Pilot program tests new fee to replace gas tax
 

.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfeySVfnN_4

>

.

John Lively is my elected representative. Interesting, that Oregon was the first state to tax gasoline in 1919.

The rebuttal to the loss of privacy is variable pricing?

The tax doubles (else halves) when you cross the Broadway Bridge. That's like when you cross the bridge in Springfield (OR) and the price of elctricity as a utility doubles.

Funny that they act like this is new when I signed up in 2018.

The rebuttal to loss of privacy is that you don't have to be tracked. OreGO has an option to just pay for total miles driven. The downside is that you pay for every mile whether it was driven in the State of Oregon or elsewhere. If you do choose a GPS based system it is only used to determine taxable miles and the data is discarded after 30 day.

What they talk about at the end with variable rates is a new trial for congestion charging. I signed up for it but didn't make the cut. (They were paying people to participate)

You should really have all three: Carbon dioxide tax on the carbon dioxide, road wear tax on the road wear and congestion tax on the congestion.

You need to tax the actual thing you need to tax.

No no we need to subsidize semis and pickups with clean burning cars because everyone needs to pay their fair share which should be the same whether you ride a bicycle or drive a semi

Assuming we ignore the fact that this is basicly a tax cut for gas guzzlers and a tax increase for efficient vehicles:
Road wear increases roughly to the cube of vehicle weight.
If you want to tax for wear, tax heavier vehicles more.
Something like x cents per km*ton^3

Dumb observation here. If I buy gasoline for my lawn mower, generator or Skidoo, do I get taxed for road wear? So what would be the difference if there were a flat tax on electricity for roads?

Just like the TSA full body scanners that couldn't save or or upload images. Anyone who said they could or might save and/or upload images was a crazy conspiracy theorist. And it was later discovered the machines in question could infact save and upload images.
After recent events how can anyone trust the government with anything?

Yes (to AZ not oil_pan_4. :)), unless......
You can also get exempted fuel at a boat marina. Some places, that is the only way you can get clear premium.

Even if you were brewing moonshine to use as a motor fuel, most likely the feedstock would've been already taxed :turtle:

I don't have to trust the government. I deal with Azuga not the State of Oregon. (Azuga is GPS fleet management company)

I know of no easy procedure to avoid that tax except distill your own fuel from plant materials you grew.

Here in NV you can get a refund for nonroad use, but it is purposefully annoying to persue.

Most airports and marinas have a use tax applied to the fuel, and since government is aware people will attempt to eschew that tax and use it in their autos, it is equivalent to the road tax.

The stationary users of road taxed electrical would probably violently revolt if charged thusly.

There are already municipal substation taxes levied on every kwhr produced nationwide only way to avoid is to have your own substation

Sad part is these can be very high by percentage of your bill higher than gas tax

Here in Brazil it used to be a common practice to charge different prices to fuel according to the payment method. I guess a similar approach to exempt taxes on fuel for non-road use directly at the gas station has not beem implemented there in NV only because it would become harder for government to find out if someone is cheating. Unless a specific dye for non-road fuel similar to what is done in England for "agricultural" gasoline became a common practice there too.

If you charge a straight one-size-fits-all tax then it's hard or impossible to get around it. You either pay the tax or don't buy the commodity or service.

But if you branch out the tax into different levels for the same service or commodity then the it becomes a game of cheating the system.

People would still try to find loopholes in a straight one-size-fits-all tax system.

I remember hearing that red diesel is the same as normal diesel, except it isn't taxed, so don't get caught with red fuel in your pickup's tank!

Who exactly would be checking and why?

Also, red has a higher sulfur content. It isn't taxed because it is prohibited from use on roads: https://www.corsefuels.com/2019/03/1...clear-vs-dyed/

Red doesn't have more sulfur, at least not in Oregon. I wish it did, because then it would be cheaper and contain more natural lubrication for fuel pumps and contain a little more energy. When ultra low sulfur became standard, things like fuel pumps began failing at higher rates, and some would add oil to their fuel to make up for the lubrication that was lost due to the sulfur removal process.

Red is heating oil and off-road use (farm use) with dye in it, but otherwise identical.

An inspector could dip a fuel tank with a stick, or swab the exhaust to detect use of red on a road vehicle. I've never heard of anyone having that happen to them. I expect most of the diesel trucks with diesel tanks and pumps in their beds to be running the lower taxed fuel.

https://outdoorchief.com/wp-content/...k-featured.jpg

Who checks for off-road diesel?

Local police, sheriff department or state police. They can dip the tank or check the fuel filter to see if it is dyed red. For heavy duty trucks they can just look at the fuel / water separator which usually have a clear housing.

Why?

It is illegal to run off-highway diesel in a road vehicle. High sulfur diesel fuel will also damage emissions equipment on vehicles designed to run on ULSD.

