Illinois Infrastructure Plan Would Raise EV Registration Fees to $1,000/yr

[lightfoot3b]

LMFTFY

“Please forget this come election season. I blindly took the proposal from my auto dealer buddies who donate copiously to my campaign, not realizing that the registration fee was crazy high, nor that there were enough people driving electric cars who would notice and make noise.”

They never expected multiple Tesla owners to show up to give them the facts either. The senator who proposed it lied constantly right in front of all of us and the DOT. I testified first. The GM rep that was flown in had pages to read. He read one paragraph after I testified. The DOT testified with the numbers I used (road use taxes collected and average miles driven per vehicle). The senator used miles driven annually per person, but didn't understand there was a difference. My local senator didn't want to even acknowledge his colleague he co-sponsored the bill with was blowing smoke left and right during the meeting where we showed him the numbers from the DOT and national insurance figures.

The care level is much lower when you aren't the one funding their campaign. I watched it happen, I watched the lies, I watched the lies continue after I personally informed them.

Then, second testimony, after that session concluded had the craziest exchange of my life. One of the representatives came up to me and a Dr. from an ND University who testified about the pollution and lack of acknowledgement of the need for sustainability. Now, not the topic of the day (road use fees), but tangentially related. The senator came up and said to the professor: a gallon of gas weighs about 6-7lbs there is no way it could produce 20lbs of CO2. Long story short we both told him to google it since he didn't (we didn't say this out loud) understand high school chemistry. Yes, we are working with people who believe they know more than people who have dedicated their lifelong study to the environmental sciences.

 

[jgillispie]

When are legislators going to realize that gas tax revenue will continue to decline with more fuel efficient cars.
The number 1 cause for road damage is weight. Any tax to fix roads should be based on weight and miles driven. In addition,
States need to quit using salt in the winter especially on bridges.

Agree with the weight part, not the salt.

 

[jgillispie]

It absolutely is but unfortunately I wouldn't get your hopes up as per mileage based tax plans are seen as big brother is watching you stuff and have yet to really gain much traction...

Jeff

In Chicagoland area all ICE vehicles require an emissions test every year. It wouldn't be much different or a stretch to require all cars to get the odometer read.

 

[jeffro01]

In Chicagoland area all ICE vehicles require an emissions test every year. It wouldn't be much different or a stretch to require all cars to get the odometer read.

Agreed but the problem with that is the "all at once" tax bill that comes with it... At least the gas tax is paid in small increments...

Jeff

 

[Sankarnp]

I think it's a sad reality we will all face soon.The logic of it is simple: As EVs replace ICE cars over the next 10 years, all of the tax revenue from hydrocarbon transportation and sales will evaporate. I don't understand what savings a state will incur when that happens but one thing is for sure, there will be a shortfall they will need to make up somewhere!

there are 4.5 million cars registered in IL with electric cars around 15,000 (.3%). ~1% of all new cars sold was electric (616,104 cars sold, 7,357 electric cars). IL should promote more electric vehicle sales before the numbers are at a level where the taxation increase can start.

 

[jsmay311]

Did you like the idea of taxing DC fast charging?

It's an ok idea in theory, but the problem for those arguing EV drivers should pay similar amounts in taxes as ICE drivers is that such a tax would raise hardly any money since the vast majority of EV charging is done at home. So you're simultaneously ceding their point that EV drivers should pay their "fair share", and then proposing a solution that wouldn't come anywhere near accomplishing that.

In Chicagoland area all ICE vehicles require an emissions test every year.

It’s every 2 years.
Does My Vehicle Need to be Tested?

 

[jsmay311]

I just went through this in ND. Some points and questions for you:
1. The federal should not be considered. The states do not collect federal taxes. The feds could impose their own fees at any time. In reality the (intelligent) feds want EVs as it would reduce healthcare costs among other reductions long term (short term in pollution at local levels in dense populations).
2. The gas car number at $575 is fuel and registration. Does an EV not pay registration in IL already?
a. In ND we now pay $120 per EV (which is dumb, if I'm one person I can't drive 2, 3, 4 EVs at one time, but if I own more than one I'm charged like I drive them all at the same time.
3. Per mile: This was in NDs first proposal but they removed it after my testimony that told them of the issues of it long term (other states charging me tax for electricity when traveling) but for now it works since other states do not do that (MN is moving towards paying at the "electrical pump"). Even after testifying again it was completely unfair unless a person drives 12,000 miles a year. Not all EVs do that. I drive about 80% more than that. I should pay per mile and pay my (higher amount) fair share.
4. We both calculated on mpg of gas cars. I was told in testimony the fuel tax incentives more fuel efficient vehicles. Yet EV numbers are calculated on typical ICE cars all while the EVs are typically around 3-4x as fuel efficient. (BTU efficiency used for calculations).

