New California EV tax

[mspohr]

New session of legislature has a new transportation bill which propose a tax on EVs.
SB 1 and AB 1 both propose a tax on Electric Vehicles. This is a regressive tax which will discourage adoption of clean EVs. Fossil fuel vehicles already receive may subsidies (from fossil fuel production, distribution and lack of tax on pollution effects). We need to tax fossil fuel vehicles, not clean electric vehicles.

Sierra Club has more details.
Capitol Voice March 2017

(Also a link to find your state assembly and senate representative where you can contact them.)

 

[Ulmo]

Here's the text of the bill: Bill Text - SB-1 Transportation funding.

I did a search for "zero", and it found an additional flat $100 annual tax for "zero emission vehicles", starting in 2020, applied to 2020 model year vehicles and later. I didn't see anything about mileage measurement. This doesn't affect cars made before 2020.

It also adds a new annual tax of up to $175 depending on price of car. This is for everyone.

The problem is that California government passes bills to collect money for road repair, and then doesn't repair the roads, over and over again. I of course oppose any new taxes.

I'd rather the government get out of the business of roads and hand it over to private enterprise: no more road taxes at all. The private enterprises would set the fees and maintain the roads themselves. That way, we don't have roads as an excuse for taxation that is actually being used on other things.

 

[Branzo90D]

While I understand your frustration with the legislature collecting taxes to build and maintain roads and then not using them for that, I do not believe we should be privatizing infrastructure. I, too, do not wish to pay taxes to the "general fund" so that whatever politicians decide can be done with that money, especially taxes which are truly based upon usage like gasoline tax. I'd be willing to pay a reasonable tax on my EV to maintain roads - if I use them, I should pay for them. I believe there are already plenty of incentives from the government to adopt clean fuel vehicles in California and throughout the US. When the Model 3 becomes available, there will be a much larger market segment adopting EVs.

Don't corporations control enough of our government already without handing them more profit motive for infrastructure which is, after all, meant for the general good of the populace? I foresee many, many issues with that. Fees? How would they be charged and who would decide how much is proper? Would I need six different transmitters for my car? What would happen when I crossed state lines?

Instead, I would recommend that a Proposition be made by the voters of the state of California requiring that all taxes collected for roads, such as tolls, gasoline tax, etc., be mandated for maintenance of that infrastructure only. As California has a very open constitutional process for this, it seems to me that this would get us out of the "paying for road maintenance and not getting any" problem much more easily than privatization.

 

[apacheguy]

My problem is not with paying for a service that I use. It's that semi trucks contribute to the vast majority of highway damage in California and they aren't paying even close to their fair share.

 

[omgwtfbyobbq]

Here's the text of the bill: Bill Text - SB-1 Transportation funding.

I did a search for "zero", and it found an additional flat $100 annual tax for "zero emission vehicles", starting in 2020, applied to 2020 model year vehicles and later. I didn't see anything about mileage measurement. This doesn't affect cars made before 2020.

It also adds a new annual tax of up to $175 depending on price of car. This is for everyone.

The problem is that California government passes bills to collect money for road repair, and then doesn't repair the roads, over and over again. I of course oppose any new taxes.

I'd rather the government get out of the business of roads and hand it over to private enterprise: no more road taxes at all. The private enterprises would set the fees and maintain the roads themselves. That way, we don't have roads as an excuse for taxation that is actually being used on other things.

Do you have any links to the bills that increased fees for road repairs, but didn't increase spending on road repairs?

 

[chillaban]

Do you have any links to the bills that increased fees for road repairs, but didn't increase spending on road repairs?

That's basically every bill where the money goes to the general fund.... it's fairly standard practice in CA.

 

[AB4EJ]

My problem is not with paying for a service that I use. It's that semi trucks contribute to the vast majority of highway damage in California and they aren't paying even close to their fair share.

Is this really true? Commercial vehicles pay a variety of taxes. Could you explain why you say they are not paying their fair share? (It may be true, I just wish to know what is this statement based on)....

