CA - AB1591 - $165 flat fee for zero-emission vehicles

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

lkkms2

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 20, 2011
Messages
347
Location
San Diego/National City, CA
drees said:
GRA said:
Here in CA, Gov. Brown's asking again for a hike in the gas tax. We'll see if he can get the legislature to go for it: http://www.smdailyjournal.com/articles/lnews/2016-01-23/tax-fight-over-roads-could-dominate-state-legislature/1776425157252.html
WTF - a flat fee for EVs is mentioned in there.
Frazier’s AB1591 would raise $7 billion a year through higher gas and diesel taxes, a $38 annual registration fee increase and a new $165 annual fee on zero-emission vehicles whose owners don’t pay anything into the gas tax fund.

Let's see. I drive 11,000 miles a year. $165/11,000 = 1.5 cents a mile. Average car gets around say 25 MPG.

25 x 1.5 cents = 37.5 cents "extra" tax per gallon equivalent! How do they justify this!!
(Where is the carbon tax to level the playing field!)

Also in San Diego and other counties in California there are sales taxes passed by propositions for transportation needs. Every time I buy something I am also contributing to transportation funds

drees, I think we may need a separate heading for this topic of discussion for here in California!

MODERATORS NOTE: Much of this thread split off from here: Gasoline May Rise Above $5 a Gallon
 
Many of you may not want to hear this, but as EV drivers we need to step up to the plate and pay for the transportation infrastructure we use. Roads and bridges are not cheap, and as others have noted we need to spend much more on maintaining them to a safe standard than we currently spend in total, even without adding new lanes or roads. I'm in Georgia, I pay a $200 annual fee on my Leaf, and I'm totally OK with that. When compared to what the average driver (getting say 25 mpg) pays in combined state and federal gas tax this is fair. Now, I'm also totally in support of a big gas tax hike right now while prices are this low. Makes perfect sense to do this now as most people will not even notice and it will raise huge $$ for infrastructure.

Someone else mentioned a sales tax, and IMO this is exactly the way to go. Everything you buy from a store or online that is shipped to your house is trucked across this country using the roads. Therefore a sales tax to support transportation infrastructure is completely logical; the more stuff you buy the more you have "used" the roads so the more you pay. Eventually we have to adopt another form of revenue generation outside of gas tax because the world is moving away from ICE slowly but surely. EVs and other AFVs still need roads even thought we don't burn any dead dinosaurs.
 
Bufordleaf said:
... but as EV drivers we need to step up to the plate and pay for the transportation infrastructure we use...
I think it is more important to help the polluters to stop polluting by increasing the taxes on polluting.
 
Saw this after reading an article GRA posted in the $5 gas thread:

Tax fight over roads could dominate state Legislature - The Daily Journal
Frazier’s AB1591 would raise $7 billion a year through higher gas and diesel taxes, a $38 annual registration fee increase and a new $165 annual fee on zero-emission vehicles whose owners don’t pay anything into the gas tax fund.

I haven't read the bill in detail, but I absolutely detest these kinds of flat fees for vehicles that don't use gas for a couple reasons:

Full bill text: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1591

1. It unfairly costs people who drive few miles more than people who drive a lot.
2. The per-mile costs typically end up much higher than the equivalent gas burning vehicle.

Now I am not against paying what one might call their "fair share". I'd be happy to. I just don't want to be gouged for trying to do the right thing.

A better plan:
Make the road tax commensurate with vehicle weight and miles driven. Heavier vehicles do much more damage to roads than light vehicles. Simply plug in your odometer reading when you pay your annual license to calculate.

Now if we also want to include a pollution tax (polluters must pay for the damage to people's health they contribute to), we could also include a fee based on the emissions of the vehicle as tested. For example, there could be an additional tax based on NOx emissions / mile.
 
DanCar said:
... I think it is more important to help the polluters to stop polluting by increasing the taxes on polluting.
A technically wonderful concept, but politically completely unworkable.

In conservative TN the governor has already given up on an increase in gasoline tax this year.
Even though many in industry and engineering fields support it there is NO WAY he can get the votes.

I agree alternative fuel vehicles need to help pay for road maintenance.

I have paid nothing in 4 1/2 years driving a LEAF.
That is wrong.

But much more likely politicians will correct that and start charging me before they do the other right thing and raise the tax on fossil fuels.
Even if gas drops to $1.25 a gallon.
And it might get there this year.
 
Well, we'll see if it goes anywhere, but Portland is working on a new gas tax:

http://bikeportland.org/2016/01/24/173183-173183
 
lkkms2 said:
Let's see. I drive 11,000 miles a year. $165/11,000 = 1.5 cents a mile. Average car gets around say 25 MPG.

25 x 1.5 cents = 37.5 cents "extra" tax per gallon equivalent! How do they justify this!!
(Where is the carbon tax to level the playing field!)
I think they justify it by taxing gasoline somewhere around 40 cents per gallon.
(They also probably consider that to be a field-leveling carbon tax, or vice versa.)

