They want to tax hybrids in WA

Interesting. We used to get incentives like tax credits and free parking for driving a hybrid, and now our 'leaders' want to create disincentives for conservation. That is how desperate our fiscal situation has become, I guess.

 

Politicians just want to take your money. It is interesting that in texas one proposal is a guzzler tax on poor gas mileage cars, trucks, and SUVs. There is a lot more revenue there then on electrified cars, and it is actually aligned with the countries goals. I doubt the washington law will raise much revenue, but can make politicians feel good about balancing the budget to help mortgage more of the future to opec.

 

It's about time. It ought to go national.

It's INSANE that the Federal gas guzzler tax does NOT apply to any "light trucks". It basically only affects inefficient cars (like exotics, AMG model Mercedes, Bentleys, etc.) which have TINY sales vs. "light trucks" that make up over 40% of the vehicles sold in a given model year in the US.

It also by extension couldn't apply to uber-monstrosities fuel economy testing exempt vehicles like the Hummer H2 and Ford Excursion since their GVWR was >8500 lbs. so they were no longer considered "light".

 

FORT WORTH, TX -- State officials are considering levying a $100 surcharge on some new vehicles that fall short of federal fuel efficiency standards.

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram says no legislation has been filed to add the surcharge, but it's among several recommendations in a recent Legislative Budget Board to cover an anticipated massive budget shortfall.

The report says light-duty trucks and sport utility vehicles pollute more than average size vehicles and are less energy-efficient.

Other suggestions include repeal of the prohibition of liquor sales on Sunday and raising the amount state employees pay for their health insurance...


http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?s...2&cmp=emc-ktrk-Todays_News-021411-mostviewed5

 

That's it? $100? That has no teeth and is nothing compared to the price of a car.

They ought to revise the Federal gas guzzler tax cutoffs at Gas Guzzler Tax: Program Overview | Fuel Economy | US EPA (those are unadjusted numbers) and Frequently Asked Questions so that they're harsher than the mpg figures there and have much stiffer penalties, besides getting rid of the "truck" exemption.

 

Its about revenue, the proposed guzzler tax is the same amount as the electronic vehicle tax WA just passed, but on many more vehicles.

I agree that the federal government should put out disincentives for guzzlers, instead of the incentives we currently have. It is implementing these as part of the new CAFE standards, but could go much further.

 

Who caused the government to borrow and spend? Blame it on greedy COE's and the Banks. H

 

Supposedly, Obama called for instituting fuel economy requirements for light trucks today.

As for the tax on EVs, how would you want them to pay their fair share of road maintainence? Not using gas doesn't negate their mass and it's effect on the road.

 

Maybe this will be the start of Washingtonians version of the Boston Tea Party. You locals could dump electric cars into the harbor!

 

I doubt this tax has anything to do with fairness. Registration fees are the obvious way to get BEVs to help fund roads when they are adopted. Right now the president has a goal of 1 million BEVs and PHEVs. The technology is in its infancy and the federal government is providing money so that it can be competitive. WA has the weather, population, and grid mix to be an early adopter state. The WA state government is just giving the the federal government the middle finger. I doubt it will really generate much revenue in that state in the next 5 years.

Electrification of the fleet is supported by both parties. The US just opened up another war in an oil country. I don't think it is to get the oil, but it is to support the arab league because they are our drug dealer. We are also supporting Europe who is dependent on Libyan oil.

 

There have been (CAFE) fuel economy requirements for light trucks since 1979. See the summaries on the right side of Fuel Economy | National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

The problem w/the GVWR >8500 lb. vehicles is that they're so heavy (or rather they're so heavy combined w/the max payload they can carry) is that they're no longer "light trucks" and thus exempt.

Supposedly laws were passed to close that loophole awhile ago but I don't know when it goes into effect (things keeps changing and I don't follow that area too much). The H2 and Excretion have been discontinued though. However, there are numerous GVWR >8500 lb. vehicles available to consumers/the general public.

BTW, your HHR is considered an SUV by the government (http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/sbs.htm) and therefore is also a "light truck". I have no doubt GM did that in order to provide a boost to their light truck fleet CAFE #s (just like Chrysler did w/the PT Cruiser). Currently, the fleets are imported passenger cars, domestic passenger cars and "light trucks" and manufacturers can't build a bunch of efficient vehicles in one fleet to offset inefficient ones in another of its fleets.

 

Beware the misreadings in the posting chain, which goes all the way back to the original story picturing a Prius before correcting with a Leaf. This proposed tax is on electrics only, not hybrids.

