Re: [EVDL] Unfair & unreasonable EV taxation is just plain stupid

Re: [EVDL] Unfair & unreasonable EV taxation is just plain stupid

-----Original Message-----
From: David Nelson
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Unfair & unreasonable EV taxation is just plain stupid

> I have to drive my Corolla 8800 miles and my Honda Insight
> 16,000 miles to have paid that same $100.

> It would be much more fair if the tax was based on the class of
> vehicle at a minimum and possibly on the range of the vehicle or size
> of the battery pack. It may cost too much to implement a tax based on
> miles driven but that could be an option, too.

We've discussed this before, and fairly recently, I think the general
consensus was that it was too complex for a simple solution.

Sure you may need to drive your Insight 16000 miles to pay the same $100
tax, but I'll hit that mark somewhere in late April-early May.

For road maintainance it is important that everyone pay an actual fair tax,
this should mean that larger heavier vehicles, do pay more.

Certainly a flat amount per vehicle is not fair, but there's a major
question about how to divide the classes of vehicles. Any dividing line
creates an incentive to build a vehicle just below that line, creating an
artificial incentive in the market. You could say a penny a pound, but that
actually biases the tax away from the rich. You could tax electricity, but
most electricity does not go towards transportation.

This is why my view remains that a lot of little taxes are better. Tax tires
(heavier and high performance vehicles use more tires), may tax electricity
in some places (mostly to encourage remote generation), a small tax based on
vehicle location (Michigan has more pot hole problems than San Diego), tax
based on usage (cameras in car pool lane can identify cheats and provide tax
benefits), additional purchase tax, I can't remember all the other ideas
everyone put forward before, there were many more.

The truth is that the various taxes that would be eliminated deliver too
much revenue to be simply placed in one simple tax. Sure an additional $100
tax on a $300,000 vehicle is unlikely to cause an owner problems, but a
straight $100 tax on someone buying a $1200 vehicle is likely to impact
their ability to eat. Whatever the solution is, it needs to be smoothed out
over the course of the lifetime of the vehicle (either directly, or through
financing) and it needs to take into account that some people drive very
little, others drive a lot. Those of us that drive way too much (me=roughly
38000 miles per year) should pay heavier taxes. Those of us that drive heavy
vehicles need to pay higher taxes. Those of us that can afford the higher
taxes (and honestly most of us on this list can) need to pay higher taxes.
Right now the gas tax is very good on these marks, the replacement needs to
be at least as good.

Sure everyone will complain "But my taxes need to be lower," and there may
even be some truth to this in some cases, but the core truth is the roads
are a shared recourse, and with sharing there is always some sacrifice, that
is just a part of the necessities. Doubtless, we will of course all still
believe our taxes should be lower, but if we don't want to go back to muddy
ruts through the landscape we need a road tax of some kind.
Joe

_______________________________________________
| REPLYING: address your message to [email protected] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev