Prius Owners Unite

The answer here in California is to raise the gas price.............again. We are officially at $4 per gallon.

 

When we charge our Prius Prime we pay taxes on the electricity and when using the ICE component, we pay taxes on the fuel as mentioned by others. Plus, we pay for our license plates and drivers permit. In fact, there’s a surcharge on fuel as part of our efforts to reduce our carbon imprint.

We can charge in many municipal parking lots for free after 6 PM and on weekends but do pay for parking during normal weekly business hours. Plus, there are numerous other free charging options around such as shopping centres or business locations. Everyone, of these places pays taxes on the hydro power they use. Also, a number of businesses have charging stations where you have to pay and the prices vary from $1 per hour to $2.50 per hour and more in certain cases.

We are also taxed municipally, pay income tax that goes to two levels of government and many other consumer taxes.

Then governments give rebates when purchasing PHEV’s, Hybrids or Electric vehicles and when installing an EV charging system. The rebate system varies from province to province.

Governments have to start thinking outside the traditional box about taxation of PHEV, Hybrid and Electric vehicles, no question about it and for obvious reasons. This is asking a lot from elected officials who do not understand the issues facing them in the quickly changing automotive sector.

It’s not just a matter of consumption taxes but also where they put the money they already collect and how they use it. For example, our road maintenance and repairs in municipalities comes from property taxes with some assistance from the upper levels of government if a specific program exists. All other repair costs come out of our income tax and consumer taxes.

Many governments both locally and at higher levels are promoting and investing in electric public transit systems. Those funds come from not only the users but general property or incomes taxes.

I don’t claim to have all the answers but certainly a reallocation of the funds they collect is one of the best places to start. This will not be a short term remedy for anything but an ongoing process of other options yet to be put forward.

 

I believe there was a recent discussion on this topic already, so I'll just repeat my opinion: a flat fee is yes indeed far from being fair; but it is currently the optimal solution in terms of implementation complexities/costs/politics/etc.

Proper taxation based on consumption (= mileage + weight + probably some other factors if we really want to fine tune the estimated road wear/impact) would be much better, but it's much more complex and expensive to implement once you begin accounting for all possible scenarios and obstacles. No sane politician (not to be confused with a good person), especially at the state level, would sign up to pioneer it.

 

Pennsylvania has annual inspections. Odometer readings are already being done and reported to the state.

 

Big brother in action. It is my opinion (here I go, making myself vunerable to nay-sayers) that should the government decide for the states to utilized a special formula for Hybrid and electrical drivers, it will require individuals to have to be totally plugged in to some kind of state monitored system to view all of our driving. I understand this is necessary, but personal freedom will be shot (if not already).

 

And many states don't.
How do you deal with interstate traffic?
Aga

And many states don't.
How do you account/apportion interstate traffic? How do you tax non-US vehicles?

Again, think big, all scenarios.

 

The OP is about Pa fees on hybrids and plug ins.
Lower the gas tax, which now the highest in the nation, but leave it for interstate road use. Then apply a per mile rate from odometer readings for in state cars. Then they will all be paying the same rate no matter the fuel, and cars with ICEs will pay the lower fuel tax, and plug ins will pay the electric tax already in effect.

 

So PA owners will be paying more compared to out-of-state 'passers-by' (and crafty PA residents who will begin registering their guzzlers out of state)?

 

People from Pa were going into NJ for decades just for cheaper gas. With this, it will be the other way.

Don't see why people would register, guzzler or otherwise, out of state if the new fuel plus miles taxes is close to what they pay in just fuel taxes now. The proposed $250 flat fee on hybrids and plug ins would be a bigger motivator for those willing to go through the hassle.

