Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > EcoModding Central
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 09-20-2019, 02:41 PM   #1 (permalink)
Hybrider
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 30
Thanks: 1
Thanked 7 Times in 3 Posts
ALERT! - Wisconsin Insight G1 Owners - Contest your $75 Hybrid Fee

It is really critical that G1 Insight owners immediately contest the $75 registration fee if you receive a registration/license renewal form that includes it. This is especially true for 1999-2003 Insights. 2004 and 2005 are a little trickier. And 2006 is really tricky. It would be great to get them all successfully exempted from the fee, but it may take a bit to make it happen. So, if you do actually have a registration renewal for an Insight, submit the MV1020 "Registration Correction Request" form as soon as you can. I'd be interested to know what on the renewal form indicates that you owe the $75 fee (does is say "full hybrid" in some field, or what)? In any case, on the correction form, check the "Other" box and describe the "error" as something like:

----
(for a 1999-2003 - first attempt...if it fails, then try next one used for 2004-2005)
This vehicle does not include a VIN code identification in the "Engine" "Fuel Type - Secondary" field of "Electric" and therefore cannot be classified as a "Full Hybrid Vehicle" for the purposes of the Hybrid-Electric Vehicle fee. As such, this vehicle is not subject to the additional $75 registration fee.

(for a 2004-2005 - first attempt...if it fails, then try the next one used for 2006)
This vehicle does not include a VIN code identification in the "Engine" "Electrification Level" field of "Hybrid" and therefore cannot be classified as a "Full Hybrid Vehicle" for the purposes of the Hybrid-Electric Vehicle fee. As such, this vehicle is not subject to the additional $75 registration fee.

(for a 2006 - first attempt...if it fails, we need to do something like stating it has the same, exact functional specification as the 1999-2005 Insights that are exempt...but need to exempt those first. Or we can maybe state that it has the same pertinent, functional specifications as a Chevy Malibu Eco - which we can provide and which is exempt, and therefore the Insight is also exempt)
This vehicle is not a full hybrid in that it cannot be powered using electricity alone. It, therefore, falls in the category of "Mild Hybrid" as specified in the Legislative Fiscal Paper #696 dated May, 2019 and titled:

Hybrid-Electric Vehicle Fee Definition
(Transportation -- Transportation Finance)
[LFB 2019-21 Budget Summary: Page 408, #10]

"2. The U.S. Department of Energy states that two types of hybrids exist in today's U.S. automobile market:
'Mild hybrids - also called micro hybrids - use a battery and electric motor to help power the vehicle and can allow the engine to shut off when the vehicle stops (such as at traffic lights or in stop-and-go traffic), further improving fuel economy. Mild hybrid systems cannot power the vehicle using electricity alone.'"

According to Paper #696:

"3. The Department indicates under the proposed definition change, DOT would apply the additional registration fee only to full hybrids. "

Therefore, this vehicle is not subject to the additional $75 registration fee.
----


It IS worthwhile to do these in order and submit multiple times step by step. Keep them describing why it doesn't apply

There is more discussion about the details at Insight Central.

B

PS...If you get a registration renewal for ANY G1 Insight, and you are NOT charged the $75 "full hybrid" fee, let us know immediately, or PM me with that info. It would be extremely important and useful.


Last edited by bluesight; 09-20-2019 at 03:10 PM.. Reason: PS
  Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to bluesight For This Useful Post:
Fat Charlie (09-26-2019), fusion210 (09-20-2019), rmay635703 (09-22-2019)
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 09-20-2019, 05:07 PM   #2 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 256

Winsight - '06 Honda Insight
Gen-1 Insights
90 day: 81.52 mpg (US)
Thanks: 232
Thanked 82 Times in 58 Posts
Good to know if this ever comes to NC!
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2019, 05:23 PM   #3 (permalink)
Hybrider
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 30
Thanks: 1
Thanked 7 Times in 3 Posts
I forgot to note that you should also include the the NHTSA VIN decoder output for your VIN that shows the fields referenced (Fuel Type - Primary, Fuel Type - Secondary and Electrification Level). Easiest is to "Show All Vehicle Details", "Show 100 Entrees", scroll down to the page that shows these entries, print out the page(s), mark the entries, and attach to the request.

Good luck!

B
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2019, 10:03 AM   #4 (permalink)
Hybrider
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 30
Thanks: 1
Thanked 7 Times in 3 Posts
If we can get an organization to litigate this, the obvious basis is equal protection under the law for tax policy:

"Equal protection requires that classification rest on real and not feigned differences, that the distinction have some relevance to the purpose for which the classification is made, and that the different treatment be not so disparate, relative to the difference in classification, as to be wholly arbitrary."

If we get this done in Wisconsin, it maybe can get done in the other model legislation states. One nice thing about model legislation is that, if it is successfully challenged in one place, there is a pretty good chance (or at least a pretty good roadmap) to get it successfully challenged in another. Please feel free to be the first/next with a successful challenge in your state.

