Punitive taxes for hybrid owners.

I agree, there are lots of issues associated with pay-per-mile. First one that comes to mind is how the heck do you asses a per-mile tax? You read the odometer once a year? But that's easy to defeat and also it can be construed as invasion of privacy. It would seem a lot more fair though if people just paid by mile qualified by weight of vehicle or some such. Certainly, industrial road use exemption is not right. I do not know how these things are taxed right now, but if true that industrial vehicles are exempt, that's not right as they are the ones cause most wear and tear to roads and infrastructure. We are definitely mired in Big Oil's game and the game has been rigged for a long time. This is partially why we find ourselves on the verge of climate disaster. Greed is blinding and wealth obtained by such greed is very insulating from reality.

 

One of the architects of the Wisconsin Prius tax had this to say

That is one reason I strongly oppose taxes that affect very small groups of people because they are rarely ever about funding

 

My first Prius replaced an older Accord that was still very fuel efficient by the non-hybrid standards at the time I made that trade. Despite being larger and heavier, the Prius saved about 200 gallons for fuel per year (15k miles). With a combined (state + federal) fuel tax rate of $0.678/gallon, that meant my Prius was paying about $135 less in annual fuel taxes than the lighter car it replaced. That tax savings is less than the hybrid tax 'penalty' of this thread, so I'd still be coming out ahead.

The full fuel savings value is much larger. At today's prices ($3.25/gal at Costco, $3.56 local average), total annual fuel savings is $650 to 700+. So a $100 hybrid surcharge is not a disincentive to me whatsoever.

I must presume that any shift of road taxes from a per-gallon basis to a per-mile or rational other system, will abolish this car's high-MPG tax discount overall. And such a system must come, absent a boosted fuel tax.

Be careful what you wish for.

 

Fuel efficiency must and will increase if history is any indicator. Keeping fuel efficiency down has been done in the past (think American cars of the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's and for the most part 90's compared to Asian or European competition). It is dumb, backwards, destructive pathological. We as humans always strive to improve our inventions. It will continue to happen and taxing fuel efficient cars more through the ridiculous lens of "fair share" is idiotic. If you replaced your old car with a new and more efficient car, good for you! You should be rewarded, not taxed more. This again just points out how silly the current gas tax is architecturally speaking. It discourages innovation and efficiency improvements. If we are threatened by efficient vehicles, then something is horribly wrong! Yes, we must fund our roads, but enough with the stupid ways of doing it. Ways that are clearly no longer relevant in our reality.

 

The fuel $aving$ in itself was my reward. The tax claw-back in this thread doesn't reduce that reward all that much, still leaving my wallet far ahead. The reduced fuel consumption did not, in itself, reduce the government's road maintenance costs one iota, so they have to make it up somehow.

The current gas tax discourages innovation and efficiency improvement? Absolute baloney, it encourages efficiency.

Did you really mean that the special hybrid tax (not the gas tax) discourages innovation and efficiency? I would agree IF that special tax was high enough to eliminate or sharply reduce the overall cost-of-ownership savings of more efficient vehicles. But with the figures I posted back at #43, that tax simply isn't anywhere near that high. For me, it doesn't even fully offset the savings in regular fuel tax, let alone the rest of the fuel cost savings.

 

I personally don't mind the additional fee. So long as it's reasonable. (Was $50.00 for me)

We have an additional "fee" for hybrid and electrics but it's minimal in Indiana (My opinion of course). Our "Gas Tax" is where it's screwed up. During the last election cycle, it was actually an accepted realization that the gas tax needed to be increased because of the condition of our roads. I remember seeing polls and most people were actually in favor of it. But most people think here in Indiana that the gas tax goes to the roads. When in fact, it doesn't.

Sadly this increased gas tax was approved - yet it still didn't have to be spent on roads. Instead the politicians left it so that this increased tax goes to the same place as this additional" hybrid fee" - to the State of Indiana's "General Fund". Letting the politicians use the cash for whatever they want. Kinda sad really, cause you pay all these taxes on gas and none of it has to be spent on roads....

Lastly, if one wants to complain about taxes. Why not complain about all the tax credits people get for buying an electric or hybrid vehicle. To me that's what is ridiculous. I'm not a fan of subsidizing anyone's car purchase.

 

That's the real meat of this. A flat $100/year tax is cheap compared to non-hybrid fuel costs. The $100 may get spent on something lame in your state... but it's not like the oil company was even going to spend it in your state at all had it gone to them instead.

Keep it in perspective- they are taking some of what you hoped you would be saving. Not all.

 

what's the extra fuel tax for a corolla vs a prius doing 12,000 miles per year?

corolla = 32mpg corolla will use 370 gallons x .24/g = $90.

prius = 50 mpg prius will use 240 gallons x .24/g = $60. + $100. = 160.

doesn't seem fair to me, not even counting the fact the government should be promoting high mpg and renewables.

 

The gas tax revenues will decrease as fuel efficiency increases. I hope that is is obvious. If so, then the gas tax revenue will go down as average fuel efficiency goes up, while the road repair and maintenance cost will remain the same or increase. You see where this is going? By design the gas tax is deficient in keeping up with progress (read: fuel efficiency increase). This is why there are stupid games being played with hybrid tax, etc. to make up for that deficiency. Hence gas tax is inherently, by design against progress and the idea of increasing fuel efficiency. I see a hybrid car as a fuel efficient gas vehicle. Not much different than a VW Golf diesel getting 45mpg. I don't see a special tax on those. Do you advocate a special tax on all vehicles that get more than Xmpg (fill in the number for X)? That would be silly and you would have a lot more reluctance in voters for that proposal. Singling out hybrids is unfair and stupid and I hope that idea dies in its infancy.