Are you talking only road use tax or are you adding in sales tax? They should be separated out if both are charged because road use tax is specific, sales tax is not. Two different items to make "fair" and road use should not be combined with anything else since it is specifically earmarked.

1. Agreed.

2. Currently EVs in IL pay $17.50/year for registration. (Other vehicles pay $98/year and the proposal is to raise that to $148/year.)
Since the Senator’s idea is to charge EVs a higher registration fee specifically to make up for their lack of revenue from gasoline sales, it makes sense to include the ICE vehicles’ registration fees when comparing total revenues paid to the state.

3. Certainly a mileage-based tax/fee might be a reasonable alternative to a flat “EV fee”, as long as it only applies to EVs. If you replaced a gas tax with a mileage tax for everyone, it would help people with gas guzzlers and hurt people with efficient vehicles. That’s not the direction I’d like to go.

And re: the point about sales tax...
I know the bill in question is trying to raise revenue specifically to fund infrastructure spending, but IL also desperately needs revenue in general, so I doubt the legislators in question care much about whether the money comes from the excise tax on gasoline sales vs from the sales tax on gasoline sales. They just want the revenue, period. And if their position is that EVs should pay similar amounts to the state in total taxes+fees as ICE vehicles (even tho I’d disagree with that argument), then it’s reasonable to include sales tax in that.

 

[jgillispie]

It's an ok idea in theory, but the problem for those arguing EV drivers should pay similar amounts in taxes as ICE drivers is that such a tax would raise hardly any money since the vast majority of EV charging is done at home. So you're simultaneously ceding their point that EV drivers should pay their "fair share", and then proposing a solution that wouldn't come anywhere near accomplishing that.



It’s every 2 years.
Does My Vehicle Need to be Tested?

Strange. My gf's car had to get tested last year and has received her notice to be tested again by December this year.

 

[renambot]

Looks like the new draft is at $250 for EVs, and progressive amount based on age of the car for gas cars (if I understand correctly):

"The current $101 a year vehicle registration fee would go to $199 for vehicles 3 years old or newer, $169 for vehicles 4-6 years of age, $139 for vehicles aged 7-11 years, and $109 for vehicles 12 years and older. Kind of a progressive tax without using auto values. $490 million a year.

The registration fee for electric vehicles is now $34 per vehicle and would rise to $250 per year. $4 million a year."

Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar » *** UPDATED x1 *** Pritzker’s preliminary draft capital plan relies on about $1.8 billion a year in new or higher taxes

 

[jsmay311]

Looks like the new draft is at $250 for EVs, and progressive amount based on age of the car for gas cars (if I understand correctly):

"The current $101 a year vehicle registration fee would go to $199 for vehicles 3 years old or newer, $169 for vehicles 4-6 years of age, $139 for vehicles aged 7-11 years, and $109 for vehicles 12 years and older. Kind of a progressive tax without using auto values. $490 million a year.

The registration fee for electric vehicles is now $34 per vehicle and would rise to $250 per year. $4 million a year."

Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar » *** UPDATED x1 *** Pritzker’s preliminary draft capital plan relies on about $1.8 billion a year in new or higher taxes

Here's a link to the full document of Gov Pritzker's plan: Rebuild Illinois Briefing copy.pdf

The relevant EV stuff is on page 6:

So, for new cars (0-3 years old) the "EV penalty" vs a non-EV car would be only $51 extra per year. ($250 - $199 = $51. In comparison, Sandoval's bill the "EV penalty" was $1000 - $148 = $852.).

• 0-3 year old EVs: $51/yr
• 4-6 year old EVs: $81/yr
• 7-11 year old EVs: $111/yr
• 12+ year old EVs: $141 /yr

If this is what gets implemented at the end of the day, I'll still be a little miffed by the big increase vs $17.50/yr and the reversal of having state policies that incentivize EV adoption rather than discouraging it, but it's still light-years better than Sandoval's $1000/year proposal. Hopefully they don't "compromise" and choose a number in between the two.

 

[tomas]

I’d be fine with this if the money was clearly committed to roads and transport infrastructure.

 

[ChrisH]

Apparently it’s an incentive to buy newer cars? Lol tax on the poor?

 

[tomas]

Apparently it’s an incentive to buy newer cars? Lol tax on the poor?

You must be confused. The registration fee goes down on ICE cars as they age. It is constant on EV.

 

[ChrisH]

You must be confused. The registration fee goes down on ICE cars as they age. It is constant on EV.

Ooooh totally read it wrong. Okay makes more sense. Our RTA tax in the Seattle area is similar. It’s super expensive $385 for a $35,000 Tesla and then goes down by 5% each year. And we’ve also had a $150/yr EV fee that is increasing to $225 this year. Plus some other fees too. It’s gross.