 

[apacheguy]

Is this really true? Commercial vehicles pay a variety of taxes. Could you explain why you say they are not paying their fair share? (It may be true, I just wish to know what is this statement based on)....

The Hidden Trucking Industry Subsidy

 

[omgwtfbyobbq]

That's basically every bill where the money goes to the general fund.... it's fairly standard practice in CA.

Do you have links to any of those bills? And doesn't this law allocate the increased tax revenue to transportation improvements instead of the general fund?

 

[Lloyd]

I just got back from Singapore, where it costs $60,000 just for the right to own a car for 10 years. The permit then must be re-applied for and repurchased after the 10 years. It does keep the number of cars down on the road!! A prius there is about $140,000!

 

[RubberToe]

Passed yesterday. Anyone know when the $0.12 gas tax goes into effect? 11-1-17 per Ulmo link above.

RT

 

[RubberToe]

Actually somewhat surprised Jerry was able to muscle this through on such short notice. If the EV fee is indeed not implemented until 2020, and prior year EVs are grandfathered in, should be good news for EV sales.

RT

 

[dmode]

I am ok with the $100 EV fees since we are not contributing to gas taxes. But feel bad for the 12 cents gas tax increase. It really hurts the poor. I know many who have commute from Tracy and Stockton to Bay Area on a regular basis. Their gas prices just went up. There is a ballot measure proposed to make sure that these funds are not funneled to general fund (which is of course what the legislature actually wants). I am also surprised the urgency on this. I have a contrarian opinion, and think that California highways are in excellent condition (outside of Bay Area). I have driven 30,000 miles last year all over CA and found most roads to be in very good condition. Just last weekend went to Tahoe via 580 > 99 > 50 and came back 50 > 80 > 680 and all highways were in great shape - not a single lane striping missing.

 

[apacheguy]

Just keep in mind that gas prices are much, much more expensive in many other countries.

 

[mspohr]

I am ok with the $100 EV fees since we are not contributing to gas taxes. But feel bad for the 12 cents gas tax increase. It really hurts the poor. I know many who have commute from Tracy and Stockton to Bay Area on a regular basis. Their gas prices just went up. There is a ballot measure proposed to make sure that these funds are not funneled to general fund (which is of course what the legislature actually wants). I am also surprised the urgency on this. I have a contrarian opinion, and think that California highways are in excellent condition (outside of Bay Area). I have driven 30,000 miles last year all over CA and found most roads to be in very good condition. Just last weekend went to Tahoe via 580 > 99 > 50 and came back 50 > 80 > 680 and all highways were in great shape - not a single lane striping missing.

The argument that "it hurts the poor" is trotted out every time gas taxes are mentioned but the reality is that the poor drive less and use public transportation more so this is really crying crocodile tears when those who can afford it just don't want to pay for road construction or maintenance. Most of this tax will be paid by people who drive gas guzzlers and who can afford it... (or, if they don't think they can afford it they can trade in the full size SUV or pickup truck for something more fuel efficient).

Also, you may have driven to Tahoe but you clearly didn't drive on the roads here. Every road here has been severely damaged by this winter. They are all full of potholes and will all need to be resurfaced.
I drove down to San Francisco yesterday and in addition to the potholes most roads needed new striping. (I-80 all the way from Truckee to the city)

 

[stopcrazypp]

Here's the text of the bill: Bill Text - SB-1 Transportation funding.

I did a search for "zero", and it found an additional flat $100 annual tax for "zero emission vehicles", starting in 2020, applied to 2020 model year vehicles and later. I didn't see anything about mileage measurement. This doesn't affect cars made before 2020.

It also adds a new annual tax of up to $175 depending on price of car. This is for everyone.

The problem is that California government passes bills to collect money for road repair, and then doesn't repair the roads, over and over again. I of course oppose any new taxes.

I'd rather the government get out of the business of roads and hand it over to private enterprise: no more road taxes at all. The private enterprises would set the fees and maintain the roads themselves. That way, we don't have roads as an excuse for taxation that is actually being used on other things.

Do you have any links to the bills that increased fees for road repairs, but didn't increase spending on road repairs?

