https://www.wate.com/news/top-stories/hybrid-drivers-in-tn-surprised-by-100-extra-fee-for-registration/ (https://www.wate.com/news/top-stories/hybrid-drivers-in-tn-surprised-by-100-extra-fee-for-registration/)
Although he doesn't want to, begrudgingly, Guider will pay the $129 registration fee. Mr. Mullins doesn't like the added fee either.
"Not fair at all, not fair at all," Mullins said.
Road taxes for EVs are a difficult topic for sure, but they have to happen..
I pay 2 cents in gas taxes per mile, give or take. That's on the same page as this EV surcharge.
If these guys get 45 MPG, and let's assume the avg. vehicle is 25 MPG, and they drive 10,000 miles annually, that's 178 gallons difference (400 to 222). At their 26 cent/gallon gas tax, that's about $46.
So I guess the charge overshoots the gas tax revenue lost by a fair bit.
Quote from: edwaleni on February 21, 2024, 11:55:05 AM
https://www.wate.com/news/top-stories/hybrid-drivers-in-tn-surprised-by-100-extra-fee-for-registration/ (https://www.wate.com/news/top-stories/hybrid-drivers-in-tn-surprised-by-100-extra-fee-for-registration/)
Although he doesn't want to, begrudgingly, Guider will pay the $129 registration fee. Mr. Mullins doesn't like the added fee either.
"Not fair at all, not fair at all," Mullins said.
I'm sure that this was publicized last year by Tennessee news sources; someone missed the news.
Truth is that, yes, governments will need tax money to fund roads and hybrids pay less and EVs nothing. A flat amount is not necessarily fair since the EV version of a larger vehicle (Ford Lightning) will most likely save more gas tax money since it replaces more gallons than a small economy car, and then there is question of fairness compared to how many miles a person drives a year.
In Illinois, EV's pay a $1400 fee upfront at purchase. Which means it not only gets into your financing, but cuts into your tax credit.
I would like to think a smaller, annual fee is more "fair".
What's the old saying? "If it moves, tax it. If it quits moving, subsidize it."
Quote from: SectorZ on February 21, 2024, 12:15:57 PM
If these guys get 45 MPG, and let's assume the avg. vehicle is 25 MPG, and they drive 10,000 miles annually, that's 178 gallons difference (400 to 222). At their 26 cent/gallon gas tax, that's about $46.
So I guess the charge overshoots the gas tax revenue lost by a fair bit.
I believe 12-13k miles is a more realistic estimate. Yet probably overcharging hybrids.
EVs being heavier than regular cars can be justified at 15-20 MPG rate tax.
Yet, flat rate is a very crude approximation here. But I don't see a simple solution here...
What is the more bitter pill? I assume most would prefer an increased EV/Hybrid registration fee over something like a mileage tax. The free lunch has to become something tangible eventually with EVs and hybrids having an increased market share.
EVs should not be taxed, as that discourages their use. Raise the gas tax and index it to inflation.
Quote from: 1 on February 21, 2024, 04:25:26 PM
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.
Quote from: 1 on February 21, 2024, 04:25:26 PM
EVs should not be taxed, as that discourages their use. Raise the gas tax and index it to inflation.
Look at our state, where someone with a brand new Honda Civic pays about $625 in excise tax, but someone with a 5+ year old Chevy Suburban pays $125 (making math assumptions of $25K and $50K MSRP value of the vehicles in question). One destroys the road hardcore over the other, yet we penalize the person getting 35 MPG in their 3,000 pound car and reward the person getting 15 MPG in their 6,500 pound SUV. If you remember years ago (about 20 by now), the feds were giving $500 credits to people buying hybrid Tahoes, which got half the gas mileage of three of the four new vehicles I've owned in my life.
They should be taxed based on how much they destroy roads, not solely by the altruism of their use, especially given the obesity involved in an EV being able to move itself.
In that line of thought, most EVs are far from light weight. Battery sleds tend to carry a lot of girth even in seemingly smaller cars.
Quote from: 1 on February 21, 2024, 04:25:26 PM
EVs should not be taxed, as that discourages their use. Raise the gas tax and index it to inflation.
