TN Hybrid -EV Owners shocked by new state fees

[edwaleni]

I always thought "save the planet" was an odd thing to say.  All cellular life in theory could be wiped out at any time due to cosmic events.

When someone says we need to do more to combat climate change, I remind them that the climate of the Earth has been changing since it was formed billions of years ago...so what exactly are you going into combat with?

Crickets.

[Rothman]

I always thought "save the planet" was an odd thing to say.  All cellular life in theory could be wiped out at any time due to cosmic events.

When someone says we need to do more to combat climate change, I remind them that the climate of the Earth has been changing since it was formed billions of years ago...so what exactly are you going into combat with?

Crickets.

Dude...really?  Here comes the thread lock...

[freebrickproductions]

I always thought "save the planet" was an odd thing to say.  All cellular life in theory could be wiped out at any time due to cosmic events.

When someone says we need to do more to combat climate change, I remind them that the climate of the Earth has been changing since it was formed billions of years ago...so what exactly are you going into combat with?

Crickets.

#1. Yes, the climate has changed as long as Earth has existed.
#2. Said changes were (generally) much more gradual, and not as fast as we're causing the earth's atmosphere to warm up. Even a relatively small change (just one or two degrees celsius) in the global average will be enough to cause big issues for the life that currently exists on this planet. Even now we're already starting to see some of the effects of this with natural weather disasters & other severe weather phenomena (like floods, droughts, hurricanes, summer heatwaves) that are getting stronger and more intense.
Of course, the question with climate change/global warming isn't if the planet will survive, as it'll very much continue to do so until the sun runs out of fuel and becomes a red giant a good few billion years from now. The question is of if we will.

[Max Rockatansky]

It is an about as absolute of a certainty as it can be that humanity will one day reach extinction.  The prospects of moving on to other worlds or even the nearest star is so low that it might as well be impossible on human scales.

[freebrickproductions]

It is an about as absolute of a certainty as it can be that humanity will one day reach extinction.  The prospects of moving on to other worlds or even the nearest star is so low that it might as well be impossible on human scales.

I'd argue that humanity naturally going extinct due to evolving into a new species and/or just dying out through no fault of our own a few hundred-thousand or even a few million years down the line is much more preferable to dying out due to our own actions in a much shorter period of time.

[Max Rockatansky]

It is an about as absolute of a certainty as it can be that humanity will one day reach extinction.  The prospects of moving on to other worlds or even the nearest star is so low that it might as well be impossible on human scales.

I'd argue that humanity naturally going extinct due to evolving into a new species and/or just dying out through no fault of our own a few hundred-thousand or even a few million years down the line is much more preferable to dying out due to our own actions in a much shorter period of time.

I more or less see a population bottleneck as an almost unavoidable certainty.  It has happened numerous times already throughout the genetic history of humanity and the status quo no matter what can't be maintained indefinitely.  Full scale nuclear war still probably the fastest way that can probably happen and seems likely given a century or two given how close it came to happening this last century.  Eventual resource depletion and disease are always another possible sources of a major bottleneck probably more in line with the last page of this thread.

Regardless, even if humanity kicks the bucket the planet will still be around.  That takes me back to the original point of saying "I'm saving the planet" is a misnomer.  Statements like that only become true if say someone pulls a Bruce Willis a single-handedly stops an interplanetary collision or something. 

[kphoger]

The challenge is that funding for road construction, maintenance, and improvement is supposed to come from vehicle registration fees and taxes on fuel purposes although, in some cases, it gets diverted to public transportation. First you improve the fuel economy "to save the planet!!!", and whoops, you decrease your fuel consumption which leads to decreased tax revenue. Now, there is that encouragement to use Electric Vehicles "to save the planet!!!", but you just cut out the fuel tax revenue.

This sums it up.

EVs should not be taxed, as that discourages their use. Raise the gas tax and index it to inflation.

I might have used the wrong wording. I'm opposed to the extra fee, not the already-existing excise tax.

So are you generally in favor of making EV owners pay more in fees and taxes than ICE owners?  That is to say, if everyone were to switch to EVs, then would you expect those EV fees and taxes to make up the lost fuel tax revenue?

[1995hoo]

In Virginia if you are subject to the highway use fee you can elect to pay per mile (using a device installed on the vehicle) that maxes out at the nominal use fee.  So someone (not me) who doesn't drive much can pay less if they enroll in this program.

Does it only count miles driven in-state?

