$1000 to register an electric vehicle ???

[roosterk0031]

Since ICE cars and trucks cost the same to register, EV might as well be too. The bill proposed to raise ICE's to $148 seems to me EV should just be the same KISS.

[redpoint5]

Oregon is a liberal state. That means we're trying new things all the time, and new things are almost always a bad idea. The thing is, the way you figure out what is a good idea or a bad idea is to try it.

[stockMKIVTDI]

Originally Posted by cowmeat

Seems a little steep, but probably not if you do the math and figure how much you're currently paying in gas taxes a year
They still have to maintain the roadways, so they will always find a way to get you to chip in. Nobody rides for free (unless you have a PHEV like me)

Yeah it’s a one time fee of 1k which is far cheaper than a diesel car paying a bare minimum of 336.13 dollars in road tax per year time 5 year which is the average someone owns a diesel truck equates to 1680.64. I’ll take the one time fee of a grand any day. Some states may have differ with rates but in VA that was what they proposed for new non range extended electric cars. There is also no plan to charge this to hydrogen vehicles which should be taking over within 5 years so it won’t matter some those will obliterate battery cars once they take off.

[Augustus]

Alabama just passed a law increasing the gas tax. Included in this is a $200 (per year) fine for EVs and a $100 fine for PHEVs. They tried to fine regular hybrids as well, but that sparked enough outrage to get removed. No one here knows what a PHEV is, and assume that every EV is a $75,000+ Tesla, so there was little opposition to the EV fine.

This convinced me to sell my Nissan Leaf. It feels like states don't understand the technology, didn't bother to do the math on how much more EVs cost vs equivalent gasoline cars, and don't care that electricity is already taxed anyway. I can drive almost 10,000 miles on $200 worth of electricity, which is about how many miles I drive my Leaf in a year. This new tax effectively doubles the cost to fuel my car, bringing it closer in line to the fuel costs of my former car, a '08 Prius. The worst thing about this tax is that it is a flat rate. It doesn't matter if you drive 100 miles in a year or 100,000. You pay the same amount. Low mileage drivers of EVs may actually end up paying more per mile than just having a normal gas guzzler.

In order to pay $200 in gas taxes under the new Alabama gas tax (28 cents per gallon), you need to buy 714 gallons of gasoline. If you drive a new Prius and average 50MPG, you would need to drive 35,714 miles in one year in order to pay the same amount of gas tax as an EV driver who may only drive 1000 miles in a year pays. According to some quick google statistics, the average Alabamian drives about 13,000 miles in a year. If there is going to be a fine on EVs, it should be no more than $50 per year, and PHEVs should be more like $10-$15.

My next car will likely be a gas hog sedan, as I want something a little bit more responsive than another Prius, and the state has discouraged me from seeking any EVs or PHEVs.

The government ruins yet another great thing.

[Snax]

Originally Posted by Augustus

. . . The worst thing about this tax is that it is a flat rate. It doesn't matter if you drive 100 miles in a year or 100,000. You pay the same amount. Low mileage drivers of EVs may actually end up paying more per mile than just having a normal gas guzzler. . .

That is exactly my situation here in Oregon right now and why I so vehemently oppose registration surcharges.

Since November when I bought my i3, I have barely put 1000 miles on it. It's completely asinine to tax it more highly just for the privilege of being able to sticker and drive it.

[Hersbird]

Originally Posted by Vman455

Comparing EVs and ICEs, though--EVs are (except Tesla) sold through dealerships, so there's no difference in the income tax of the salespeople, etc. And for Teslas, well--you still have to pay sales tax on a Tesla, and since they tend to be more expensive than the average car, there's more revenue coming in per car sold for those EVs than ICEs. If you're going to get that particular, though, I think you just open a huge can of worms. What about taxes on steel manufacturers? Do those count as "transportation" revenue if some of their product ends up being turned into cars? If I buy food at a gas station, does that count as "transportation" revenue? For that matter, my bikes each cost several thousand dollars, and I bought all of them since moving to Illinois--shouldn't the sales tax I paid on them be counted as "transportation" revenue? If that's the case, I should be entitled to a lot bigger share of the road than I currently use.