 

Not sure if all states have the Initiative process, but we have it in Washington State. Some years our license tabs became onerous and were based on the value of the vehicle. An activist, Tim Eyman, sponsored an initiative for $30. car tabs and it passed. For a few years it cost just a few dollars over $30. to renew the license. Gradually the legislature started adding on more and more fees, both statewide and locally for such things as public transportation, and now fees like $150 for an EV and $75 for a hybrid. Next year the license renewal fee for an EV in Seattle will be more than $500. Obviously, the law makers don't listen to the people. So for our upcoming November 5 election, the same person has sponsored another $30. license fee law, Initiative 976. It is surprising the amount of advertising we see on TV against this initiative. Microsoft has contributed $300,000 to support the negative ads. So far, I have seen no ad in favor of it or any news person even mention it. I think most people haven't heard about it except for the negative ads which don't say what the initiative does, but only if you don't vote against it terrible things are going to happen in our state.

 

California has been a model for other states to follow for decades. Other states now see how easy it is to "sneak" things through. As more people move out to other states and crowd their roads, they will copy us, in order to generate more revenue.

 

p.s., Washington is one of our most beautiful states, I envy you!!

 

What isn't being said is that before Eyman's first $30 car tab initiative, the fee was based on the value of vehicle. Afterwards, you paid $30, regardless if you drove a brand new Porsche or a 30 year old pinto. Unsurprisingly, the benefit of this "fairness" pretty much all went to people who could afford expensive cars.

While I don't agree with the EV/Hybrid taxes, Eyman's initiatives are almost always subterfuge for starving the state government of revenue.

 

Actually, I did say that the onerous tab fees were based on the value of the vehicle. In our case, we had bought a small motorhome based on a 1 ton Toyota chassis. I often couldn't justify spending 6-700 dollars to renew the tabs and we weren't using it very much so we sold it. The State used a vehicle value guide that was somewhat higher than blue book. After we got $30 tabs, the price quickly doubled as the State kept adding on additional fees, like a filing fee, computerization fee, and weight fee. I had to pay an additional weight fee even for my Mazda Miata, so they got everyone with the fees. Incidentally, if you buy a brand new Porsche, say for $100K, they immediately hit you with about $9700. in sales tax, so the Porsche buyer contributes also.

 

There is an easy solution for this, increase gas tax and place a proper tax on electricity, with gas tax being higher and slightly more punishing, so no matter what you drive, you'll get hit with a tax that's meant to be allocated for road maintenance\improvement. This would encourage EV\PHEV\HV adoption while maintain tax revenue.

Of course not many politicians have the balls to increase gas tax as it would anger just about every voter in the state, and EV\PHEV owners are a small group to target against. Hats off to Chris Christie who actually made it happen in NJ and lost his job eventually. Before the tax increase, NJ gas was so cheap that it literally made no sense to pay any kind of premium to change to something that uses less gas.

 

Define "proper".

 

Surely it's not something I can pull out of my a$$.. it'll have to looked at to see what proper should be. I'll let you know what I think that' number would be when I am Governor.

 

at least in principle?
Are you going to distinguish b/w electricity used for driving (and impacting the roads)e vs everything else? If yes, how? If not, basically you're making gas buyers pay for everything? What happens when Tesla trucks become a thing (for the sake of the argument)?

 

I wouldn't give Christie much credit as his gas tax increase was paired with a number of tax cuts/credits. Also, he didn't lose his job because of it, but due to being term limited as Governor.

Also, Christie's belated raising of the gas tax was about 6 years too late to save the ARC rail project.

 

Of course not letting gas buyers pay for everything, but a higher percentage than there is now. I don't think there is any realistic way to distinguish electricity used for driving vs everything else, so a fee could be added to all electricity usage. Perhaps dedicated super charging stations would carry a surcharge.
Again, it's an framework to offset tax revenue loss due to less fuel consumed. it would take some in depth calculation to determine what the proper numbers should be.

I don't want to totally derail this into a political debate. As much as I didn't like the gas price hike, it was the right thing to do and not many other politicians would have the guts to commit that kind of political suicide.