No.

From the DMV webpage:

Will I be charged for miles driven outside Virginia or on private roads?

Yes. At this time, the Mileage Choice Program does not differentiate between miles driven outside of Virginia or on private roads versus inside Virginia and public roads.

Of our three cars (we recently sold the other), as far as I know only one is subject to the Highway Use Fee, and the fee for that car came out to $12 for a two-year registration renewal, so we felt the amount was trivial enough that it wasn't worth exploring the mileage-based option. Sometimes the effort you have to put in to save a pittance just isn't worth the trouble. We also found it objectionable that said option requires you to pay tax to Virginia for miles driven in other states.

(Mine is up for renewal this year, so I guess I'll find out whether it's subject to the fee. I don't remember paying it in 2022, but that doesn't mean I didn't do so.)

[hbelkins]

EVs should not be taxed, as that discourages their use. Raise the gas tax and index it to inflation.

The problem is that they are not ready to be the predominant form of automotive transportation in the United States.  Build a better charging network, improve range and get priced competitive with ICE first.  Artificially stacking the deck with tax credits and waivers on things like having to pay a gas tax equivalent won't work forever.  If the mandates were going to start somewhere it should have begun with hybrid capabilities for most ICE vehicles. 

Right now even with everything going on a lot of EV buyers make their purchase as a quasi-luxury item.  The market was dictating a shift towards hybrid and EV options just fine.

Interesting aside, we talked about this with my father in law this week while down in Mexico.  I couldn't fathom EVs or hybrids taking the slightest foothold here for decades to come with all the 30-40 year old clunkers still in use.  The concept of a reliable charging grid in rural Jalisco is amusing to contemplate.

Not quite a question of tax credits, but related. Our governor recently broke ground on the first federally-funded EV charging station at a Circle K station in Richmond. Meanwhile, a few miles to the south, the Buc-ee's has its own bank of charging stations that were funded by the company. Why should Circle K be the beneficiary of federal funding for its chargers -- and thus having the captive audience of motorists coming in to the store to make convenience purchases -- while Buc-ee's footed the bill itself for its charging stations?

[SectorZ]

EVs should not be taxed, as that discourages their use. Raise the gas tax and index it to inflation.

The problem is that they are not ready to be the predominant form of automotive transportation in the United States.  Build a better charging network, improve range and get priced competitive with ICE first.  Artificially stacking the deck with tax credits and waivers on things like having to pay a gas tax equivalent won't work forever.  If the mandates were going to start somewhere it should have begun with hybrid capabilities for most ICE vehicles. 

Right now even with everything going on a lot of EV buyers make their purchase as a quasi-luxury item.  The market was dictating a shift towards hybrid and EV options just fine.

Interesting aside, we talked about this with my father in law this week while down in Mexico.  I couldn't fathom EVs or hybrids taking the slightest foothold here for decades to come with all the 30-40 year old clunkers still in use.  The concept of a reliable charging grid in rural Jalisco is amusing to contemplate.

Not quite a question of tax credits, but related. Our governor recently broke ground on the first federally-funded EV charging station at a Circle K station in Richmond. Meanwhile, a few miles to the south, the Buc-ee's has its own bank of charging stations that were funded by the company. Why should Circle K be the beneficiary of federal funding for its chargers -- and thus having the captive audience of motorists coming in to the store to make convenience purchases -- while Buc-ee's footed the bill itself for its charging stations?

Even better given Circle K isn't an American-owned company. The Canadian night owl people own it (I'm unsure if using their actual name is PC at this point).

[Max Rockatansky]

EVs should not be taxed, as that discourages their use. Raise the gas tax and index it to inflation.

The problem is that they are not ready to be the predominant form of automotive transportation in the United States.  Build a better charging network, improve range and get priced competitive with ICE first.  Artificially stacking the deck with tax credits and waivers on things like having to pay a gas tax equivalent won't work forever.  If the mandates were going to start somewhere it should have begun with hybrid capabilities for most ICE vehicles. 

Right now even with everything going on a lot of EV buyers make their purchase as a quasi-luxury item.  The market was dictating a shift towards hybrid and EV options just fine.

Interesting aside, we talked about this with my father in law this week while down in Mexico.  I couldn't fathom EVs or hybrids taking the slightest foothold here for decades to come with all the 30-40 year old clunkers still in use.  The concept of a reliable charging grid in rural Jalisco is amusing to contemplate.