That's basically every bill where the money goes to the general fund.... it's fairly standard practice in CA.

Some money goes to the general fund, but it is overblown the amount. ~$100 million out of $5 billion a year from gas tax revenue goes to the general fund. That's 2%. There are some proposed bills to make that zero. That would seem to be a more sensible approach than privatizing roads.

In the other thread, there was concern the rest of the money goes toward transit (and not roads/streets), however, the analysis shows of the federal part 85% goes towards highways, 15% towards transit. State is split 57% highways, 36% city/counties (mostly local streets/roads), 7% transit. Overall roughly a 90/10 split between the two.
Roadshow: How much gas tax money goes to California roads? – The Mercury News

So the overall problem isn't really the gas tax money going to general fund or transit (add together still less than 15%), it's that gas tax revenue is not keeping up with road repair demand (ironically because of huge efficiency gains in recent years).

 

[dmode]

The argument that "it hurts the poor" is trotted out every time gas taxes are mentioned but the reality is that the poor drive less and use public transportation more so this is really crying crocodile tears when those who can afford it just don't want to pay for road construction or maintenance. Most of this tax will be paid by people who drive gas guzzlers and who can afford it... (or, if they don't think they can afford it they can trade in the full size SUV or pickup truck for something more fuel efficient).

Also, you may have driven to Tahoe but you clearly didn't drive on the roads here. Every road here has been severely damaged by this winter. They are all full of potholes and will all need to be resurfaced.
I drove down to San Francisco yesterday and in addition to the potholes most roads needed new striping. (I-80 all the way from Truckee to the city)

I am not sure that these are crocodile tears. My cleaners are going to be here this evening. They commute from Modesto to Bay Area thrice a week for cleaning jobs. There are many many blue collar workers who do a similar commute. I spoke with a jr sales guy at a ICE dealer - commutes from Tracy. Hair stylist at Supercuts, commutes from Manteca. Are you saying that their expenses will not change significantly ?

Of course, roads above 6000 ft. are shot because of record snowfall. But that's nothing new and happens most years. In flat areas, roads are mostly fine IMO. Here's a street view of I-80 near Davis from Feb 2017. Perfect condition and lane striping

Google Maps

 

[mspohr]

I am not sure that these are crocodile tears. My cleaners are going to be here this evening. They commute from Modesto to Bay Area thrice a week for cleaning jobs. There are many many blue collar workers who do a similar commute. I spoke with a jr sales guy at a ICE dealer - commutes from Tracy. Hair stylist at Supercuts, commutes from Manteca. Are you saying that their expenses will not change significantly ?

Of course, roads above 6000 ft. are shot because of record snowfall. But that's nothing new and happens most years. In flat areas, roads are mostly fine IMO. Here's a street view of I-80 near Davis from Feb 2017. Perfect condition and lane striping

Google Maps

I agree that these people will have increased costs. But they are not "the poor". They have jobs.
Also, maybe the reason they are commuting such long distances and wasting all that gas is because gas is too cheap. Might be time to find a job closer to home or get a more fuel efficient car which pollutes less.

 

[larmor]

I just don't understand, there are huge taxes in CA as it stands. There are no real weather issues. Having come from upstate NY and then CT and MA, where they are dealing with snow removal, ice issues, salting, sanding of lots of roads. The question to ask is where is all the CA tax money going, because roads aren't great, and we really don't have any 'real' weather issues.

 

[dmode]

I just don't understand, there are huge taxes in CA as it stands. There are no real weather issues. Having come from upstate NY and then CT and MA, where they are dealing with snow removal, ice issues, salting, sanding of lots of roads. The question to ask is where is all the CA tax money going, because roads aren't great, and we really don't have any 'real' weather issues.

TBF, CA also has to deal with these issues which often go unnoticed by majority of the population. I bet CA has more geographical area that is covered in snow and requires snow removal in winters. Think of the San Bernardino mountains in So Cal and Sierra and Cascade ranges. US 395, I-80 needs regular snow removal and also parts of I-5 closer to Mt Shashta.

Having said that, I agree that infrastructure spending can be prioritized easily by optimizing other programs.