WA SB 5251 : $100 annual fee for EVs (was EV Tax)

[DaveinOlyWA]

they may be. to be honest with ya, i have not followed it that closely other than to say i prefer that certain types of vehicles not be singled out for taxes especially a blanket tax.

i would rather see taxes on larger vehicles based on weight and mileage. if you want to drive a high mileage vehicle and its not for business purposes, you should pay a premium

but then again, my opinion always seems to run in that direction when its other peoples money involved

 

[evnow]

No New Taxes!..

Well, that slogan is killing American infrastructure. Soon we will be competing with Bangladesh on who is worse (Already Bush's lead levels allowed in drinking water was close to theirs).

Ultimately infrastructure & services money needs to come from somewhere. When & if the schizophrenic electorate wakes up to the fact that there is no free lunch, may be we will invest in the country again and bring it back to first world standards.

My counter proposal would be : Prices (and fees) should reflect true costs. This includes road & bridge maintenance. Paying for various oil security measures abroad. Paying for using (or misusing) common goods like the environment.

 

[davewill]

i would rather see taxes on larger vehicles based on weight and mileage. if you want to drive a high mileage vehicle and its not for business purposes, you should pay a premium

That would be nice and fair, but then you start trying to figure out how to get accurate mileage data. Every time I've seen this come up, legislators seem to think we need to add GPS units to cars to record the mileage and automatically send it to the state. The problem being that I don't want my every movement reported to the government. The odometer is much more accurate, anyway. I think we'll end up taxing the electricity, myself. It fits in with how we've done this so far, and the billing data is largely available. It's also much easier to hide the tax on an already complex utility bill, than it is on something like your car registration. It would make installs more expensive though, since we'd all have to have a second meter (or equivalent) to measure our EV charging.

 

[Anonymous]

i would rather see taxes on larger vehicles based on weight and mileage. if you want to drive a high mileage vehicle and its not for business purposes, you should pay a premium

I agree, that would be the most fair and it's relevant. Separate the road tax from gasoline and instead tie it to weight per axle combined with distance traveled. That takes care of nearly every kind of vehicle, including NEVs, CNG, Fuel Cells (Hydrogen), EVs, Solar vehicles, whatever else you can think of.

However, FAIR and PRACTICAL don't always go hand in hand. Setting up and maintaining that system would be expensive, especially at the start. It's definitely possible. You could even have it be a self-reported system, and verify that mileage (and make up the difference if you lied) every X years or when the vehicle is sold. You have to report mileage for every sale, that's a perfect time to check up on what has been reported compared to actual mileage. (oh, gee, 6 months ago you reported that your odometer reading was 65k, but now you're selling it at 210,000.... Guess you need to pony up some road taxes....) But any of those options are significantly more costly to maintain than putting a tax on gas, and/or a flat fee at registration.

Frankly, the more I think about it, I'm really not that upset about the $100 tax on EVs. At least for now. As long as they're doing no sales tax and the significant rebate, I'm still WAY ahead. The amount that the taxpayers are helping my up-front costs (including the EVSE), I'm willing to pay back a little more than my share in road use taxes. Once those other breaks go away, though, something should change.

The aspect that does bother me is the fact that if Nissan chose to put a little tiny gas generator in the Leaf, even if it took days to charge the battery, it could then be called a hybrid and be except from this like the Volt is. I think they need to at least re-write this law to have it set based on battery capacity or EV range or something.

CNG is going to become a big thing, it already is for heavy equipment (garbage trucks, buses). Other technologies will come out as well. They'll need a better way to handle this in the future, I just don't think they know exactly how to deal with it right now. This is the cheap and easy thing for them to do in the meantime so that they can wait and see what the real world data suggests.

$100 per year? No biggie. I'm saving more than that PER MONTH just in the difference between electricity and gasoline. Is it fair? Of course not. But I could go on for days about the stuff that isn't fair. Quite frankly, I think more things are unfair in my favor than not, so I really shouldn't complain, should I?