Funding roads by the gas tax exclusively seems to go against the stated goal of transitioning away from fossil fuels. If we get rid of ICE cars, then who's paying the gas tax?
Quote from: SectorZ on February 21, 2024, 04:36:46 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 21, 2024, 04:25:26 PM
EVs should not be taxed, as that discourages their use. Raise the gas tax and index it to inflation.
Look at our state, where someone with a brand new Honda Civic pays about $625 in excise tax, but someone with a 5+ year old Chevy Suburban pays $125 (making math assumptions of $25K and $50K MSRP value of the vehicles in question). One destroys the road hardcore over the other, yet we penalize the person getting 35 MPG in their 3,000 pound car and reward the person getting 15 MPG in their 6,500 pound SUV. If you remember years ago (about 20 by now), the feds were giving $500 credits to people buying hybrid Tahoes, which got half the gas mileage of three of the four new vehicles I've owned in my life.
They should be taxed based on how much they destroy roads, not solely by the altruism of their use, especially given the obesity involved in an EV being able to move itself.
In a very ideal world, weight and mileage should come into play. Both sort-of kind-of worked with plain gas engine. Commercial trucks get another layer of taxation.
With more emphases on fuel efficiency, hybrids, and EV - idea breaks down.
Taxing everyone based on weight and mileage seems great until all small details (state of registration vs state where miles are driven, odometer tampering, GPS too intrusive etc etc) come up.
For EVs and cars with more powerful on-board computing (aka every newer car) mileage reporting without tampering possibility and privacy issues may be possible. But not there yet.
Quote from: 1 on February 21, 2024, 04:25:26 PM
EVs should not be taxed, as that discourages their use. Raise the gas tax and index it to inflation.
If you happen to peruse the article in the link, you will notice that the Hybrid/EV annual tax in TN is indexed to inflation going forward.
Which is interesting in that fuel taxes are not, they are at a fixed percentage until legislative action changes it.
If EV use hits its predicted 15% market share by 2035, its possible they could be contributing much more than 15% of the revenue.
Quote from: 1 on February 21, 2024, 04:25:26 PM
EVs should not be taxed, as that discourages their use. Raise the gas tax and index it to inflation.
Why the heck should everyone else pay more to give the EV drivers free access to the roads? That's bullshit.
Virginia has a "highway use fee" that's based on a vehicle's fuel efficiency using a complicated formula. EV and hybrid drivers pay more, but some gas car owners pay too—my wife had to pay it last year when we renewed her registration, although the amount was relatively low. The theory is to try to approximate the notion that everyone should be paying approximately the same in taxes towards the roads.
I might have used the wrong wording. I'm opposed to the extra fee, not the already-existing excise tax.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 21, 2024, 05:18:44 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 21, 2024, 04:25:26 PM
EVs should not be taxed, as that discourages their use. Raise the gas tax and index it to inflation.
Why the heck should everyone else pay more to give the EV drivers free access to the roads? That's bullshit.
Virginia has a "highway use fee" that's based on a vehicle's fuel efficiency using a complicated formula. EV and hybrid drivers pay more, but some gas car owners pay too—my wife had to pay it last year when we renewed her registration, although the amount was relatively low. The theory is to try to approximate the notion that everyone should be paying approximately the same in taxes towards the roads.
I do think that LONG TERM, once EVs are priced similarly, chargers are everywhere, blah, blah, blah, then it makes some sense for gas users to have to pay more for road access, but until that point, it needs to be spread somewhat equitably as you described for Virginia.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 21, 2024, 05:18:44 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 21, 2024, 04:25:26 PM
EVs should not be taxed, as that discourages their use. Raise the gas tax and index it to inflation.
Why the heck should everyone else pay more to give the EV drivers free access to the roads? That's bullshit.
Virginia has a "highway use fee" that's based on a vehicle's fuel efficiency using a complicated formula. EV and hybrid drivers pay more, but some gas car owners pay too—my wife had to pay it last year when we renewed her registration, although the amount was relatively low. The theory is to try to approximate the notion that everyone should be paying approximately the same in taxes towards the roads.
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.