Note also that electrics and other 'Clean alternative fuel vehicles' are exempt from state sales tax through July 1, 2015. With 9.8% vehicle sales taxes in my area, this exemption is far larger than the proposed new tax, so the incentives are still positive, not negative.

Think of this as a partial takeback of the sales tax exemptions. Hybrid buyers had the same exemptions for a while, but suffered an almost complete takeback (all but 0.3%) on August 1, 2009. The remaining sliver was taken back this past January 1.

This exemption spurred me to buy a Prius 4-6 months ahead of original plans.

PS: Department of Revenue links: Clean Alternative Fuel Vehicles and High Mileage Hybrid – Sales/Use Tax Exemption) and pdf.

The state is desperate, to the point of talking about taking COLAs away from state pensions.

 

Yep. This is why I rated this thread 1 star and had ignored it for so long. The thread title is misleading and should be changed.

I thought the $100 EV fee had already passed for WA state but it looks like it has a bit further to go per Politics Northwest | State Senate approves $100 annual fee on electric cars | Seattle Times Newspaper and Electric Car Tax for Washington Gets One Step Closer to Law that I just found.

I didn't know about the latter. Thanks!

I heard about the (now expired) WA hybrid sales tax exemption. When I was living in CA and knew I had to move back up to WA, I was contemplating selling my CA HOV sticker equipped 06 Prius and somehow buying a 2010 up here in WA and getting it temporarily registered at a WA address to take advantage.

In the end, I didn't do it.

 

Took another look at the transcript of the Presidents address, and he claims to be proposing fuel economy standards on heavy duty trucks this summer. I simply confused the terminology before.

I'm well aware the HHR is a light truck by the EPA. Same with the PT Cruiser, Subaru Outbacks, and likely many other cars. If the new Tundra had been as successful as Toyota hoped, they likely would have reclassified the Matrix to counteract the FSP. I've owned both a Matrix and an HHR. It would probably just take a change on a form. There's a loop hole and they all will take advantage of it if they have too.

 

I thought Washington was a progressive state.
When the rest of the world is getting greener, we seem to be moving backward.
There aren't enough hybrid cars to make a revenue dent taxing them. Obviously, the culprits are the SUVs, those "commercial" vehicles in every driveway.

The media is also a problem--with its profit-oriented priorities and low regard for the public interest.

 

mistitled thread

The proposed tax is on EVs (right or wrong), not hybrids. The original story previously had a misleading picture but I don't know about its page title.

I think this thread needs be locked and a new one started or the thread title needs to be changed. I think a lot of people are getting the wrong idea.

 

Re: mistitled thread

My memory is that the page text itself was correct. But both the picture, and the CNN page with a teaser link to it, were wrong.

CNN headline writers appear no better than my local newpaper headline writers and TV teaser writers -- they usually don't have time to read the content they are assisting, so their headlines and teasers occasionally conflict with that content.

 

The argument actually makes sense and is fair, I have to admit.

Yes, you could just raise taxes on everyone, but this is NOT about getting people to more fuel efficient vehicles, it is more directly charging people for wear on the roads, and this is a direct route to make up the loss. I don't know that $100 is too much or too little, though.

Nobody can pretend that we're not paying less now per mile driven in the way of taxes vs road wear of what we were paying before.

This is already covered loosely with gas taxes. Typically heavier/larger vehicles used more gas so everything worked out fine. But Hybrids mess the equation up, so using old math on new vehicles is not reasonable.

You'll notice that when you asked this all we heard were crickets. People are complaining about a new tax. That's what people do, but prius and EVs are now paying less of their share in taxes than they were before. It's that simple.

A cyclist is not wearing the road to any meaningful degree. Considering the comparatively poor gas economy of motorcycles they actually pay more than they ought to per mile driven when you look at how much they actually weigh.

 

A Nissan leaf weighs in at 3500 lbs, on two axles = 1750 lbs / axle.
A fully loaded semi weighs 80,000 lb on 5 axles = 16,000 lbs / axle.
Road damage goes up by the fourth power of axle weight. So, a Leaf is doing 1/6500th the damage of a semi-truck. A Leaf isn't wearing the road to any meaningful degree.

Put another way if you are taxing a Leaf $100, the corresponding tax for a semi should be $650,000.

[Edit: These are of course, per mile, calculations, the above would need to be modified by total miles driven per year, to make a fair yearly tax]

 

Here too, for a few years at least.

Even better than that, our Governor (he's now nationally renowned) wants to pay for the deficit in the state employees' retirement fund by increasing the state employees' pension contributions. And from January 1, 2012 anybody who take early retirement will no longer receives healthcare benefits. There's nothing like a retrospective pay cut to cheer up the workforce.