No question the gas tax is too low, however. At the very least, they could/should have indexed it to inflation in 1993.

drees said:
GRA said:
Here in CA, Gov. Brown's asking again for a hike in the gas tax. We'll see if he can get the legislature to go for it: http://www.smdailyjournal.com/articles/lnews/2016-01-23/tax-fight-over-roads-could-dominate-state-legislature/1776425157252.html
WTF - a flat fee for EVs is mentioned in there.
Frazier’s AB1591 would raise $7 billion a year through higher gas and diesel taxes, a $38 annual registration fee increase and a new $165 annual fee on zero-emission vehicles whose owners don’t pay anything into the gas tax fund.
 
lkkms2 said:
Let's see. I drive 11,000 miles a year. $165/11,000 = 1.5 cents a mile. Average car gets around say 25 MPG.

25 x 1.5 cents = 37.5 cents "extra" tax per gallon equivalent! How do they justify this!!
(Where is the carbon tax to level the playing field!)!
Well, including sales taxes it seems the best number I can find is that California residents are paying about 42 cents per gallon tax for gas right now (before any increase) of which you pay 0. So someone who has a 25 mile per gallon car is paying $184.80 for those same 11,000 miles today and has been for years. So even the $165 for EV owners in the bill is less than they pay before they get increased. Yes, they may pollute more but they do no more damage to the road than you. So how do you justify that?

Gas taxes are the most regressive of taxes and hit poor (and predominately minority) residence of CA the hardest (not to mention that housing prices and policies in CA force the poor to live further out so they have to drive more miles in less efficient cars to get to work) all while affluent EV owners exercise their privilege cruising along in HOV lanes (which fails to reduce the number of cars on the roads creating more carbon and pollution for everyone) and demand more taxes on "them" to level the playing field to avoid paying for the roads they use.

Sounds more like: "I support tax increases for thee, but not for me."
 
drees said:
I haven't read the bill in detail, but I absolutely detest these kinds of flat fees for vehicles that don't use gas for a couple reasons:

Full bill text: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1591

1. It unfairly costs people who drive few miles more than people who drive a lot.
2. The per-mile costs typically end up much higher than the equivalent gas burning vehicle.
Well the rough calcs I did in the other thread suggests the other thread suggests that the $165 is likely a little light in CA which has about a 42 cent per gallon tax (which I've seen other argue its as high as $1.00 a gallon depending on what all you consider) but assuming and average car getting 25 miles per gallon and driving a fairly low average of 11,000 miles a year, they are paying $185 per year (before any increase).
drees said:
A better plan:
Make the road tax commensurate with vehicle weight and miles driven. Heavier vehicles do much more damage to roads than light vehicles. Simply plug in your odometer reading when you pay your annual license to calculate.

On this, we agree :D

vehicle class * miles driven and drop the gas tax for all. The DMV knows your vehicle class, you report miles annually and pay the tax. Fair to all!
 
At 10,000 miles a year that is 1.65 cents per mile. A fair share unless you don't drive much. Agree with vehicle weight and miles driven as the fairest way to divide up. I am against any fee that discourages BEV adoption at this point though, because we need to get off fossil fuels ASAP.
 
You pollute.. you pay. What is so difficult to understand?

As more people are pushed to EVs due to higher gas prices, the EV prices will drop down such the cost of ownership over say 5 years in an EV will be cheaper than a gas car. At that point the poor don't have to pollute just like the rich guys.

But we need to get there.

We have heard the argument that EV Incentives benefit the rich and so it is unfair to the poor. Now you are saying, punishing polluters hurt the poor more than the rich.
 
Bufordleaf said:
Many of you may not want to hear this, but as EV drivers we need to step up to the plate and pay for the transportation infrastructure we use. Roads and bridges are not cheap, and as others have noted we need to spend much more on maintaining them to a safe standard than we currently spend in total, even without adding new lanes or roads. I'm in Georgia, I pay a $200 annual fee on my Leaf, and I'm totally OK with that. ....

And I'm down for paying a FAIR share. But there's nothing fair about paying a flat tax when others are paying a use-tax. And the gasoline tax is unfair to begin with because it punishes people who can't afford newer more efficient cars. A system needs to be developed to collect this revenue fairly whatever vehicle type you're using. In my opinion, roads are part of the commons and benefit everyone regardless of whether they drive a little or a lot or not at all. Roads should be paid for out of the general budget and taxes collected accordingly.
 
Am I not taxed for the electrons I use? Isn't the gasoline tax put in the same coffer as all other taxes and then road repairs, etc. are paid from the general fund? Would Electric utilitiy taxes end up in a general fund? I need to Google these things unless someone much smarter than me answers. Thanks!

PS I'd 'like' to pay my fair share of road usage. but 'fair' is SOOO different to too many people. The large trucks (personal use , not the 18 wheelers) would argue that they are 'working vehicles' and need a tax break, where your little EV is freely enjoying the same road(s). I get that feeling anyway.
 