 

[midwestLemur]

This is still penalizing ownership of EVs which is crazy when we're still less than 1% of vehicles on the road in Illinois, and the revenue they say it will pull in is laughably small. They really can't find fossil fuel subsidies they can cut that would produce more savings than this would bring in?

 

[jsmay311]

Ooooh totally read it wrong.

Sorry, that was probably my fault in listing out what I called the “EV penalty” amounts by vehicle age, which in hindsight can easily be confused as being the total registration fee. Too late to edit my previous post to make it clearer.

 

[tomas]

This is still penalizing ownership of EVs which is crazy when we're still less than 1% of vehicles on the road in Illinois, and the revenue they say it will pull in is laughably small. They really can't find fossil fuel subsidies they can cut that would produce more savings than this would bring in?

No it is not penalizing. If the $250 holds up, it is equivalent of charging EVs $100 to $150 per year fixed fee in lieu of $0.44 per gallon fuel tax. So if you drive an EV 8,000 miles or more, you come out ahead of a 25mpg gas powered car.

Many of us still think EVs should bear incentives. However I do not think that is the larger political will right now. Thank goodness Tesla changed the market and drove down battery costs while subsidies were still in place. I think (hope!) EVs can now compete despite waning incentives.

 

[jsmay311]

This is still penalizing ownership of EVs[...]

No it is not penalizing. If the $250 holds up, it is equivalent of charging EVs $100 to $150 per year fixed fee in lieu of $0.44 per gallon fuel tax. So if you drive an EV 8,000 miles or more, you come out ahead of a 25mpg gas powered car.

Tomayto, tomahto.

Objectively, this would specifically target EVs with $51-$141/yr higher registration fees than any other type of passenger vehicle. (Point, penalizing.)

Subjectively, one could argue that a higher EV registration fee is appropriate/reasonable/equitable in order to compensate for lower gas tax revenues and help fund infrastructure construction and maintenance. (Point, not penalizing.)

OTOH, one could also argue that EVs’ lack of gasoline usage is their central positive attribute, and it’s appropriate/reasonable/fair for EV owners to avoid the costs associated with purchasing gasoline, including gas taxes, since society as a whole benefits from the reduced costs of the vehicles’ air pollution and its associated negative health and climate impacts. And gas taxes exist not only to raise revenues for roads, but also to incentivize people to buy more-efficient vehicles and use less gasoline. (Half point, penalizing(???))

Regardless, it’s a pretty big negative change from the status quo, which is gonna be tough for EV owners to swallow. But the state is deep in the red, and the politics of raising taxes significantly on the masses while asking much less from mostly-affluent EV owners understandably raises some tricky questions.

So, in conclusion... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[midwestLemur]

asking much less from mostly-affluent EV owners

This may have been true in the past, but with affordable used EVs now fairly common and the Model 3 as the first full EV actually capable of 100% replacing a gas vehicle within reach of the masses, I really doubt its true now. There's a lot of people out there in Illinois driving EVs who aren't making 100k, or even 50k a year. Another 250 bill that people are going to have to plan for is going to be a burden. Not to the absurd degree of the previous $1000 fee, but its still going to make people think twice before going electric which is the exact opposite of what we should be doing right now.

I just really seriously doubt that the money the EV Penalty is necessary at this point in time. A slightly higher registration fee on new vehicles that get under 40mpg would bring in far more money.

 

[lightfoot3b]

1. Agreed.

2. Currently EVs in IL pay $17.50/year for registration. (Other vehicles pay $98/year and the proposal is to raise that to $148/year.)
Since the Senator’s idea is to charge EVs a higher registration fee specifically to make up for their lack of revenue from gasoline sales, it makes sense to include the ICE vehicles’ registration fees when comparing total revenues paid to the state.

3. Certainly a mileage-based tax/fee might be a reasonable alternative to a flat “EV fee”, as long as it only applies to EVs. If you replaced a gas tax with a mileage tax for everyone, it would help people with gas guzzlers and hurt people with efficient vehicles. That’s not the direction I’d like to go.

And re: the point about sales tax...
I know the bill in question is trying to raise revenue specifically to fund infrastructure spending, but IL also desperately needs revenue in general, so I doubt the legislators in question care much about whether the money comes from the excise tax on gasoline sales vs from the sales tax on gasoline sales. They just want the revenue, period. And if their position is that EVs should pay similar amounts to the state in total taxes+fees as ICE vehicles (even tho I’d disagree with that argument), then it’s reasonable to include sales tax in that.

Thanks! #3, yes ice only, or per mile everyone and then registration is against fuel economy to keep that equity.