@texases You haven’t yet thanked us for our contribution to the >$6 billion of subsidies taxpayers have contributed over the past 8 years to keep the price of gas low for your gas guzzler. (The total cost of the EV tax credits are a drop in the bucket next to that.) You’re welcome.
@texases, who wrote “Fact - the moment you pay your taxes, the money is no longer yours. It’s the government’s/ours.”
Correct. And when do you “pay your taxes”? When you file your return, and your tax liability is determined.
And when an EV buyer files their return, the federal tax code then determines their liability based on their specific situation, just like any other part of the tax code.
Your twisted logic is now trying to claim that once any tax is deducted via payroll, that is “governments/ours”. That just isn’t so. Otherwise, one could just have no payroll tax (ever heard of a 1099?) and then the money is still theirs???
So in your last post you revealed your true feelings…it’s not that you have a problem with how your tax dollars are used, for something you don’t support…you don’t want my tax dollars used for it. Well guess what, it’s not your business, my tax liability is between me and the government, and my choice…just as yours is. If you don’t like it, vote your conscience and don’t buy an EV…or better yet, DO buy an EV!
And the home interest credit is not a “red herring” (do you even know what that means?) it is an analogy, and an apt one. If you still don’t get it, do some research or ask someone to explain it to you.
Which brings me to your hyper focus about the tax credit not being worth it because it won’t do enough to reduce CO2 emission (though we have already determine in nearly all cases it will do a little and may do a lot, with respect to vehicle emissions.
I think you are not aware the the main purpose of the EV tax credit was not about C02 reduction; that was a minor side benefit. Rather it intent in 2007 inception by Congress and Pres Bush was to increase gas mileage, efficiency, reduce gas consumption, move towards greater energy independence/less dependence on oil, foreign or otherwise ( in 2030 imagine how much oil will be needed from the proven reserves in the Middle East…if cars only run on oil)
So consider all these other long term pluses of encouraging EV adoption; benefits that are not necessarily tied to the individual adoption of EV but rather to the collective once their are enough drivers, consumer demand and voice, and related infrastructure…did I mention the hi tech domestic industry economic benefits (think Tesla) Those will be jobs and tax dollars earned too…
The current Tax credit will equate to ~$1.5 billion in tax revenue lost over 10 years (assuming such energy progressive not having an EV credit option wouldn’t have otherwise bought a PV system or do energy improvements on their homes, getting a credit anyhow)
Current Oil industry tax credits and deduction will total ~$44 billion in lost federal revenue for the same 10 year period - over $4 billion PER YEAR for one of the already most (if not most) profitable industries in history.
Still think EV credits are the real waste of “our taxpayer money”?
Yes
The question of taxing electricity used to propel cars has to be addressed at some time in the future. It will likely be in the form of either an additional sales tax when the car is purchased initially or some form of annual levy based on average mileage driven. Any form of additional taxes on electric vehicles, however, will be very unpopular and politicians want to avoid it like the plague.
Currently gas taxes presumably pay for highway upkeep and new consruction. And if that is true, we’re falling behind with the Interstate system and many bridges badly in need of repairs.
@longprime, I ride to work every weekday on the bike.
The scooter is sidelined until (lithium) battery replacement.
@docnick
gas tax revenues in Ore is down and has been for many years. The combination of more efficient ICE cars, concentration of people into the cities, less miles driven and hybrids have made significant impact on this tax.
Trucking co’s are going to squeal but until truckers hold the line on axle weights, I won’t have much sympathy. That trucker who hit the I-5 bridgeis going to cost taxpayers a few hundred million that no one has.
Gas tax revenues are down nation-wide. A moderate increase in the per-gallon tax (about $0.18/gallon I think) would solve it. But politicians won’t do that. Instead some are pushing per-mile taxes. The reason? One of the proponents wrote me ‘Folks don’t trust the gas tax will be spent on roads’. Huh? That has nothing to do with anything, the same problem exists with per-mile taxes, which also adds in a whole new agency, whole new set of taxes, etc.
@docnick: you raise a good point, about planning for future road tax revenue from EVs/PHEVs.
I think most EV drivers would be happy to contribute their fair share of road taxes.
The issues with with the two proposals you mention are:
-
A sales or registration tax will likely be based on vehicle price or type, not road usage, and will be unfair to drivers of expensive EVs and/or low mileage drivers
-
A mileage tax, although better, does not take into account the varying efficiencies of different EVs ( see below) and therefore might under tax large vehicles and over tax smaller, more efficient ones.
Why not tax the kWh used for charging at the point of delivery or sale? That way the tax is collected appropriate to “fuel” usage, and in the locale where it is likely to impact the roadways.
Similar with gas tax, which economically encourages some drivers to choose more fuel efficient vehicles (and/or not drive like a jackwagon), per kWh EV tax would encourage similar consumer choices and behaviors (for example one EV gets 4 miles per kWh where another only 2.5, and instead of jackwagoning to drive efficiently or maybe in cold weather to choose to use heated seats instead of forced air to get max EV efficiency. Personally I love heated seats anyhow!
We already have the technology to do this type of electronic accounting; my Volt reports daily the number of kWh used to charge the vehicle which I can view on the volt owners site. (If you’re curious, it’s typically 8 kWh per night for my 34 mile one way commute, which inludes 15-20% charging losses. So at least in summer my Volt is getting ~4.25 miles per kWh. Note: I typically have 15-20 mile range remaining; don’t want you to think I only get 34 miles per full charge)
Linking this data to home utility service or remote charging service accounts could allow the appropriate collection of fuel usage tax. There may be some initial resistance from utilities and charging station providers to collect these taxes, but in the end it can be worked out, just like it is now for gas stations.