Not quite a question of tax credits, but related. Our governor recently broke ground on the first federally-funded EV charging station at a Circle K station in Richmond. Meanwhile, a few miles to the south, the Buc-ee's has its own bank of charging stations that were funded by the company. Why should Circle K be the beneficiary of federal funding for its chargers -- and thus having the captive audience of motorists coming in to the store to make convenience purchases -- while Buc-ee's footed the bill itself for its charging stations?

John Harris didn't lobby hard enough.  Arch Beaver must be pissed with his number one marketing guy.

[jeffandnicole]

EVs should not be taxed, as that discourages their use. Raise the gas tax and index it to inflation.

The problem is that they are not ready to be the predominant form of automotive transportation in the United States.  Build a better charging network, improve range and get priced competitive with ICE first.  Artificially stacking the deck with tax credits and waivers on things like having to pay a gas tax equivalent won't work forever.  If the mandates were going to start somewhere it should have begun with hybrid capabilities for most ICE vehicles. 

Right now even with everything going on a lot of EV buyers make their purchase as a quasi-luxury item.  The market was dictating a shift towards hybrid and EV options just fine.

Interesting aside, we talked about this with my father in law this week while down in Mexico.  I couldn't fathom EVs or hybrids taking the slightest foothold here for decades to come with all the 30-40 year old clunkers still in use.  The concept of a reliable charging grid in rural Jalisco is amusing to contemplate.

Not quite a question of tax credits, but related. Our governor recently broke ground on the first federally-funded EV charging station at a Circle K station in Richmond. Meanwhile, a few miles to the south, the Buc-ee's has its own bank of charging stations that were funded by the company. Why should Circle K be the beneficiary of federal funding for its chargers -- and thus having the captive audience of motorists coming in to the store to make convenience purchases -- while Buc-ee's footed the bill itself for its charging stations?

For that Bucees, they decided it was a worthwhile business expense to have the chargers.

For Circle K, you may need to dig deeper to see if there's any sort of easement or other government control of those spots.  A lot of states will be getting federal funding to install chargers along highway locations, and there may be various reasons why certain spots were picked.

[edwaleni]

EVs should not be taxed, as that discourages their use. Raise the gas tax and index it to inflation.

The problem is that they are not ready to be the predominant form of automotive transportation in the United States.  Build a better charging network, improve range and get priced competitive with ICE first.  Artificially stacking the deck with tax credits and waivers on things like having to pay a gas tax equivalent won't work forever.  If the mandates were going to start somewhere it should have begun with hybrid capabilities for most ICE vehicles. 

Right now even with everything going on a lot of EV buyers make their purchase as a quasi-luxury item.  The market was dictating a shift towards hybrid and EV options just fine.

Interesting aside, we talked about this with my father in law this week while down in Mexico.  I couldn't fathom EVs or hybrids taking the slightest foothold here for decades to come with all the 30-40 year old clunkers still in use.  The concept of a reliable charging grid in rural Jalisco is amusing to contemplate.

Not quite a question of tax credits, but related. Our governor recently broke ground on the first federally-funded EV charging station at a Circle K station in Richmond. Meanwhile, a few miles to the south, the Buc-ee's has its own bank of charging stations that were funded by the company. Why should Circle K be the beneficiary of federal funding for its chargers -- and thus having the captive audience of motorists coming in to the store to make convenience purchases -- while Buc-ee's footed the bill itself for its charging stations?

For that Bucees, they decided it was a worthwhile business expense to have the chargers.

For Circle K, you may need to dig deeper to see if there's any sort of easement or other government control of those spots.  A lot of states will be getting federal funding to install chargers along highway locations, and there may be various reasons why certain spots were picked.

Circle K in Europe have some of the best high current chargers.

[JREwing78]

So, just for funsies, I did the math on what it costs me to pay for the roads I drive on a regular basis.

To simplify matters, I based all the fuel taxes on what I pay in Wisconsin, 30.9 cents per gallon. I'm an evil person who's ruining the planet with a Jeep Grand Cherokee, so I get about 18 mpg. In 15,000 miles, I pay the state of Wisconsin about $260 for the privilege of driving their roads. It was closer to $200 a year when I had my Accord, and maybe $500 a year when I still had a 90+ mile daily commute.

What's sad is that Illnois and Indiana team up to pull about $100-$120 a year out of me just to drive around Chicago. Thanks, toll roads! Also, my city takes a $45 wheel tax to help maintain the city streets.