 

[thew]

i would rather see taxes on larger vehicles based on weight and mileage. if you want to drive a high mileage vehicle and its not for business purposes, you should pay a premium

I agree, that would be the most fair and it's relevant. Separate the road tax from gasoline and instead tie it to weight per axle combined with distance traveled. That takes care of nearly every kind of vehicle, including NEVs, CNG, Fuel Cells (Hydrogen), EVs, Solar vehicles, whatever else you can think of.

However, FAIR and PRACTICAL don't always go hand in hand. Setting up and maintaining that system would be expensive, especially at the start. It's definitely possible. You could even have it be a self-reported system, and verify that mileage (and make up the difference if you lied) every X years or when the vehicle is sold. You have to report mileage for every sale, that's a perfect time to check up on what has been reported compared to actual mileage. (oh, gee, 6 months ago you reported that your odometer reading was 65k, but now you're selling it at 210,000.... Guess you need to pony up some road taxes....) But any of those options are significantly more costly to maintain than putting a tax on gas, and/or a flat fee at registration.

Frankly, the more I think about it, I'm really not that upset about the $100 tax on EVs. At least for now. As long as they're doing no sales tax and the significant rebate, I'm still WAY ahead. The amount that the taxpayers are helping my up-front costs (including the EVSE), I'm willing to pay back a little more than my share in road use taxes. Once those other breaks go away, though, something should change.

The aspect that does bother me is the fact that if Nissan chose to put a little tiny gas generator in the Leaf, even if it took days to charge the battery, it could then be called a hybrid and be except from this like the Volt is. I think they need to at least re-write this law to have it set based on battery capacity or EV range or something.

CNG is going to become a big thing, it already is for heavy equipment (garbage trucks, buses). Other technologies will come out as well. They'll need a better way to handle this in the future, I just don't think they know exactly how to deal with it right now. This is the cheap and easy thing for them to do in the meantime so that they can wait and see what the real world data suggests.

$100 per year? No biggie. I'm saving more than that PER MONTH just in the difference between electricity and gasoline. Is it fair? Of course not. But I could go on for days about the stuff that isn't fair. Quite frankly, I think more things are unfair in my favor than not, so I really shouldn't complain, should I?

Yes you should.(Complain) . EVs should not be taxed.. we want folks to use them not shy away.. And I think someone here has misunderstood the Sales tax thing.. You pay Sale Tax on the Car if you live in a State that charges Sales tax.. I think most of them. If you live in Oregon you do not pay sales tax.. But the Nissan Dealer charges it if you live in a state that collects Sales tax.. (most of them) .

So to weigh Sales tax against a $100 Added EV tax makes no sense.. Most of us pay Sales Tax.. Registration needs to be based on Weight. That equals wear and tear on the roads.. SO of course an EV pays its fare share in Registration VLF etc... But Ev's should not pay more simply because they do not stop at a gas pump.. that is simply crazy..

I want to see the Funds we already collect spent wisely.. The Government can keep raising Taxes to the sky falls but until they spend the funds correctly nothing will get better..

 

[Anonymous]

Washington State (which is where I live and is what this thread is about) is a sales tax state, but when buying a Leaf you do NOT pay the sales tax.

WHY do you think EVs should not be taxed at all? I'm really having a hard time with all the people with this concept of entitlement. "I'm buying an EV, so I should get a free EVSE, not pay sales tax, not pay road use tax, all chargers should be free for my use, and everyone on the street should bow down to me because I'm such a wonderful person for buying electric!" BS. WHY shouldn't we be paying our fair share?

Like I said, I don't think the flat $100/year idea is perfectly fitting or fair, but then again the tax credits aren't "fair" either, but that's unfair in our benefit.

 

[thew]

Washington State (which is where I live and is what this thread is about) is a sales tax state, but when buying a Leaf you do NOT pay the sales tax.

