Prius Owners Unite

Pennsylvania, my fair orig state, has among the highest pump tax. Believe it was higher than Ca. for a while there, but Ca would have none of that and started increasing carbon taxes etc. I always try to fill up in MD instead. So...there is that to overcome...that Pa. would in theory have the highest such fees, if they go that way, and whereas Ca. will not compete on that front.

It is still not fair to tax gas hybrids unless all gas vehicles are taxed based on MPG.
Plug-in is a different argument due to alternate fuel.

Roar Lions Roar!! (PSU alum here)

 

Prius Prime tank size + fuel economy means I can fill up in NJ and the drive the length of PA without stopping for gas till Ohio. Works out pretty nicely.

 

After Pa we lived in NJ so I did NJ to Pgh a lot...now its DC to Pgh

 

We Are (Alum here too).

One of my staff is a boilermaker, so hoping for a good result tomorrow.

Trying to avoid hearing “boiler up” on Monday.

 

ah, that explains it

 

As long as there is some explanation.

You an alum from somewhere?

I just hope we play the first half and don’t have to play catch up in the second half.

 

Even including hybrids the cars you speak of represent under 5% of cars in the state, only about 1500 EVs are there. These handful of vehicles have zero impact on road funding .


Hybrid taxes are morally wrong, completely unnecessary and possibly illegal

This legislative turd is copied right off the ALEC model legislation website.

A special fixed tax for hybrids is not only unnecessary but damaging to common people who unfortunately own one.
These fees do not reflect the reality of use, or have any bearing on what a similar car would use for fuel. They also can’t fix the road funding issue (which started before hybrids existed) which will result in more calls for fee increases when this policy fails.
Fixed fees also do not charge visitors to the state pushing the cost to those who live here.
Our DMV only passes on about 45% of fees collected into the state coffer while gas tax is over 99% efficient as there is no “beauracracy” to pay for.
This tax is simply bad policy, “technology “ shouldn’t be taxed lest we have the
1. Turbo tax
2. ECU tax
3. CVT tax
4. Aluminum cab tax
5. Fuel injection tax
6. Bluetooth tax
7. Dent resistant door tax
8. Direct injection tax
9. LRR Tire tax
10. Alloy rim tax
11. Electric door and window tax
12. Remote entry tax
13. Automatic transmission tax
14. Disc brake tax
15. Airbag tax
16. Collision avoidance tax
17. Air conditioning tax
18. Heated seat tax.
19. Powered rack and pinion steering tax
20 Tubeless radial tire tax
21. Independent suspension tax
22. On demand 4wd tax
23. Cam tax
24. ABS Brake tax
25. Hallogen headlight tax
26. Synthetic motor oil and fluid tax
27. Dual brake chamber master cylinder tax
Etc etc. all of which improved fuel economy more than the couple hybrids in the state.

Also many older hybrids don’t even get good mileage and folks only own one because it was cheap.

 

boston college, we're in the toilet bowl most years

 

Yeah you can’t have Doug Flutie every year .

Saw Mark Herzlich calling a game the other day.

Still rockin the mowhawk.

Looked like he was doing well.

 

I'm a little late to this party but.............
It is not "insane" at all.

Consumers, individuals, the public in general, really PAYS FOR EVERYTHING when you get right down to it.
In the case of roads, it seems only fair that those who USE the roads contribute the most to the cost of them.
If the revenues from gas taxes are falling, the necessary funds have to come from somewhere else.

If you have a better idea, put it out there.
But remember that "the Government" really is YOU.
ALL of the Governments money comes from YOU.

 

99% of vehicles are powered by liquid fuels, raise the gas tax.

100% of privately owned heavy equipment is fossil fuel powered, raise the diesel tax.
Under 100 experimental heavy machines are electric, and most are not privately owned.

As the percentage of the public that drives is going down, what happens when few people own cars?


The problem with fixed fees is that I can’t opt out of them and if I do opt out, I will stay opted out due to major lifestyle changes required.