So, for about $35 a month, or $400 a year, I have access to 15,000 miles of driving on roadways that are (generally) plowed, salted, and maintained.

For comparison:

   
• The GAS I put in my car to drive that distance (minus the fuel tax) is nearly SIX time more expensive than the road payment. When Big Oil feels randy, maybe EIGHT times the road payment.
• My rent payment is TWENTY-TWO times my road payment, and some would consider that cheap rent.
• My internet service is twice as expensive. Between that and all the subscription entertainment services I purchase in a month, it's probably SIX times what I pay for roads.
• A sit-down dinner at a relatively mediocre chain restaurant (with beer) cost about the same as my road payment, and that's only good for about 12 hours or so before it's used up and I have to replenish.

Maybe this is why I get so irritated with people who literally complain about how THE WORLD IS ENDING whenever a government suggests raising the fuel tax or registration fees to fix the roads. I will GLADLY pay another $50-$100 a year in road taxes if it meant not hitting a pothole that could cost me TEN times as much to fix!

Same reason I roll my eyes when someone suggests it's SO HARD to figure out a road funding formula. It's not. It's really not. What it requires is this:

   
• The courage to tell your constituents to take their medicine, even if it tastes bad, because by taking it they will feel better later.
• The vision to solve the funding issue in a manner that doesn't require constantly revisiting the issue every few years (indexing collection of these funds to inflation, for example), and
• The integrity to use that money in a responsible manner, and the transparency to show that responsible use, so that the results of that bad medicine are visible.

[kalvado]

So, just for funsies, I did the math on what it costs me to pay for the roads I drive on a regular basis.

To simplify matters, I based all the fuel taxes on what I pay in Wisconsin, 30.9 cents per gallon. I'm an evil person who's ruining the planet with a Jeep Grand Cherokee, so I get about 18 mpg. In 15,000 miles, I pay the state of Wisconsin about $260 for the privilege of driving their roads. It was closer to $200 a year when I had my Accord, and maybe $500 a year when I still had a 90+ mile daily commute.

What's sad is that Illnois and Indiana team up to pull about $100-$120 a year out of me just to drive around Chicago. Thanks, toll roads! Also, my city takes a $45 wheel tax to help maintain the city streets.

So, for about $35 a month, or $400 a year, I have access to 15,000 miles of driving on roadways that are (generally) plowed, salted, and maintained.

For comparison:

   
• The GAS I put in my car to drive that distance (minus the fuel tax) is nearly SIX time more expensive than the road payment. When Big Oil feels randy, maybe EIGHT times the road payment.
• My rent payment is TWENTY-TWO times my road payment, and some would consider that cheap rent.
• My internet service is twice as expensive. Between that and all the subscription entertainment services I purchase in a month, it's probably SIX times what I pay for roads.
• A sit-down dinner at a relatively mediocre chain restaurant (with beer) cost about the same as my road payment, and that's only good for about 12 hours or so before it's used up and I have to replenish.

Maybe this is why I get so irritated with people who literally complain about how THE WORLD IS ENDING whenever a government suggests raising the fuel tax or registration fees to fix the roads. I will GLADLY pay another $50-$100 a year in road taxes if it meant not hitting a pothole that could cost me TEN times as much to fix!

Same reason I roll my eyes when someone suggests it's SO HARD to figure out a road funding formula. It's not. It's really not. What it requires is this:

   
• The courage to tell your constituents to take their medicine, even if it tastes bad, because by taking it they will feel better later.
• The vision to solve the funding issue in a manner that doesn't require constantly revisiting the issue every few years (indexing collection of these funds to inflation, for example), and
• The integrity to use that money in a responsible manner, and the transparency to show that responsible use, so that the results of that bad medicine are visible.

On one hand, I am with you.
On the other hand, this forum is populated by people who have roads in a special place of their hearts, that's not true for an average Joe. For him, it's a death by a thousand cuts: heating bill went up. Water bill went up. Trash and sewer bills went up. Insurance went up. Oh, now registrations go up?
Joe's boss: congratulations, here is your 0.25% raise for this decade!
Uncle Sam:


In other news, a recent study showed that despite high cost of living, it is still amazingly popular among population.

[Max Rockatansky]

People don't like change and it scares them (even when illogical).

[kalvado]

People don't like change and it scares them (even when illogical).