Quote from: Mapmikey on February 21, 2024, 05:29:44 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 21, 2024, 05:18:44 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 21, 2024, 04:25:26 PM
EVs should not be taxed, as that discourages their use. Raise the gas tax and index it to inflation.
Why the heck should everyone else pay more to give the EV drivers free access to the roads? That's bullshit.
Virginia has a "highway use fee" that's based on a vehicle's fuel efficiency using a complicated formula. EV and hybrid drivers pay more, but some gas car owners pay too—my wife had to pay it last year when we renewed her registration, although the amount was relatively low. The theory is to try to approximate the notion that everyone should be paying approximately the same in taxes towards the roads.
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.
I like that idea, too.
Quote from: 1 on February 21, 2024, 05:21:57 PM
I might have used the wrong wording. I'm opposed to the extra fee, not the already-existing excise tax.
Different taxes go (at least should go) to different accounts. From my perspective, dedicated federal highway fund is how things should work on a state level as well. And there is no reason EVs shouldn't be contributing their "fair share". Definition of "fair" is always difficult though
Quote from: Mapmikey on February 21, 2024, 05:29:44 PM
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?
Quote from: kphoger on February 21, 2024, 06:51:50 PM
Quote from: Mapmikey on February 21, 2024, 05:29:44 PM
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:
Quote
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.
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.
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.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 21, 2024, 09:06:57 PM
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.
Quote from: edwaleni on February 21, 2024, 11:44:54 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 21, 2024, 09:06:57 PM
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...
Quote from: edwaleni on February 21, 2024, 11:44:54 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 21, 2024, 09:06:57 PM
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.
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.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 22, 2024, 12:31:45 AM
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.
Quote from: freebrickproductions on February 22, 2024, 02:00:10 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 22, 2024, 12:31:45 AM
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.
Quote from: ZLoth on February 21, 2024, 09:00:53 PM
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.
Quote from: 1 on February 21, 2024, 04:25:26 PM
EVs should not be taxed, as that discourages their use. Raise the gas tax and index it to inflation.
Quote from: 1 on February 21, 2024, 05:21:57 PM
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?
Quote from: Mapmikey on February 21, 2024, 07:20:21 PM
Quote from: kphoger on February 21, 2024, 06:51:50 PM
Quote from: Mapmikey on February 21, 2024, 05:29:44 PM
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:
Quote
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.)
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 21, 2024, 04:33:09 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 21, 2024, 04:25:26 PM
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?
Quote from: hbelkins on February 23, 2024, 02:05:48 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 21, 2024, 04:33:09 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 21, 2024, 04:25:26 PM
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).
Quote from: hbelkins on February 23, 2024, 02:05:48 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 21, 2024, 04:33:09 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 21, 2024, 04:25:26 PM
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.
Quote from: hbelkins on February 23, 2024, 02:05:48 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 21, 2024, 04:33:09 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 21, 2024, 04:25:26 PM
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.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 23, 2024, 06:26:49 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on February 23, 2024, 02:05:48 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 21, 2024, 04:33:09 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 21, 2024, 04:25:26 PM
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.
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.
Quote from: JREwing78 on February 23, 2024, 10:32:36 PM
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:
(https://imageio.forbes.com/blogs-images/joshbarro/files/2012/04/spending-GDP-chart1-1024x697.jpg)
In other news, a recent study showed that despite high cost of living, it is still amazingly popular among population.
People don't like change and it scares them (even when illogical).
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 24, 2024, 07:47:46 AM
People don't like change and it scares them (even when illogical).
Those who really don't like changes don't drive EVs
Quote from: kalvado on February 24, 2024, 08:03:13 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 24, 2024, 07:47:46 AM
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.
Quote from: kalvado on February 24, 2024, 08:03:13 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 24, 2024, 07:47:46 AM
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.
Quote from: Strider on February 24, 2024, 06:10:46 PM
Quote from: kalvado on February 24, 2024, 08:03:13 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 24, 2024, 07:47:46 AM
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.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 24, 2024, 06:22:12 PM
Quote from: Strider on February 24, 2024, 06:10:46 PM
Quote from: kalvado on February 24, 2024, 08:03:13 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 24, 2024, 07:47:46 AM
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.
