Wisconsin EV tax rears its head again

[bluesight]

We'll see what happens. Like in Michigan and most others, this model legislation only applies to hybrid vehicles with 4KwH batteries and larger. So, instead of generating the promised $8M, it will net about $500K in WI. If/when the WI public finds out about that, maybe they will have a different opinion about the intelligence of their Republican legislators. As far as I know, only Idaho attempted to impose a special tax on gas-only hybrids. There is currently a call for repeal by legislators that would not be considered liberals. We can only hope that the whole thing will be tossed (eventually).

B

[rmay635703]

Where is the finalized text of the bill?

Per other sources it doesn't specify that the hybrid has to plug in.

[bluesight]

This is the latest I saw and it should be the final language that was approved. Page 904 or search for 1895m.

Here is the language, and while the "may be" terminology for using an external source is weaselly, the "not less than 4 kilowatt hours" is definitive and is specific to include the Prius Plug-in and "above". This is clearly written with the petroleum suppliers in mind. Anything that dares to not use petroleum should be punished:

b. “Hybrid electric vehicle” means a vehicle that is capable of using gasoline,
diesel fuel, or alternative fuel to propel the vehicle but that is propelled to a
significant extent by an electric motor that draws electricity from a battery that has
a capacity of not less than 4 kilowatt hours and may be capable of being recharged
from an external source of electricity.

B

[rmay635703]

At least it doesn't affect my Insight but tripling the fee on the other tempts me to sell any ev I can't put collector plates on.

My original goal was to drive only vehicles with permanent plates and sell off the rest back in 2009 when they first talked about this BS,
me thinks it prudent to stick it to the man and pay zero plate fees until such time that the law is fixed.

[bluesight]

Idaho is a good case study of where to apply pressure on these measures. As of March, the gas-only hybrid tax hadn't been repealed. But, hopefully with continued agitation, it will be. Once the gas-only hybrids are taken out, the amount of revenue collected has got to be so minuscule as to be ridiculous. Emphasizing that might eventually lead to repeal of the whole business, given enough unrelenting agitation.

B

[rmay635703]

Hmm what are the finalized fees?

In any event back in 2009 it was mentioned that the wisdot doesn't have consistent or complete model documentation on all cars.
For example a 2016 Ford Focus is usually listed as just that, options, descriptions and other info besides "Focus" may not be on the title

It was estimated that fixing the problem and implimenting the law would cost
$5 million

From personal experience over the years I have had
A car title with no model listed
A car title with the wrong model listed
And I still own a car with a title that is totally wrong, make is wrong, "fuel type" is also wrong.

Our registration system is more or less "on your honor"

Maybe those of us affected just need to get a color change on the title

[Xist]

Just as long as law enforcement does not give you a hard time for having an incorrect title.

[rmay635703]

Originally Posted by Xist

Just as long as law enforcement does not give you a hard time for having an incorrect title.

On my one car they won't allow me to change the title

They don't recognize the model and would only use what was on the mn title which was wrong

[Panther140]

Originally Posted by bluesight

My 2003 Honda Insight hybrid (3cyl, 1L) averages 50MPG. A NON-hybrid Ford Fiesta SFE (3cyl, 1L) averages 35MPG. For 10,000 miles traveled, the Fiesta will use 286 gallons and the Insight, 200 gallons. The Fiesta owner will pay $88 in WI gas tax (at $0.309/gal), and, for the Insight, instead of paying "little to nothing", I'll pay $62. Seems like I avoided all of $26 in gas tax. But consider the owner of a new-technology, aluminum F150 pickup that averages 17MPG compared to the old-technology, non-aluminum F150 averaging 14MPG. For 10,000 miles traveled, the non-aluminum F150 will use 714 gallons, and the aluminum, 588 gallons. WI gas taxes for the non-aluminum version will be $221, and $182 for the aluminum, allowing the aluminum version owner to avoid $39 of gas tax. This is obvious, simple math. But under the hybrid tax legislation, I will be charged a $75 penalty for not paying my $26 "fair share", while F150 owners, and there are a lot of them, will be charged nothing for avoiding $39. Singling out hybrid technology by name for punitive taxation is legislatively picking winners and losers, as much as it would be to have a special tax for aluminum bodied vehicles. It is indefensible, unfair, and, eventually, unworkable.

B

The aluminum body F150 makes its efficiency gains by becoming lighter in weight.
That decreases wear on the road.

The F150 is also not using an energy source that circumnavigates the user tax on fuel.

[Panther140]

So why is it that only gasoline/diesel powered vehicles should pay for the roads?

In the future, when most vehicles are either hybrid or electric, how high should we make the gasoline/diesel tax per gallon to pay for the roads that the hybrids and EVs drive on?

Are any of you thinking ahead, at all? Or does that not serve your egos?

By the way, I've never seen liberals be so opposed to any tax ever before in my entire life.

Why is nobody talking about why E85 is taxed the same as regular gasoline?