Also, taxing people at what is already their point of sale or distribution is something consumer are accustomed to ( as opposed to getting a brand new bill in the mail) so it may prove more palatable to politicians as well.
aventinavenu That would be ideal. However, drivers of EVs will be charging all over, so a meter has to be built into the vehicle itself. And the results somehow reported. Whatever happens, it will mean more bureaucracy no doubt.
Does Elon Musk still have a portion of PayPal?
@circuitsmith
Called the distributor of that EBike.
Wifey says that we will go down to one vehicle when the Civ dies. So I need to keep that beast going and need a short distant transportation besides a bicycle.
I need to find out if that bike can take a level2 charger (240V-40A). I have a 400ft elevation climb that just about fully discharges an E-assist bicycle bat.
I made some $$ on Solarcity and can take some out for a EV bike.
IMHO, gas tax compensation for EVs would be a reasonable approach, only, if they were a large number or the dominant number of cars on the road. Right now, it would be totally counterproductive. EVs are so few in number, the incentive to have one for other reasons should remain in tact, including avoiding road tax. Where does it end ? Will you start charging more tax for a Corrolla over pick up truck. Generally, higher efficient cars are lighter with few exceptions, cause less damage to roads and should be incentivized. EVs for now, should be incentivized the most with NO road tax. Isn’t there a tax on electricity that the EVs incur while charging that the gas powered cars don’t pay of between 3.7 and 5 percent ?
I would argue…you would be taxing them twice. Everyone should be in favor of not double taxing energy sources and charging EVs additional fees for road maintenance would be that case. Later, dedicated EV chargers could have an additional, nominal fee to help pay road maintenance, but only when the number of EVs is actually a factor. For now, they are a net gain for the environment, and should be incentivized and not taxed out of existence.
Per mile taxes is equally counter productive. Efficient cars which cause the least damage would begin to pay the same rates as truckers which cause the most. This is a counter productive idea, and generally taxing gasoline and diesel by the gallon is most effective to encourage better mileage and put the repair onus on whom it belongs, the big heavy gas hogs ! Besides, the more miles you travel, the more gas you use, the more tax you pay…it’s already in effect in a more quotable way.
Why do people pick on Volts?I think they are a swell looking auto,lot of hybrids and some Volts,even a few leafs around Charlottesville,just bought an electric string trimmer(time will tell) I like electric-could you imagine a 3/8 ths gas powered drill?-Kevin
Volts and Teslars are both (not quite equally) impractical to own on the average budget. A $35k Coralla or Civic would get picked on too for their price/performance/ practicality discrepancies.
@Dagosa,I believe some of this is jealousy,one problem I’ve found with some of these bargain autos is that after the dealer gets done with you ,its not such a bargain anymore.And I really would like the option of traveling 30+ miles with zero gas in the tank(plus I finally figured out most of these car salesman are not really your friends{big deal or walk-never had to many to call me back.I marvel at these deals these folks on these forums claim they get.they don’t exist in these parts-Kevin
@kevin "I believe some of this is jealously"
Absolutely. Wish I could afford a Teslar as a play car and envious of those who can. It’s hard to believe that any one who can afford one is limiting their carbon footprint in the rest of the way they live. But, that’s just me being jealous talking.
Comparing a Volt to “$35,000 Corolla or Civic” is the perpetuation on the myth that pro-oil right wing forces want you still keep believing - to keep the masses ignorant and afraid of EVs, particularly the Volt, keep them “out of reach” by perception.
In fact, currently lease deals are ~$159 a month for the Corolla or Civic, and $259 for the Volt, similar $2500 cash at signing…but actually quite likely you will save $100 on gasoline every month with the Volt making their monthly costs THE SAME. ($125 for gas vs $25 for electricity) Plus fewer oil changes (once every year or two)and less maintenance with the Volt.
And price is where the comparison ends. The Volt is faster, handles better, more upscale inside and out, higher safety rated, has more standard features, and just plain more to drive than all other “entry level” cars like the Corolla and Civic…and more energy efficient than the Prius or any gas hybrid.
This is the secret that powerful forces don’t want you to realize. Take a 24 hour test drive of the Volt, your eyes will be opened!
It is true that a gallon of gas is about 40 kWh of energy. But only 25% or so makes it to the wheels so effectively it’s about 10 kWh. People can drive 3 to 4 miles per kWh so that’s where they’re getting that it’s about $2 per gallon. People drive 40 miles on 12 kWh electric and compare that a gallon of gas. 12 kWh costs 1.50 to 2.00.
As for the $7500 tax credit, any tax credit is less money to the govt. So where does the govt get that money back? From the rest of us. Home interest deduction is the same. Although the people getting the interest are taxable for the most part so that balances it.
Regarding coal brink sunk pollution never heard that term. Marginal kWh from burning coal at 30% efficiency vs gas at 25% then coal is making more co2. Cars create other pollution. As does coal he mercury. Mercury isn’t sunk pollution don’t know what you meant.
Also the gas flares in and are not emitting methane. They would be if they didn’t burn it. They’re drilling for oil. The methane is a by product so they burn it as its not economical to ship it to market. No pipelines nearby.
Fracking does release some methane which escapes although the EPa or some such just came out and said it’s less than they thought.
Well I guess we need to find a way to cheaply sequester CO2,then I suppose we can go hell for leather and quickly consume every combustible source of energy we have(not as much there as some would have you believe folks(peak oil is for real) if you don’t believe that,why do the prices jump so much? And I do hope everyone understands what “peak oil” means.I don’t think tar sands really count in the grand scheme of things-Kevin
I think we are already spending a cool billion for R&D just for coal. Annually.