WHY do you think EVs should not be taxed at all? I'm really having a hard time with all the people with this concept of entitlement. "I'm buying an EV, so I should get a free EVSE, not pay sales tax, not pay road use tax, all chargers should be free for my use, and everyone on the street should bow down to me because I'm such a wonderful person for buying electric!" BS. WHY shouldn't we be paying our fair share?

Like I said, I don't think the flat $100/year idea is perfectly fitting or fair, but then again the tax credits aren't "fair" either, but that's unfair in our benefit.

Uhh, well the Thread was about the EV tax, look at the Title.

WA SB 5251 : $100 annual fee for EVs (was EV Tax)

And California and Oregon and WA are all 3considering it right now..

And again not sure what you mean by not Taxed.. WE pay Sales Tax and VLF . those are both Tax.. Now maybe for you folks in Washington things should change but for the rest of us effected by the New desire to add a EV tax it does matter.. At least in California we are paying our fare share.

 

[Packet]

Like I said, I don't think the flat $100/year idea is perfectly fitting or fair, but then again the tax credits aren't "fair" either, but that's unfair in our benefit.

Tax credits are meant to encourage a behavior, and we want to encourage EV adoption. Just like the first-time homebuyer tax credit was meant to encourage people to buy houses, and it did, or the cash for clunkers was meant to encourage people to buy new cars (infusion of cash into the economy) that were more efficient.

I think the problem with the $100/year idea is that it gets mentally perceived as a penalty. It's not, but it gets seen that way. It probably could be better framed. Like, say, have a special EV license plate, one that -- like in other states -- lets you use the HOV lanes even with only one person in the car, but which costs $100. Et voila. Now it doesn't feel like a 'tax' but rather like you're paying for the Magic EV Carpool Plate. Or just have a special plate for EVs that doesn't have special privileges, but which costs $100. Suddenly it feels like a license fee, or something similar, which is easier to swallow.

Saying "because you drive an EV, you have to pay more taxes" may be functionally the same thing, but will always be less well-received.

 

[Anonymous]

Uhh, well the Thread was about the EV tax, look at the Title.

WA SB 5251 : $100 annual fee for EVs (was EV Tax)

Silly me, here I was thinking that since the title was "WA SB 5251..." that we were focused on talking about the Washington State one... :roll:

 

[thew]

Uhh, well the Thread was about the EV tax, look at the Title.

WA SB 5251 : $100 annual fee for EVs (was EV Tax)

Silly me, here I was thinking that since the title was "WA SB 5251..." that we were focused on talking about the Washington State one... :roll:

I Thought it was ( EV Tax ) as it started out.. But no matter. It affects all of us , If WA passes it California will be next etc.. But thank you for the Spirited conversations!

 

[thew]

Like I said, I don't think the flat $100/year idea is perfectly fitting or fair, but then again the tax credits aren't "fair" either, but that's unfair in our benefit.

Tax credits are meant to encourage a behavior, and we want to encourage EV adoption. Just like the first-time homebuyer tax credit was meant to encourage people to buy houses, and it did, or the cash for clunkers was meant to encourage people to buy new cars (infusion of cash into the economy) that were more efficient.

I think the problem with the $100/year idea is that it gets mentally perceived as a penalty. It's not, but it gets seen that way. It probably could be better framed. Like, say, have a special EV license plate, one that -- like in other states -- lets you use the HOV lanes even with only one person in the car, but which costs $100. Et voila. Now it doesn't feel like a 'tax' but rather like you're paying for the Magic EV Carpool Plate. Or just have a special plate for EVs that doesn't have special privileges, but which costs $100. Suddenly it feels like a license fee, or something similar, which is easier to swallow.

Saying "because you drive an EV, you have to pay more taxes" may be functionally the same thing, but will always be less well-received.

Yes! Exactly.

 

[highcountryrider]

Looks like SB 5251 is still around, but hasn't passed. Is that right?

