My brother, who lives in the Chicago burbs owns a small trucking company (3 trucks on the road). The company is based out of Indiana, and he NEVER buys fuel in IL. He used to work for a large trucking company before he started his own, and even they would encourage drivers not to buy fuel in the Chicagoland area. This is all lost revenue for the state of Illinois, and they are left dealing with the issues as a result.
Just went to register my wife's car (bought it in Dec so register it every December) and remembered this thread. Apparently the EV tax in 2020 is going to be $248, and our ICE vehicle registration is going from $101 to $148 (or thereabouts, maybe it's $156? I dunno). So $100 more than an ICE, which is about what I calculated it should be up thread. Still feels stupid, like they are penalizing people for doing something beneficial, but whatever.
Of the 8 states listed, I would say that 7 of them are either Republican strongholds or have serious government funding shortfalls to explain the anti-EV taxes. The baffling one is California, which is supposed to be doing all it can to encourage EV usage, yet here they are with an extra $100 flat tax (which also means it is an anti-working class regressive tax) on electric cars. I guess file that one under California just raising taxes in general.States Hike Fees for Electric Vehicle Owners in 2020
At least eight states will enforce new or higher registration fees for electric vehicle owners starting Wednesday in an effort to offset lost revenue from gas taxes.
These states are Alabama, California, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Ohio, Oregon and Utah, according to the Associated Press.
The fees, which range from $50 in Kansas to $200 in Alabama and Ohio, are meant to help fund the states' infrastructure, which relies heavily on gas taxes. States have seen gas taxes fall over recent years due to cars' better gas mileage and an increase in electric vehicle usage.
While some think that states are being reasonable with the new fees, which they claim are less expensive than what vehicle owners pay each year for fuel taxes, others like electric vehicle advocate Neda Deylami call the fees a "kind of a blanket penalty for anyone who chooses to go electric."
California, which is responsible for nearly half of the nation's electric vehicle sales, will charge electric vehicle owners a $100 fee starting July 1.
We hear all the time about all of the "invisible costs" that ICE vehicles cost in terms of pollution, health issues, blabbedy blah blah, which EVs are supposed to help sidestep, so why do they need the piddly additional costs from EVs? Plus, the additional marginal wear from EVs on the roads is infinitesimal versus the temp changes, plows, and big trucks we have on our streets.
The whole thing just smacks of "those jerks are getting a free ride, we need to tax them!" but if "those jerks" are helping to transition us away from fossil fuels, shouldn't they be rewarded, not shaken down for every last nickle? It's like if they enacted a soda tax, and then realized that people who don't drink soda aren't contributing, so let's tax their water! but wait, we're trying to influence people away from drinking soda, why do we turn around and tax those that are doing what we want them to?
Taxation and pensions (legacy costs) are really what hurt IL, I always see the state the same way I see GM - if they could actually cut the bull****, reorganize, consolidate, and really start a new chapter in how things work it'd be a smashing success. That inevitably hurts people in the short-term, so even though the big picture would really improve you end up caught in the politics and muck of it all.
| 17 Elantra | 18 JLU Sport | 01 BMW 740 iL | 91 Dynasty | 74 SuperBeetle | 62 Ford Unibody | The poster formerly known as 200HP4dr
Before, a trade-in up to $20,000 reduced the tax payable on the purchase of the new car. Now it's going down to $10,000. You still only pay tax on the difference over the $10,000.
I agree the nickel & diming is stupid though.
It actually peaked all the way back in 2001 and the migration started after 1996 when the US government cut off the money spigot for PR. They went from a welfare baby of the US to something even worse - they aren't independent, so they don't have autonomy but they also aren't a state, thus they can't vote and effectively have no representation. The best thing at this point would be to grant PR its independence and sign a Compact of Free Association with them, such as the USA has with the Federated States of Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau. PR is simply way too big to treat it like it's Guam II.