The gas tax is not a road tax - it's a gas tax. We pay taxes on our "fuel" too, they're called electric utility taxes. Those tax receipts must have increased commensurate with EV adoption - let lawmakers try to use those funds for roadwork. Of course the whole idea that "these taxes pay for this and those pay for that" is fundamentally flawed anyway, as money is fungible.

If there's to be a road tax, then let there be a road tax that's paid by ALL users - the idea of taxing us for NOT buying gas is just completely idiotic. By the same logic, we should tax gas vehicle drivers for not buying as much electricity as we do, and non-smokers for not buying cigarettes!
 
Most EVs make about 125 miles per gal E. and that is the way the tax is set up. large trucks pay more, and use more fuel. If you use less like a hybrid you pay less. I pay taxes in my power bill for the right of way of the power lines, and sales tax on my power bill. now they want me to pay anther tax? California road tax is 39.5 cents a gasoline gallon. less not confuse fed tax and sale tax. just look at road tax. who wrought this bill?
 
finman100 said:
PS I'd 'like' to pay my fair share of road usage. but 'fair' is SOOO different to too many people. The large trucks (personal use , not the 18 wheelers) would argue that they are 'working vehicles' and need a tax break, where your little EV is freely enjoying the same road(s). I get that feeling anyway.

Fair enough. The construction guy who takes his truck as a business expense, sure. The redneck who likes to have a truck to show he's a real man...not so much.

I somewhat used to be in favor of a flat fee when I personally drove 1,000 miles a month. Now we have two EVs in the family and neither drives more than 400 miles a month...not so much. Now I'm in favor of a mileage based fee and have no problem with BIG GOVERNMENT knowing my driving habits. After all, I need to tell my insurance company (AAA) how many miles a year I drive annually, and they use that data to help decide what my insurance rates will be.
 
so 12,000 miles 25 mpg is 480 gallons and 190 in taxes.
$165 seems high for not contributing to the pollution but not outrageous.

How much is the fuel tax increasing?
" including revenues attributable to a $0.225 per gallon increase in the motor vehicle fuel (gasoline) tax imposed by the bill"

Not exactly one sided. Yes those that drive 2,000 miles a year might pay a little extra but it is not huge.
 
Nubo said:
And I'm down for paying a FAIR share. But there's nothing fair about paying a flat tax when others are paying a use-tax. And the gasoline tax is unfair to begin with because ... A system needs to be developed to collect this revenue fairly whatever vehicle type you're using.
Almost everyone I know agrees with this, and yet I don't see it happening at all without concerted, coordinated effort. And nothing personal here, but so much complaining is just whistling in the wind. Money out of politics is my personal "solution" to so many of these widely-agreed-upon-things-that-never-seem-to-get-done... Arrrrrrrgh!

Nubo said:
In my opinion, roads are part of the commons and benefit everyone regardless of whether they drive a little or a lot or not at all.
Quick digression: am I the only one who's bothered by the inability of the "auto-linker" to determine what is and is not an actual reference to what is being linked to? Apparently it was not told what spaces or punctuation marks are. Ridiculous!
 
DanCar said:
Bufordleaf said:
... but as EV drivers we need to step up to the plate and pay for the transportation infrastructure we use...
I think it is more important to help the polluters to stop polluting by increasing the taxes on polluting.



So as for stepping up to the plate and help with this GOV slush fund that gets borrowed from for other programs...but never gets reimbursed cause the GOV borrows from hand to hand, then says there's no $$$ left in the budget from taxes that is suppose to go into road bridges...etc,
 
fooljoe said:
The gas tax is not a road tax - it's a gas tax. We pay taxes on our "fuel" too, they're called electric utility taxes. Those tax receipts must have increased commensurate with EV adoption - let lawmakers try to use those funds for roadwork. Of course the whole idea that "these taxes pay for this and those pay for that" is fundamentally flawed anyway, as money is fungible.
Money is fungible, but the entire justification for the 39 to 42 cents per gallon tax on gasoline (over the basic sales tax paid on all other products) was specifically to pay for roads (if that money is not getting there, that's on your lawmakers). Such taxes don't exist on electrons. So if not dedicated to roads, then that tax should not exist. The gas tax was always an easy substitute for a road use tax and until alternative fuel vehicles (including hybrids) came alone, a very effective one.
fooljoe said:
the idea of taxing us for NOT buying gas is just completely idiotic. By the same logic, we should tax gas vehicle drivers for not buying as much electricity as we do, and non-smokers for not buying cigarettes!
You do use the roads so you should pay for them. So as alternative fueled vehicles become more common the gas tax method of collecting road use taxes no longer works well and needs to be replaced with a direct road use tax and the gas tax eliminated. Until then, electric vehicles (including hybrids) need to pay for their use of the roads.
DanCar said:
I think it is more important to help the polluters to stop polluting by increasing the taxes on polluting
Now if like DanCar you want to justify the 39 to 42 cents a gallon gas tax as "pollution tax," well, that's different. Since most people don't have a choice of non-polluting vehicles, as affordable non-polluting vehicles don't exist, then you are just taxing people for being poor.
 
Back
Top