If we can't find a sympathetic organization to litigate, maybe we can consider a GoFundMe effort...long shot...but hey...

B
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2019, 01:44 PM   #5 (permalink)
Hybrider
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 30
Thanks: 1
Thanked 7 Times in 3 Posts
If you want to make a difference, maybe you can send something like this to the Gov Ever's "Voice Your Opinion" page. It's long and wordy. I don't consider that a disadvantage. And if you send the IDENTICAL thing, I also don't think that's a disadvantage. If he sees an active, unified and organized community out there, especially this community that maybe tends to vote Democratic, he may take notice. If he does hold up the fee and the legislature balks, maybe that will generate a little press and public notice for the issue. Again, step by step...

B
-----
Governor Evers,


I am a member of the community of hybrid-electric vehicle owners, specifically, gas-only hybrid-electric vehicle owners. I respectfully request that you instruct the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WI DOT) to stop collecting the $75 hybrid-electric vehicle fee that is now being imposed on gas-only hybrid-electric vehicles pending challenges to the legislative and WI DOT definitions that form the basis that justifies the fee, and to the processes and procedures WI DOT uses to select vehicles that will be charged the fee.

According to the Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau Paper #696 dated May, 2019 and titled:

Hybrid-Electric Vehicle Fee Definition
(Transportation -- Transportation Finance)
[LFB 2019-21 Budget Summary: Page 408, #10]

You, as the recently elected Democratic governor of Wisconsin, proposed the following:

"Amend the definition of a hybrid-electric vehicle to mean a vehicle that is capable of using
both electricity and gasoline, diesel fuel, or alternative fuel to propel the vehicle. "

This definition is entirely arbitrary and unworkable. It does not provide guidance to citizens or to WI DOT as to which vehicles are and are not included as targets for the fee. In fact, every gas-only vehicle is covered by the definition in that they all use electricity to fire spark plugs to ignite gas to propel the vehicle. This means that the enforcement of the legislation is, by its nature arbitrary. On this basis, alone, the WI DOT should be instructed by you to stop collecting the hybrid-electric vehicle fee.

Subsequent issues in defining arbitrary subsets of targeted vehicles accrue from that basic, vague definition. According to the discussion point of Paper #696:

2. The U.S. Department of Energy states that two types of hybrids exist in today's U.S. automobile market:

"Mild hybrids - also called micro hybrids - use a battery and electric motor to help power the vehicle and can allow the engine to shut off when the vehicle stops (such as at traffic lights or in stopand-go traffic), further improving fuel economy. Mild hybrid systems cannot power the vehicle using electricity alone. These vehicles generally cost less than full hybrids but provide less fuel economy benefit than full hybrids"; and

"Full hybrids, have larger batteries and more powerful electric motors, which can power the vehicle for short distances and at low speeds. These vehicles cost more than mild hybrids but provide better fuel economy benefits."

and:

"3. The Department indicates under the proposed definition change, DOT would apply the additional registration fee only to full hybrids. DOT indicates that it would search the vehicle identification number (VIN) for a hybrid identification as only vehicles that have full hybrid capabilities would carry this hybrid VIN identification."

The definitions in discussion point 2 are not from any technical papers prepared by the US DOE, but are instead from instructional, public facing pages that encourage the adoption of Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEVs). Reference:

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Hybrid Electric Vehicles

They are entirely unsuitable for use as "definitions in law". There are other, more precise sources that that define different types of hybrid-electric vehicles that do not support the statements of discussion point 2. Nonetheless, in discussion point 3, WI DOT apparently specifies that the stated definition for "full hybrids" will be the basis for applying the hybrid electric vehicle fee. This method of classification has little or no relevance to the purpose for which the classification is made.

Discussion point 3 also states that WI DOT would "search the vehicle identification number (VIN) for a hybrid identification as only vehicles that have full hybrid capabilities would carry this hybrid VIN identification". This process has proven to be entirely opaque to citizen scrutiny. Requests to WI DOT to provide details on their VIN identification processes and procedures have gone unanswered. Citizen searches of VIN identification values for relevant vehicle models show inconsistent results. In addition, citizen evaluations of the VIN identification values show that some identical manufacturer and model vehicles across different years yield differing, potentially relevant VIN identification values. This means that the different classifications for different vehicles, with regard to imposition of the hybrid-electric vehicle fee, will not be "real", and will instead be feigned or arbitrary distinctions, in this case, model year.

Gas-only hybrid-electric vehicles exist on a continuum of energy efficiency that include small-engine turbos, vehicles that employ weight reduction, and vehicles that use alternative, but still taxed fuels, such as diesel. The imposition of the $75 fee on gas-only hybrid-electric vehicles is entirely disparate, relative to the difference in efficiency classification, as to be wholly arbitrary both for vehicles generally considered hybrid-electric, and any other efficient vehicle.

"Equal protection requires that classification rest on real and not feigned differences, that the distinction have some relevance to the purpose for which the classification is made, and that the different treatment be not so disparate, relative to the difference in classification, as to be wholly arbitrary."