Also, we have to specify which roads we're talking about here. Roads within a municipality that aren't interstates, US routes, or county highways are maintained with local funds, and those aren't remotely covered by local transportation taxes (Champaign, for example, takes $0.04 per gallon, and those greedy *******s in Urbana $0.05 per gallon).

The fairest thing to do, I think, is get rid of the state gas tax altogether and have a flat registration fee based on vehicle weight. No worries about government surveillance counting how far you drive, heavier EVs are penalized more but so are brodozers, and there's no penalty or incentive for EVs versus ICEs as far as road usage taxes are concerned. This will never happen, but I can dream.

Of course, starting Jan. 1 we'll have taxed, legal weed here. That should help put a dent in our financial hole.

No the fairest thing to do is just completely pay for the roads out of the general fund 100% and get the money from all the standard income taxes, property taxes, and sales taxes, and stop acting like in this one area of public service the roads somehow need to be self supported. They serve all the people equally.

[Snax]

Originally Posted by Hersbird

No the fairest thing to do is just completely pay for the roads out of the general fund 100% and get the money from all the standard income taxes, property taxes, and sales taxes, and stop acting like in this one area of public service the roads somehow need to be self supported. They serve all the people equally.

Exactly this.

Statistically, lower income people must drive further for employment and are subjected to a greater share of fuel taxes. Any form of use tax such as this is regressive and hits lower income people harder.

We don't tax people more for using the library, for calling the police, for having children in school. Roads, just like other commons and services, are public domain with free access, so to implement use taxes as we have allowed to happen in so many ways is simply contrary to the public good.

Registration fees make sense on a basic level until they turn into taxes that differentiate on how our roads are used by otherwise legal vehicles, and increased rates for EVs etc. just continues to work against lower income people having any kind equalizing force.

[Vman455]

Originally Posted by Hersbird

No the fairest thing to do is just completely pay for the roads out of the general fund 100% and get the money from all the standard income taxes, property taxes, and sales taxes, and stop acting like in this one area of public service the roads somehow need to be self supported. They serve all the people equally.

Yeah, I agree with that position. We all rely on roads to transport everything we buy, and we should all pay for them regardless of whether we drive on them individually or not. But if we're going to have vehicle registration fees that [ostensibly] fund roads too, I think there should be some penalty for vehicles that put more stress on those roads and not just the vehicles that consume more, even if there is correlation between mass and fuel economy. Doing it this way would allow easing the burden on trucking companies as well since they're integral to the transportation of goods--simply lower the registration fees on tractor trailers, but keep it for 8,500+ lb GVWR personal vehicles.

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Registration tax by weight makes some sense too, and I could be for that. Gasoline taxes should remain as a disincentive towards use though, to be determined be each municipality and based on federal targeted consumption goals.

This is a good point too. I guess in my perfect world, I would jack up the federal gas tax to disincentivize consumption nationwide.

[redpoint5]

I would have economic, national defense, and environmental studies report on the impacts of raising fuel taxes at varying amounts and by varying rates to determine what might be the best balance. Then I'd implement that strategy, which would probably be a well announced and slowly increasing federal tax on fossil fuels. You want business and individuals have time to prepare and adjust for the changes, not dump it on them suddenly.

[Angel And The Wolf]

Originally Posted by hat_man

Just read this in the paper and thought I'd post a link to the article. I hope this doesn't happen.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/busin...509-story.html

A more fair way is to tax each vehicle by the amount of damage it could have done to the roads in the year concluding with each registration. Heavier vehicles do more damage to the roads than lighter vehicles, and in each case, the more miles driven, the more damage done.

Set a rate per pound-mile, and multiply the number of miles driven times that rate, then multiply the weight of the vehicle by that result.

The number and contact patches of the tires might also figure in, with the weight applied to the ground over a larger area (six, eight, or more tires) lowering the tax, as more contact patch would do less damage than two, three, or four tires transferring the same weight to the road surface. (Think of being stepped on by a tennis shoe, versus by a spiked heel.)

A 6,000 lb truck driven the same miles would pay twice what a 3.000 lb car would, whether one, or both are EVs.

Replace the fuel tax with this formula, and there would be no worries about cars and trucks going electric, and each vehicle would pay proportional to it's road damage.

EVs would still give a financial advantage to their owners via of eliminating the gallons of fuel bought.