I wrote my legislators to oppose it:

As a purchaser of an electric vehicle, I consider this bill to be
regressive. At this point, we should be encouraging as many people
as possible to "go electric". When EVs are common enough to have any
impact on the roads, then perhaps a road tax would be appropriate, but
not now.

xxxxxx

 

[Packet]

I still think that it's only fair we pay towards road maintenance, but this should be handled differently.

Instead of "you pay a $100 EV tax to make up for lost gas tax," it should be "You pay $100 per year for registration on a special EV license plate." That EV plate could then be used for things like enforcing EV parking spaces, or whatnot. The outcome -- EV drivers paying our fair share towards road maintenance -- is still the same, but you /feels/ less like you've been slapped with a penalty if you get something (like a zappy green EV license plate) in exchange for that $100.

 

[KeithFrechette]

I agree that we need to pay our fair share for road maintenance and whatnot. Until July 2015, though, the state of Washington declares EVs except from sales and use taxes, as an incentive for going electric. I would consider the proposed fees to be a "use tax" of some sort, and thus feel we should be exempt from it until July 2015. Of course, the legislature my have a different interpretation.

 

[Packet]

Until July 2015, though, the state of Washington declares EVs except from sales and use taxes

Ah, now, I wasn't aware that the July 2015 exemption was on /use/ taxes as well as /sales/ taxes. Then I would agree that the $100 road maintenance would directly conflict with that.

 

[GaslessInSeattle]

I have to say it seems a little odd to have the sails tax waived to give incentive to buy this new technology and then to have them turn around and tax the users in another way. I think they should wait until EV's really have a chance to catch on before doing this or maybe pass it but have it go into effect in say three or five years. All we need is another inane thing for consumers to point to as a disadvantage to EV's.

Fyi, Sen. Mary Margaret Haugen of WA state has introduced a bill that would add a $100 annual registration fee for electric vehicles to make up for diminishing gas-tax revenue. EV owners get no respect if this passes. Sure it's only $100, but being charged because we are concerned with using less fossil fuels and cleaning up the environment. I would imagine that this will be happening elsewhere.

Read more: http://www.theolympian.com/2011/01/20/1512545/missing-headline-for-20odomes.html#ixzz1BgHN7djd

 

[AndyH]

http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/WA-Senate-passes-100-annual-electric-car-fee-3305434.php

OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) — The Washington state Senate has passed a bill to charge electric car owners a $100 annual fee to compensate for the lack of gas taxes they pay.

Sen. Mary Margaret Haugen, the Camano Island Democrat who sponsored the bill, says while electric cars are good for the environment, they put the same wear and tear on the state's roads that gas vehicles do.

The same bill passed in the Senate last year but failed in the House.

Washington's gas tax stands at 37.5 cents per gallon, and is the state's largest source of transportation dollars.

The bill does not apply to hybrid vehicles or to those that don't exceed 35 mph.

The bill passed Saturday on a 31-16 vote and goes next to the House.

 

[ebill3]

The $100 annual EV use fee in WA was talked about some time ago, but then sort of fell off the RADAR screen. Looks like it is back for real February 1st. Initially, I was a bit piqued that Volts are exempted, but shucks, you pay sales tax on a Volt, not on a pure EV. I'm good.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5028920...car-owners-wash-face-annual-fee/#.UNj3pazyThd

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

The fee is to offset the loss of gas tax revenue of which the Volt can pay substantially less than a regular ICE which is "unfairnes" part one.
In 2011 I paid just about $100 in gas taxes for the Prius but for people who drive LEAFs and don't much will be penalized unfairly "unfairness" part two.

I don't mind paying my fair share to maintain roads and I think the tax should be mileage based

 

[KJD]

I would not be opposed to paying my fair share of road maint. and 100 per year seems reasonable.

Now I just want to know if those people that drive gas guzzlers are going to pay for that Trillion dollar war in IRAQ.