Those who really don't like changes don't drive EVs

[Max Rockatansky]

People don't like change and it scares them (even when illogical).

Those who really don't like changes don't drive EVs

Which also happens to be most people.  Giving people logical equations and calculations on why their lives would only nominally change tends to not help. 

Even me, I tend to think that I'm falling into this category right now to an extent.  Currently I can't find an EV that suits my needs over a comparable economy ICE.  Trouble is I tend to get focused more on what happens after the 2035 PHEV mandate in California versus my next likely vehicle purchase in 2026-2028.  2035 it is almost certain that EVs and even plug-in hybrids will be more competitive with lower tier automotive segments compared to today. 

[Strider]

People don't like change and it scares them (even when illogical).

Those who really don't like changes don't drive EVs

Nah. They don't see the point of driving EVs other than profits towards the big companies. It has nothing to do with avoiding changes. Also, our grid isn't equipped to handle ALL EV vehicles on the road at the same time.

[jeffandnicole]

People don't like change and it scares them (even when illogical).

Those who really don't like changes don't drive EVs

Nah. They don't see the point of driving EVs other than profits towards the big companies. It has nothing to do with avoiding changes. Also, our grid isn't equipped to handle ALL EV vehicles on the road at the same time.

There aren't enough gas stations if everyone was driving their current ICE vehicles at the same time either.

[edwaleni]

People don't like change and it scares them (even when illogical).

Those who really don't like changes don't drive EVs

Nah. They don't see the point of driving EVs other than profits towards the big companies. It has nothing to do with avoiding changes. Also, our grid isn't equipped to handle ALL EV vehicles on the road at the same time.

There aren't enough gas stations if everyone was driving their current ICE vehicles at the same time either.

The number of gas stations relative to the number of ICE vehicles owned has been dropping for sometime since the oil shocks of the 1970's. While many survived the 1973 event, the 1977 and 1979 events started the decline. The trend continued downward through the 80's as Federal MPG standards started to take a hold in the market place. An average ICE got 10-13mpg in 1973. Even though gas was ~.22/gal that is still a lot fill ups per car. Today the average ICE gets 21 in the city and 27 on the highway. The only exception to that is SUV's which get 13 and 16.  The explosion in SUV ownership has slowed, but not stopped the trend.

[vdeane]

People don't like change and it scares them (even when illogical).

Those who really don't like changes don't drive EVs

Nah. They don't see the point of driving EVs other than profits towards the big companies. It has nothing to do with avoiding changes. Also, our grid isn't equipped to handle ALL EV vehicles on the road at the same time.

The grid can't handle everyone running their air conditioning at home at the same time either, yet that doesn't stop people.

[Rick Powell]

The number of gas stations relative to the number of ICE vehicles owned has been dropping for sometime since the oil shocks of the 1970's. While many survived the 1973 event, the 1977 and 1979 events started the decline. The trend continued downward through the 80's as Federal MPG standards started to take a hold in the market place.

I'd wager the average number of pumps per retailer has expanded 3X or 4X what it was in 1970, offsetting the reduced number of retailers. In my town there were about 15-20 retailers at one time, most being mom and pop operations with two pumps, regular and premium. There are eight retailers now, none of which have less than 8 pumps each.

[edwaleni]

The number of gas stations relative to the number of ICE vehicles owned has been dropping for sometime since the oil shocks of the 1970's. While many survived the 1973 event, the 1977 and 1979 events started the decline. The trend continued downward through the 80's as Federal MPG standards started to take a hold in the market place.

I'd wager the average number of pumps per retailer has expanded 3X or 4X what it was in 1970, offsetting the reduced number of retailers. In my town there were about 15-20 retailers at one time, most being mom and pop operations with two pumps, regular and premium. There are eight retailers now, none of which have less than 8 pumps each.

That is a good point. I looked back at the small town in Illinois I lived in. In 1973, its population was just under 6000 and they had 8 gas stations, all but one had 2 or 3 pumps, only the truck stop south of town had more.

Today the population of the same town is just over 8000 and they still have 8 gas stations, except for the truck stop, the other 7 have changed. The 2 pump stations were all or near the city center. The current stations are all at the fringes of town and vary from a 4 pump (Casey's) to a 6 pump (Circle K). The WalMart there has a gas station as well.

[triplemultiplex]

Americans are so spoiled.  Our buttholes pucker when we have to pay more than a hundred bucks to register a car while the rest of the First World is like, "Damn, that's a bargain!"