ChiTownVenture said:

How would this kill research and development of clean energy cars, the federal tax credit is more then what the state would be charging.

I don't know about killing it, but the new state tax would be a new cost associated with electric vehicles that consumers don't currently have to pay, now if they plan to increase the the federal tax credit to offset this new tax then I can see it not having any net effect.

I don't think taxing by the mile is the way to go for government, if they want to start charging for using the service, it would probably be best just to privatize the running and operating of it.

And for purposes of this law "'Highway' means every public way, road, street,thoroughfare and place, including bridges, viaducts and other structures within the boundaries of this state, open, used or intended for use of the general public for vehicles or vehicular traffic as a matter of right."

[ChiTownVenture]

If the average driver drives 15,000 miles per year and cost is .6 cents per mile .006 the tax would be $90 per year?

At that rate no one would buy a EV

"Are you assuming it's easier because there are fewer people that it effects therefore you get less pissed off constituents?"

No I'm saying that when new technology affects taxes adjustments should be made as soon as possible so that people don't say "well it's been 5 (or 10 or 20) years and they haven't collected taxes, why start now?"

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

No I'm saying that when new technology affects taxes adjustments should be made as soon as possible so that people don't say "well it's been 5 (or 10 or 20) years and they haven't collected taxes, why start now?


The real question is why even start...?