Quote from: Strider on February 24, 2024, 06:10:46 PM
Quote from: kalvado on February 24, 2024, 08:03:13 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 24, 2024, 07:47:46 AM
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.
Quote from: edwaleni on February 24, 2024, 08:25:52 PM
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.
Quote from: Rick Powell on February 24, 2024, 11:37:16 PM
Quote from: edwaleni on February 24, 2024, 08:25:52 PM
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.
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!"
IMHO
- No one who pays attention should have been "surprised" that TN taxed this. I'm sure it was well covered in the media. But I'm going to give the guy in the story a break on being an uniformed boob, this is a Nexstar station, and this is their writing style. They try to make a story "relevant" by saying things like "little suzzy was surprised that the park board closed the pool" or "Jimmy was surprised that they are closing the Target on Rt 22" and such, when no one was really surprised, they just use that to make the story seem like a local deal.
- Of course, non traditional powered vehicles should be taxed, and taxed heavily. At least enough to cover for the unpaid gas tax, but, since such vehicles do not currently/may not ever exist outside subsidy, and the subsidy is in the form of tax breaks only the rich can take advantage of, maybe they should pay yet more.
- Building charging stations with tax money (unless its tax money taken directly from the users via a yet higher non traditional vehicle tax) is daft. I pay, via the price the merchant charges me, for the regular pumps, why should I be taxed to pay just because someone wants to save money/virtue signal in their vehicle choice?
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 28, 2024, 12:19:55 PM
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!"
Considering how many people are living paycheck to paycheck are you really surprised that people are complain? I'm not saying it financially responsible to live that thin on margins but a lot do.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 28, 2024, 01:47:21 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 28, 2024, 12:19:55 PM
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!"
Considering how many people are living paycheck to paycheck are you really surprised that people are complain? I'm not saying it financially responsible to live that thin on margins but a lot do.
@Max,
Got news for you. There are tons of doctors, lawyers and other professionals who live "paycheck to paycheck". Its just that their one paycheck is a whole lot more and they save very little.
It's not talked about because they live in big houses and drive nice cars, but believe me, you would be shocked how many pay for all of that "stuff" every month with little after.
So at one end you have those wondering what can they get by with, and on the other end you have those who wonder how much *more* they can get by with.
Quote from: edwaleni on February 28, 2024, 11:15:40 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 28, 2024, 01:47:21 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 28, 2024, 12:19:55 PM
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!"
Considering how many people are living paycheck to paycheck are you really surprised that people are complain? I'm not saying it financially responsible to live that thin on margins but a lot do.
@Max,
Got news for you. There are tons of doctors, lawyers and other professionals who live "paycheck to paycheck". Its just that their one paycheck is a whole lot more and they save very little.
It's not talked about because they live in big houses and drive nice cars, but believe me, you would be shocked how many pay for all of that "stuff" every month with little after.
So at one end you have those wondering what can they get by with, and on the other end you have those who wonder how much *more* they can get by with.
Why do you presume that I don't know there are people who make good money who can't manage it? Why do you assume that I necessarily feel sorry for individuals fitting the description?
And no, I wouldn't be shocked at how poorly people spend money. My own father made 250k annually through much of the 1990s. The man never invested anything and spent everything he made on vices. When he kicked the bucket from brain cancer in 2009 he didn't have a cent to his name. He even married his third wife due to what I suspect was a play to get health benefits.
I get that this is a road forum and there is a lot of "logic" based thinking afoot. I'm just giving a reason why people complain, I'm not saying I agree with it. Most normal people aren't dictated by logic when it comes to fiscal matter and thusly get pissy when something potentially hits their wallet (especially with politically charged visibility). Stuff like mileage taxes and increased registration fees would fall into such a category.
Quote from: edwaleni on February 21, 2024, 11:44:54 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 21, 2024, 09:06:57 PM
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.
So I should be okay spending as much money as I want and never worry about running out, because, hey, my bank account balance has been changing since I started the account, right?
