Fuelly Forums

Fuelly Forums (http://www.fuelly.com/forums/)
-   Hybrid Vehicles (http://www.fuelly.com/forums/f35/)
-   -   Hybrid owners in MI are being penalized (http://www.fuelly.com/forums/f35/hybrid-owners-in-mi-are-being-penalized-18243.html)

wassmer 11-10-2015 02:03 PM

Hybrid owners in MI are being penalized
 
To whom it may concern,

I am sure that you heard about the plan of Governor Snyder to charge owners of energy-efficient cars higher fees because they will pay less taxes due to using less fuel. I find this absolutely unacceptable and it is a slap into the face of everybody trying to do the right thing in face of man-made global climate change and air pollution due to combustion. What are you as an organization of electric car owners planning to do about it?
I think Snyder's outdated policy needs to be addressed by a broad association of all interest groups of environmentally concerned and acting citizens who will soon be punished for the honorable examples they provide for our society. You should reach out to hybrid owners and owners of residential rooftop solar panels that are in immanent danger to be charged retail rate for energy that they consume in low-production time periods while the utility companies will get away paying them wholesale rate for energy that owners put into the grid at peak hours.

I am more than happy to do my part in bringing groups together and organize direct actions. As this all comes down at us very quickly, we have to act very soon - that means yesterday!

Best, Tom
---------------------------------------
Thomas Wassmer, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of Biology
Siena Heights University
1247 E. Siena Heights Dr.
Adrian, MI 49221
517-264-7637

rfruth 11-10-2015 04:22 PM

capitalism at work :D

Charon 11-10-2015 07:14 PM

Seems to me it would be more appropriate to contact your legislator instead of an Internet forum.

Jay2TheRescue 11-10-2015 07:24 PM

This happened in Virginia a few years ago. The Governor that signed it into law was promptly shown the door at the next election.

Draigflag 11-10-2015 11:16 PM

The government always puts profits and taxes before human/environmental health sadly. They just the environment as another way to tax people. It's the same story here, we pay Road tax based on emissions. Fuel efficient cars are free, big SUV'S are $800 a year. Some might say that's unfair, but it has made people more aware of emissions and switch to more efficient vehicles. As of 2017 everyone will pay the same rate 140 per year. Now people are going to probably justify this by buying bigger cars, that have higher emissions and use more fuel. Backwards thinking as per usual...

trollbait 11-12-2015 05:36 AM

This is just because the politicians don't have the stones to raise the fuel taxes. The federal portion stopped covering road work before hybrids even showed up.

Charon 11-12-2015 04:47 PM

Every road user needs to pay their share of the road maintenance expenses. It has usually been seen as fairest to assess that cost as a fuel tax. Those users who went to propane, CNG, or electricity usually did so in an attempt to reduce their costs, not for any so-called "environmental preservation" reasons. Some US states are looking at assessing road tax by some variation of distance travelled, sometimes by GPS measurement. Those ideas have led to outcries of "invasion of privacy" among others. The fun is only just beginning.

OliverGT 11-13-2015 07:08 AM

If I was in charge...

I would split the tax into two parts:

1. Road Tax - This would be a fixed charge same for all vehicles, or maybe based on weight.
2. Environmental Tax - This would be on Fuel, Petrol, Deisel and any other fuel source.

That way people are not charged for their ability to pollute, but the actual pollution they cause.

For example, you might want to own a big fat V* gas gussler, but you only drive it a few thousand miles a year.

On the other hand, you might have a nice efficient little deisel, but drive 25 thousand miles a year.

The current way of charging on a cars ability to pollute means that the gas gussler will pay more even though they pollute less. This is not fair in my opinion.

Oliver.

litesong 11-13-2015 12:35 PM

Re-pubic-lick-uns are swiftly forcing toll roads across the U.S., with lots of propaganda to justify allowing rich people to pay user fees to drive the previous commuter lanes that were reserved for 2 or 3 occupants per vehicles. On top of that, big low mpg vehicles won't be charged any more. On top of that, is expensive monitoring systems(freedom intrusive) that were NOT needed when the lanes were previously HOV lanes.

trollbait 11-16-2015 04:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OliverGT (Post 186076)
If I was in charge...

I would split the tax into two parts:

1. Road Tax - This would be a fixed charge same for all vehicles, or maybe based on weight.
2. Environmental Tax - This would be on Fuel, Petrol, Deisel and any other fuel source.

That way people are not charged for their ability to pollute, but the actual pollution they cause.

For example, you might want to own a big fat V* gas gussler, but you only drive it a few thousand miles a year.

On the other hand, you might have a nice efficient little deisel, but drive 25 thousand miles a year.

The current way of charging on a cars ability to pollute means that the gas gussler will pay more even though they pollute less. This is not fair in my opinion.

Oliver.

A gas guzzler driven only a few thousand miles a year isn't going to pay more than a Prius driven the 15k miles average at current gas tax rates.

If it is an older car, it could actually pollute more than that Prius despite being driven far fewer miles.

OliverGT 11-16-2015 06:13 AM

trollbait,

If the tax is on the Fuel, everyone will pay equally for their pollution.

You are correct that an older car could pollute more than a Prius, even if driven for less miles, but in my solution they would pay more, because the tax is on the Fuel.

What I am against is taxing based on a vehicles ability to pollute. As the same argument works the other way, you could have a Prius and drive 60k miles (at 40mpg) a year which would be far more polluting than my old gas gussler which is only drven 2k miles (at 10mpg) a year. But in most countries the gas gussler will be taxed more because it has the ability to pollute more.

But having the ability to do something doesn't mean that it will. Most cars have the ability to break the speed limit, but they don't go around giving everyone speeding tickets.

Anyway, rant over, I'm not in charge... But hopefully if I pester enough people they might start to listen.

Oliver.

trollbait 11-16-2015 09:18 AM

Ah, I didn't see that you were outside of the US, and thus misunderstood where you were coming from. Here, any other fees or taxes on a car aren't based upon the ability to pollute. They are on vehicle type or property value.

Draigflag 11-16-2015 09:58 AM

Same thing with Supercars, they pay more Road tax, but realisticly do a few thousand miles a year, still pay the highest Road tax at 500 a year. Silly system, I'm just glad my tax is free.

LDB 11-16-2015 10:03 AM

Taxes should be based on vehicle weight which is what damages road surfaces and fuel consumption, two variables and two taxes. Weight tax would be part of the annual licensing of the vehicle, consumption on pump purchases per gallon as we have now. Then, and most importantly, a stipulation in the law forbidding the criminals, uh I mean politicians, from robbing the fund for their pork projects. All funds must go to highway infrastructure.

Draigflag 11-16-2015 10:08 AM

The annual Road tax here is based on fuel consumption, or C02 which is directly linked anyway. Good idea in theory, however as you know, the fuel tests are flawed anyway, with most cars using way more fuel, and therefore emitting way more pollution than the figures suggest.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:50 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.