Taxing alternative energy vehicles

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » February 16, 2005, 5:18 pm

I found this kind of bizarre.

Oregon and California are looking into a GPS tracking chip to be placed in the new hybrid cars that will track mileage. Officials are concerned that owners of these new hybrid cars won't be spending enough money on gas which is taxed for road development and upkeep.

You can't win...buy an alternative energy vehicle and uncle sam's still going to hit you up for not buying gas and paying your share for new roads.

I understand that money for road construction needs to come from somewhere but it just sucks knowing that even though you're trying to save the environment and use less gas, you'll be hit up for the taxes as if you used it anyway.

miir · Post by **miir** » February 16, 2005, 5:57 pm

That's really fucked up.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » February 16, 2005, 6:11 pm

That's retarculous... and I wouldn't be surprised if the oil lobby was behind it...

It will serve only to keep people away from alternative energy vehicles and continue our sadlt industry-driven dependence on it.

gotta find that money somewhere else... like increasing the occupational priveledge tax. (they just did that here... from 10 to 52)

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » February 16, 2005, 6:26 pm

i think it has more to do with Gasoline tax being the principle pot of money that roads and related infrastructure are paid for with.

so if there were massive adoption in the marketplace of hybrid vehichles, gasoline sales would dip, as would the taxes from them, as would the funds to fix and maintain roads.

Hybrid vehichles do probably exert a comparable wear and tear on roads as gasoline vehichles. So that is probably the source of the bullshit legislation.

that being said, i think this falls under the category of "Nuissance legislation" and will not ever get voted into law.

Tinkin Tankem · Post by **Tinkin Tankem** » February 16, 2005, 7:36 pm

Along the same line as Voro. Hybrid vehicles are becoming a very competitive option for those buying new cars. The number of them on the market has increased exponentially in the past say 5 years (since they weren't readily available prior.) Say within the next 10 years they hold 33% of the market in the private sector. So 33% of the drivers are paying a fraction to use the same amount of road that I do and you would lose that income used for road construction/renewal. Granted the trucking industry is a major player in paying for the roads. It would still be a big hit. The real question in my mind is how much will they charge them? I think the tax on gas is arouns 50cents/gallon in Iowa (That's could be completely off, I didn't look it up.) Say for the sake of argument it's 50cents though. If you're getting 60miles to the gallon and you pay an extra 50cents/30 miles it's still a pretty good incentive.

Imho they should pass some sort of legislation on this now while there won't be many people complaining vs. when a large proportion of the cars in the country are hybrids. Let's face it, if we're going to drive, we need roads. If you're car has a comprable weight to mine I don't think it's fair that I pay twice or three times what you do to travel on the roads. The fact of the matter is that the system is old and will soon be outdated to our new age technology. Seeing some sort of foresight capability from the government isn't all that bad of a thing is it?

Rekaar. · Post by **Rekaar.** » February 17, 2005, 4:10 am

Voronwë wrote:i think it has more to do with Gasoline tax being the principle pot of money that roads and related infrastructure are paid for with.

so if there were massive adoption in the marketplace of hybrid vehichles, gasoline sales would dip, as would the taxes from them, as would the funds to fix and maintain roads.

Hybrid vehichles do probably exert a comparable wear and tear on roads as gasoline vehichles. So that is probably the source of the bullshit legislation.

that being said, i think this falls under the category of "Nuissance legislation" and will not ever get voted into law.

bingo

XunilTlatoani · Post by **XunilTlatoani** » February 17, 2005, 11:41 am

Some more discussion about this here:

http://www.veeshanvault.org/forums/view ... hp?t=12284

Tracking devices in cars are always going to have privacy hurdles to jump over. As I mentioned in the other thread, a lot of us in northern Illinois willingly use a transponder in our cars to pay tolls, because paying cash at the tolls costs twice as much without using the I-Pass.

I think the more likely outcome will be what it always has been...if the government is not making enough money on the gas tax, then they'll raise the tax rate until they do. They can then justify it by saying if you have a more fuel efficient car, not only will you be paying less gas tax than the gas-guzzlers, but you'd be helping the environment. A tracking system would cost extraordinarily too much, and it's a lot to ask to get everyone to do all at once (not to mention tampering concerns, etc.)

Tyek · Post by **Tyek** » February 17, 2005, 12:38 pm

I researched this a little and I hate to tell you, but the tracking devices are already in a lot of the cars.

BLACK BOX INFO
Find out if your automobile has a black box at http://www.airbagcrash.com. (Note: Scroll to bottom of page to find your auto model after you click on link.)

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » February 17, 2005, 12:48 pm

Filthy tree huggers don't want to pay their share!

XunilTlatoani · Post by **XunilTlatoani** » February 17, 2005, 2:33 pm

Tyek wrote:I researched this a little and I hate to tell you, but the tracking devices are already in a lot of the cars.

BLACK BOX INFO
Find out if your automobile has a black box at http://www.airbagcrash.com. (Note: Scroll to bottom of page to find your auto model after you click on link.)

This is a system used solely for the purpose of recording the last 5 seconds before the air bag was deployed in your car. Granted that according to their web site they have successfully used the data in a criminal case to defend a driver against reckless driving (and presumably the data could be used against the driver as well), but it's not like this thing is tracking your location. Looking at the specs, it basically tracks your speed, how much you were pressing the throttle, how much you were pressing the brake, if your seat belt was buckled, the state of your air bag suppression switch and how long it took the air bag to deploy.

Personally, I'm not that concerned about someone knowing the state of my car 5 seconds before a crash with air bag deployment....tracking the GPS location of my car indefinitely on the other hand concerns me just a bit.

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » February 17, 2005, 2:53 pm

XunilTlatoani wrote:and presumably the data could be used against the driver as well

It has been, with no warrant or driver notification either. A drunk had his charge changed from negligent homicide to manslaughter (IIRC) due to it's reading. He'd been at full throttle for whatever time period was recorded, and had never touched the brakes prior to running into someone.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » February 17, 2005, 3:08 pm

Hello this is Onstar, how may I help you?

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » February 17, 2005, 3:16 pm

A lot of the misconceptions about some boxes in use now (not the black boxes) come from people not understanding what they actually do. While they do gather a lot of information, they don't transmit it on their own. The company that wants the information doesn't even get it on their own. The car's owner has to unplug it from under their dashboard and hook it up to their home computer to transmit data online. If you don't want that period's data reported, don't upload it. Systems with GPS tracking integrated are a bit more complicated, but the pricing on that type of system hasn't really become completely worth it yet. I know that the company I work for has actually had testing going on in the UK through a sort of tech exchange with another company. I can agree with the boxes that track information, but those with GPS's are the one's that I feel may go overboard.

masteen · Post by **masteen** » February 17, 2005, 3:21 pm

Voronwë wrote:Hello this is Onstar, how may I help you?

I just hit a guy, and I could really use another vodka tonic!

Lynks · Post by **Lynks** » February 17, 2005, 3:24 pm

masteen wrote:
Voronwë wrote:Hello this is Onstar, how may I help you?
I just hit a guy, and I could really use another vodka tonic!

Ok, we took care of that for you, is their anything else? Thank you for chosing Onstar.

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » February 17, 2005, 3:26 pm

If the govt wanted to track you, your cell phone and credit\debit cards are probably sufficient anyway. Between the two they give a good picture of where you were and what you did.