There appears to be no motor vehicle taxation exemption under the "Equal Protection Clause" for this type of arbitrarily targeted fee. On all points, the gas-only hybrid electric fee is inappropriate, unfair, and probably illegal.

Again, as a member of the gas-only hybrid-electric community, and an affected Wisconsin citizen, I request that you, as governor, instruct the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WI DOT) to stop collecting the $75 hybrid-electric vehicle fee pending challenges to its implementation.

Sincerely,
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2019, 10:25 AM   #6 (permalink)
Hybrider
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 30
Thanks: 1
Thanked 7 Times in 3 Posts
If you are getting cut off trying to communicate with Gov. Evers on his "Voice Your Opinion" page (guess they may not like long opinions), you can try emailing your opinion to:

govinfo@wisconsin.gov

B
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2019, 08:15 PM   #7 (permalink)
Rat Racer
 
Fat Charlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Route 16
Posts: 3,363

Al the Third, year four - '13 Honda Fit Base
Team Honda
90 day: 42.9 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,283
Thanked 1,403 Times in 901 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesight View Post
If we can get an organization to litigate this, the obvious basis is equal protection under the law for tax policy:

"Equal protection requires that classification rest on real and not feigned differences, that the distinction have some relevance to the purpose for which the classification is made, and that the different treatment be not so disparate, relative to the difference in classification, as to be wholly arbitrary."
The usual justification behind gas taxes is road maintenance. Penalizing small, lightweight, fuel efficient vehicles as being "tax dodgers" violates that justification of the tax. Max GVW x miles driven is the ideal way to base a road maintenance tax, and gasoline used is the most practical way of collecting it. Fuel efficient vehicles aren't trying to dodge road maintenance taxes and shouldn't be levied with an "extra" tax while contributing substantially less to road deterioration than larger, less efficient vehicles.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheepdog44 View Post
Transmission type Efficiency
Manual neutral engine off.100% @MPG <----- Fun Fact.
Manual 1:1 gear ratio .......98%
CVT belt ............................88%
Automatic .........................86%

  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Fat Charlie For This Useful Post:
Daschicken (09-27-2019), RedDevil (09-27-2019)
Old 09-27-2019, 03:28 AM   #8 (permalink)
Duck duck duck
 
RedDevil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
Posts: 3,458

Red Devil - '11 Honda Insight Elegance
Team Honda
90 day: 57.77 mpg (US)

It - '09 Hyundai I10 Active Cool
Team Hyundai
90 day: 33.38 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,310
Thanked 1,828 Times in 1,173 Posts
Even worse - road and structure damage is not linear with vehicle weight, but increases exponentially with overloaded vehicles.

We have some major bridges which need repairs soon, and on the subject it got noted that a single overweight truck causes more damage than 8,000 passenger cars...
__________________
2011 Honda Insight + HID, LEDs, tiny PV panel, extra brake pad return springs, neutral wheel alignment, 44/42 PSI (air), PHEV light (inop), tightened wheel nut.
lifetime FE over 0.14 Gm or 0.09 MM.

  Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2019, 10:25 AM   #9 (permalink)
Rat Racer
 
Fat Charlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Route 16
Posts: 3,363

Al the Third, year four - '13 Honda Fit Base
Team Honda
90 day: 42.9 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,283
Thanked 1,403 Times in 901 Posts
So we'd better collect $75 each from 8,000 hybrid owners. They need to contribute their fair share!
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheepdog44 View Post
Transmission type Efficiency
Manual neutral engine off.100% @MPG <----- Fun Fact.
Manual 1:1 gear ratio .......98%
CVT belt ............................88%
Automatic .........................86%

  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Fat Charlie For This Useful Post:
fusion210 (09-28-2019), RedDevil (09-27-2019)
Old 09-27-2019, 10:49 AM   #10 (permalink)
Duck duck duck
 
RedDevil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
Posts: 3,458

Red Devil - '11 Honda Insight Elegance
Team Honda
90 day: 57.77 mpg (US)

It - '09 Hyundai I10 Active Cool
Team Hyundai
90 day: 33.38 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,310
Thanked 1,828 Times in 1,173 Posts
Road tax should be load tax...

Maybe make an exception for safety gear. So vehicle weight minus airbags etc.

Then there are other categories that also need discounts. Gas guzzlers, as legacy car makers will face hard times. Bonus for Trumper stickers. No tax for the rich, they already pay a lot of tax. An extra fine for EVs as they don't spend on Big Oil's products.
Uncle Donald should hire me as a strategist

__________________
2011 Honda Insight + HID, LEDs, tiny PV panel, extra brake pad return springs, neutral wheel alignment, 44/42 PSI (air), PHEV light (inop), tightened wheel nut.
lifetime FE over 0.14 Gm or 0.09 MM.


Last edited by RedDevil; 09-27-2019 at 10:58 AM..
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com