I would argue we are no where near critical mass outside California and discouraging vehicle ownership won’t help fund roads

 

I know that it is REALLY confusing to see politicians try and plan for the future in a rational way............

When/IF fewer TOTAL people own cars, the need for roads and maintenance should be less, but without some kind of global disaster, I don't think that will really happen.

NOW......if you are really interested in this subject, do some studying on how Europe (and maybe Asia too) handles vehicle "taxes". In Europe, the cost of fuel at the pump is something like 4X what it is in the US because of taxes. This discourages fuel usage, steers buyers toward more efficient vehicles and tends to discourage vehicle ownership too. Lots of bicycles and motor scooters in use.
I do not know what if any extra taxes they have for electric vehicles. I would guess none.

But I think that your logic is screwed up if you really believe that a relatively small tax on electric vehicles will discourage vehicle ownership.

 

I think the bottom line is that we all have purchased our vehicles so we could reduce our personal cost of driving and pollute less. By them raising my tag fees, I would have been better off just keeping my 2006 Scion XB that was paid off. We all are just trying to make our mode of transportation comfortable, affortable and convenient for all of our independent lifestyles.

 

Agreed, because the gas tax per gallon is so extremely low and almost meaningless it means “low” fixed fees easily equal annual fuel costs and make alt fuel vehicles an economic looser.

It can and does drive vehicle decisions

Like it or not privately owned motor vehicles only use at most a third of fossil fuels and even if all cars become EV, the supply side needs to be dealt with, even a very very low tax like 1% on the supply side would shore up a number of problems, but god forbid we do that.

You know, cause it would affect business decisions, be unavoidable and actually be cheap to collect and it would reflect use and be a minor pollution deteran.

The horror of it

 

I think we in California should start taxing vehicles by size. If we were all driving cars that were one foot shorter, thousands more cars would fit on the freeway at a given time. Couple this with limited times for trucks to be driven on the freeways (as was successfully done during the Olympics in Los Angeles), and we could improve traffic flow even more. SUV's, trucks, RVs, all should pay higher registration fees than smaller, lighter vehicles. Call it a "Large Hog" tax. Every morning on the freeways you see thousands of single occupant Large Barges crowding up the roads. The problem is we fat Americans have been brainwashed into buying Iron Dinosaurs. A large portion of this large population can afford a low occupancy, much smaller, lighter (plugin hybrid?) second vehicle to drive to work. Now can we convince the manufacturers to offer these types of vehicles; sadly, greed says no. It has to be pointed out to people that idling in your ICE bucket on the freeway is not going to improve the Climate Change situation. As troubling as it is to some, Big Gubmit is probably going to have to get involved to improve the problem.
As far as taxes on electrified vehicles which are currently the best available solution to air pollution; it's flipping absurd. When your population of electrified vehicles reaches 50 percent or more, then maybe you can start talking about extra taxes on them. Statistics show that large commercial trucks are the primary cause of road degradation, aside from weather conditions. BTW, California's gasoline tax is about 40 cents, which is comparable to many other states; our double charges for gasoline out here is due to oil company greed.
OK, rant over; as you were!

Posted via the PriusChat mobile app.
AChoiredTaste.com

 

Next rant: ban cars, everyone should bike.

Followed by: everyone take a bus!!!

Then: I'm vegan Tesla driver so I'm better than all of you.

and so on....

 

Agree fully

Kei car taxes can be workable as long as you leave a partial way out for the so called “poor need truck drivers” like 2wd manual transmission standard cab.

It is believed that a significant portion of large transport being non-ice won’t occur until 2050 or later and the percentage of fuel used for trucking / shipping goes up every day,
So fuel taxes should be with us a long time, unless we just want trucking welfare fully subsidizing the industry.
So the argument that some day in a 100 years we will all have EVs so let’s tax them immediately at the level we should be taxing other cars but don’t argument falls flat.

The fair share folks like to leave out the weight VRS wear portion of the equation as well.