 

When I drove close to 500 miles from NM through Texas, Oklahoma to Missouri on my return trip home The drive was boring but notable because I didn’t see a single passenger car until I got into Missouri.

There were several excellent photo ops showing dozens of semis parked in both way stations with both highway directions jammed with all semis .

As a society road creation and maintenance is currently extremely polluting and energy intensive, each mile of road emits the same pollution as 50,000 cars driving for a year. (Asphalt is less polluting, cement more)

Replacement of roads every 5 years is unsustainable and destructive and there are better ways of making roads that last longer and use fewer resources, sadly to change this
1. We need heavy vehicles like long haul semis off the roads, they were never intended to be used that way in the past and are the sole source of damage on “traveled” roads.

2. Vested interests need to plow sand, roads do not need to be as brittle and energy intensive as they are today there are many better alternatives.


I have seen folks talking about charging bikes and folks who don’t own cars road tax, where does this end?

Here in Wisconsin one of the road bozos in office was saying every car needed to pay about $3500 a year for road maintenance, several of my friends earn under $20,000 a year, I think we have a cost and intelligent decision problem not a funding problem

There is likely not enough tax base to fund roads the way fuzz dreams of, what happens if we are too poor to pay the man?

 

Several notes to call out:
(*) you left out the federal gas tax of $0.184/g;
(*) the rate of state tax you listed for MA is outdated, it had risen to $0.2654 last summer;
(*) MA is a low-tax state on this, national average state tax was over $0.31 last summer.
(*) my state of WA is a high-tax state on this, at $0.494.

I live in a much higher tax state, and drive my Prius a greater annual distance. Run these figures through for my situation (if we had a hybrid tax surcharge), and the Corolla ends up paying more tax.

Those promotions ought to come from elsewhere, not out of the road maintenance budget.

 

1) i assume these are state fees, and apply to state revenues, does the fed get part?

2) google

3) and we don't have a hybrid penalty, but we do have 24 cent/kwh electrons

4) makes up for your electric cost. i would definitely drive a plug in there.

*) it doesn't matter, because the gas tax isn't designated for roads and bridges

 

Hang on, is that replacing an asphalt road every 5 years? (seems about right) while concrete roads seem to last longer...

I agree wholeheartedly that the heavy vehicles need to be... resolved in this. Some really need to stay on the road and that's okay as long as they are taxed appropriately for the damage they cause. And others should be replaced altogether, either by moving it to rail or to a higher number of smaller, lighter trucks. It's going to raise the cost of shipping stuff. Raise it a lot, too. But it's overdue.

 

i don't know if taxing commercial equipment helps, since they just pass it along to the consumer

 

I am in the camp that less government is almost always better. (ie. the politicians who currently wish to ban cars, planes and even cows). I am perfectly capable of making good rationale decisions on my own without government intervention. We bought a 2008 Prius new in 2008 because it was a good investment and a way for our family to control our cash flow for gas - at the time it was + $5.00/gal. We still have that Prius and we've found it to be a wonderful economic and reliable means of transportation for our family.
As for taxes in our area we pay - a surcharge on our car insurance for both our cars, a government franchise fee on our gas and electric service, a gasoline surcharge tax, property taxes for our vehicles, a yearly registration for our vehicles, a 5.5% tax on every part and piece we buy for our vehicles as well as any service that is performed on the vehicles. Maybe I am just being silly but I think the government gets enough of my money for vehicle ownerships and driving already.

A novel approach may be to let road maintenance be privatized on a limited basis and see if they are competitive and reliable and eliminate some government bureaucracy and waste in the Transportation Departments - having money actually spent on roads. If it turns out this competitive approach works begin to expand it and give road maintenance to the best and most efficient competitors. The government could still play a very small part in an oversight role but the actually management would be transferred to competent business owners with their success and profitability depending totally on their performance.

 

My point is that we are long overdue in passing it through to the consumer, which will make it that much harder to fix.

 

Bull, consumers DO NOT WANT to be efficient
They find every reason to justify land barges and buy as much as they can finance .
They will only downsize if there are real advantages to their bottom line or are forced by cost as happened in 2008-2012

Saving a couple hundred a year is not enough for most so a $100-$200 annual fee is a real disincentive as show by the dramatic well documented failure in the Wisconsin Plug in market.

I would also argue there are real costly affects to large cars and trucks that can be reduced with smaller vehicles like Kei cars and motorcycles, and unless those affects are accounted for we will never be able to start minimizing the costs of parking, traffic and highway costs

Commercial interests when faced with an unavoidable cost will find ways to minimize the cost, if that means more rail, more local depos and more efficient routes so be it.

 

Passing delivery transportation fees to consumers is a good idea. Then people who consume pay instead of people who already pay taxes and are taxed more because they chose a fuel efficient vehicle. Some one will end up paying, it just seems more fair that entities are taxed proportionally to the wear and tear they produce on roads. I doubt very much that a hybrid Prius cause more road wear than a Hummer. Yet, I see no extra taxes on those vehicles.