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 29, 2024, 09:24:05 AM
Quote from: edwaleni on February 21, 2024, 11:44:54 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 21, 2024, 09:06:57 PM
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.
So I should be okay spending as much money as I want and never worry about running out, because, hey, my bank account balance has been changing since I started the account, right?
One could argue that I might have unintentionally made a case for doing that very thing above.
Quote from: edwaleni on February 28, 2024, 11:15:40 PM
It's not talked about because they live in big houses and drive nice cars, but believe me, you would be shocked how many pay for all of that "stuff" every month with little after.
It's hard to talk about those things due to the sound of many tiny violins playing at once for their plight, especially when they hold degrees in higher education but also can't master third-grade mathematics.
Quote from: edwaleni on February 21, 2024, 11:44:54 PM
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.
How would crickets help you in combat? (Please post any replies in picture form.)
(https://cards.scryfall.io/large/front/5/d/5d1c2f16-5661-4c17-8265-f4b88ff1e833.jpg?1562878752)
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 28, 2024, 12:19:55 PM
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!"
Expectations and changes. $100 should be not a huge amount of money for a $10-50k asset (car) owner - but it wasn't there last year!
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 29, 2024, 12:15:31 AM
I get that this is a road forum and there is a lot of "logic" based thinking afoot. I'm just giving a reason why people complain, I'm not saying I agree with it. Most normal people aren't dictated by logic when it comes to fiscal matter and thusly get pissy when something potentially hits their wallet (especially with politically charged visibility). Stuff like mileage taxes and increased registration fees would fall into such a category.
I feel like the world would be a much better place if people did use logic-based thinking with respect to money. Of course, then the economy would probably collapse, so maybe not...
Quote from: vdeane on February 29, 2024, 01:00:13 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 29, 2024, 12:15:31 AM
I get that this is a road forum and there is a lot of "logic" based thinking afoot. I'm just giving a reason why people complain, I'm not saying I agree with it. Most normal people aren't dictated by logic when it comes to fiscal matter and thusly get pissy when something potentially hits their wallet (especially with politically charged visibility). Stuff like mileage taxes and increased registration fees would fall into such a category.
I feel like the world would be a much better place if people did use logic-based thinking with respect to money. Of course, then the economy would probably collapse, so maybe not...
Not disagreeing given that is the approach I tend to take. All the same though, money management is something a lot of people are all levels of income struggle with. If anything my own Dad taught me how manage my money by showing me exactly what not to do with it.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 29, 2024, 12:15:31 AM
Quote from: edwaleni on February 28, 2024, 11:15:40 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 28, 2024, 01:47:21 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 28, 2024, 12:19:55 PM
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!"
Considering how many people are living paycheck to paycheck are you really surprised that people are complain? I'm not saying it financially responsible to live that thin on margins but a lot do.
@Max,
Got news for you. There are tons of doctors, lawyers and other professionals who live "paycheck to paycheck". Its just that their one paycheck is a whole lot more and they save very little.
It's not talked about because they live in big houses and drive nice cars, but believe me, you would be shocked how many pay for all of that "stuff" every month with little after.
So at one end you have those wondering what can they get by with, and on the other end you have those who wonder how much *more* they can get by with.
Why do you presume that I don't know there are people who make good money who can't manage it? Why do you assume that I necessarily feel sorry for individuals fitting the description?
And no, I wouldn't be shocked at how poorly people spend money. My own father made 250k annually through much of the 1990s. The man never invested anything and spent everything he made on vices. When he kicked the bucket from brain cancer in 2009 he didn't have a cent to his name. He even married his third wife due to what I suspect was a play to get health benefits.
I presumed nothing, I only shared my experience. Just like you did with your dad. (sorry to hear about him)
Quote from: 1 on February 21, 2024, 04:25:26 PM
EVs should not be taxed, as that discourages their use. Raise the gas tax and index it to inflation.
there honestly should be a fee on EV charging stations. like a additional 50 cents or something to every Whr of use or whatever.
and that fee would just be split between the TVA and TDOT. but i guess because the TVA is federally controlled, they had to do it this way.
sucks to suck i guess.
I'm perfectly fine with EV superchargers having a tax similar to the gas tax.