In Oregon the fine for running off-highway diesel on the road is up to $10,000

When I lived in Michigan it wasn't uncommon for police to set up check stations at grain elevators or sugar beet depots. Checks also happen at scales and other points were commercial trucks are checked for compliance. I've heard on diesel forums of state police setting up a checkpoint and checking all diesel vehicles (like a DUI checkpoint or motorcycle enforcement checkpoint) but haven't every seen one myself.


EDIT: Off-Highway diesel used to have a lot more sulfur than on-highway. It was 3000 ppm prior to 2007. It was 500 ppm from 2007 - 2010, and now is 15 ppm.

On-Highway diesel was 600 ppm prior to 1994. 500 ppm from 1994 to 2006 and now is 15 ppm.

The drop to 15 ppm was required for 2007 EPA emissions

I remember when the School had us put died diesel into the buses since as a school they didn't have to pay taxes. That stopped only when they stopped selling died diesel locally.

When some EPA07-certified International engines were released in my country in late-2005, standard Diesel fuel still had 1800ppm of sulphur, and a so-called "Metropolitan Diesel" had 500ppm. This may explain why the NGD9.3 got a bad reputation among local truckers, being only fitted to some Volkswagen trucks before it got replaced by some Cummins engines.

EPA07 engines did not exist in 2005. Nobody was making the new engines before they were absolutely necessary and 2006 had a huge preorder for people that don't want to deal with the new emissions tech.

However, there are issues with selling used US Spec trucks into Central and South America. We have kits to remove the emission equipment and decertify them to the local emission standard

Euro IV directive 2005 existed and from an equipment standpoint wasn’t much different than EPA07 even if the levels allowed were slightly different

Im understanding the blocks and components existed to meet Cali epa prior to Epa07, but nobody wanted them. Our 05 bluebird met the 07 spec, and got taken away for SANFRAN Apcd use by GSA. Odd bus, was assembled from leftover parts.

Both International and Ford advertised the NGD 3.0 engine fitted to the Argentinian Ranger from late-'05 to '11 as already compliant to EPA07 from the start, even though that standard was actually stricter than the Euro-3 which became enforced in Brazil at that same time.


Even though electronically-governed engines were not unheard of at that time, in late-'05 they became more widespread here for Euro-3 compliance. Only some cabovers from Volkswagen, Agrale and Ford, and local variants of the F-350, retained some all-mechanical engine back then. But I really don't know why International refered to EPA07 when Brazil and some neighboring countries are more used to the Euro standard as a reference.


I remember this issue with the 2nd generation of the Mercedes-Benz ML and the Dodge Ram. Even the fuel filters had to be replaced by others with a higher density of their filtering element.

EPA04 added EGR
EPA07 added particulate filters
EPA10 added SCR injection (DEF)

HD Diesel Emission Standards (NOx / PM)
https://ecomodder.com/forum/attachme...8&d=1632021723


Brazil got Euro 3 in 2006, Euro 4 in 2009, and Euro 5 in 2012

EDIT:

You are talking about a light-duty diesel engine. That is were we got mixed up. EPA07 is a Heavy Duty emission regulation and doesn't apply to light-duty engines. I thought you were saying Ford was putting diesel particulate filters on their Ford HD trucks 7 years before they were required.

Also Euro 3 Light Duty diesel regulations are completely different from Euro 3 for Heavy Duty diesels. LD diesels got particulate filters years before HD diesels.

For all that I know our fuel pumps had red diesel. In 5.5 years I never actually saw the fuel, although I do remember one driver managing to spill fuel, so that would have been weird. She called it in on the radio.

I keep visualizing her screaming because it is red! Why is it red! It isn't supposed to be red!

I wondered how she messed up and if it would evaporate before the mechanic got there.

School buses are exempt from federal fuel taxes so it is very likely your buses were running red dyed diesel (It would also make it easy to see if employees were stealing diesel for their personal vehicles)

Diesel is much slower to evaporate than gasoline. That is why the areas around diesel pumps look like an oil slick unless the fuel station regularly cleans them.

We had our own pumps, so I am sure they had exempt undyed fuel delivered.

So the claims from International that its NGD engines met EPA07 were a lie, as they didn't have particulate filters, and I also don't remember seeing any EGR on them.


Euro-4 was actually skipped due to the 2008 asset bubble crisis, while Euro-5 was anticipated in order to compensate for the higher emissions that vehicles which would otherwise comply to Euro-4.


Particulate filters were absent from vehicles certified as Euro-3 here, and only became more common once Euro-5 was implemented.

Diesel Net's emissions page (great source on global emission standards) says.

That could be based on the 2008 financial crisis. Brazil wouldn't have wanted to pay to upgrade their refineries to make ultra-low sulfur diesel nor pay to import it from other countries.

Mexico's adoption of Euro V was also delayed due to lack of ULSD.

That was the official claim from the government at that time.


The so-called Premium refineries meant to be built in Ceará and Maranhão were never finished, basically due to widespread corruption at Petrobras under some former governments.