EV property tax

[johnnycombo]

next time you talk to your PA state senator ask if he or she has ever heard of PennDOT and the AASHTO design standards which contemplate lane design loads far in excess of the weight of our little EVs. ?

Anti EV politics are popular right now and even politicians who are pro electric vehicles use them as a bargaining chip to get what they want. That's how PA ended up with a $200, to be 260 in 2026, road fee that was originally proposed as $375 fee and progress from there. I think in just a few short years the ice market will crumble in the USA, just like it has begun to in the rest of the world and they will have to design a whole new fee system.

Sponsored

 

[HuntingPudel]

Pebbles the ? wants to know if Grady knows how many ??s will fit in the Coupe de Ville ?.

Let’s just say the inside of that thing is a playland. ??

 

[rreddy3]

Let’s just say the inside of that thing is a playland. ??

Sounds like ?? party time in “Dad’s” Caddy! ?

 

[Fixbear]

I just received property tax bills for my two cars. Both of them are nearly equal in value but only one of them is a Ford MME. That one carries an additional “electric vehicle tax” of $214.86 I’ve read that this compensates the State for lost gasoline taxes. But in effect it is an attempt by the State of North Carolina to punish anyone trying to lower environmental pollution, by buying an EV. Shouldn’t we be incentivizing voluntary attempts by private citizens to curtail atmospheric poisoning. What’s next? Pay people who pollute and punish those who try to better the AQI? Maybe their slogan will be “give a hoot! Pollute” or perhaps, ”Want clean air? Move to Mars!”

That's like buying 700 gallons of gas. About the equivalent of 16,000 miles travel. Seems a bit high unless your running a lot of miles.

 

[Fixbear]

If GA is anything like PA, they'd get maintained the same as they do when there IS tax income: extremely poorly.

Penn has special problems with their roads. They have no hard rock. To far south for hard gravel and no good Dolomite deposits. Makes it very difficult to make a wear resistant surface. Add to that frequent freeze/thaw cycles.

 

[Fixbear]

that's exactly what it is....

States are struggling with strategies to collect revenue needed to build and maintain roads. unless/until they can implement a use tax mased on weight and actual miles, this is the easiest way to recover 'lost' revenue from gas tax collection at the pump.

I think it is 'fair', but I am hoping for 'more fair' based on weight and actual miles to provide incentive for the market to move to smaller, lighter vehicles and drive fewer miles.... incentivized by lowering cost of registration and insurance.

That's already the system that is used on tractor trailers. They pay from $2900 to $6800 per year depending on miles and weight. Plus paid toll roads.

 

[Fixbear]

I agree with you for the most part.

But, considering the AASHTO design standards applicable to roads and highways I’m confident that the impact on paving life from 4500-5000 pound EVs versus 3000-4000 pound ICE vehicles, not to mention 5000 pound plus ICE pickups and commercial vehicles, is non existent. Sure, there could be exceptions, poorly maintained “farm” or very rural roads not designed to AASHTO standards, but on the roads 99.9 % of us travel on 99.9% of the time, impact is negligible.

Your forgetting the Northern states that allow studs in the winter. They create such wear that you can see the grooves in the spring. Requiring annual topping on high traffic routes.

 

[superdave80]

It's funny, on the weight thing, I've a friend who likes to have "gotcha moments" He was telling me he read an article that said parking garages were not designed for the weight of EVs and they're at risk of collapse if too many evs park in them!!

That story was on the forum a while back, and I pointed out that the picture of the collapsed parking garage literally showed nothing but ICE SUVs. Funny when giant SUVs became popular in the 90's, nobody was worried about collapsing garages.

 

[rreddy3]

Your forgetting the Northern states that allow studs in the winter. They create such wear that you can see the grooves in the spring. Requiring annual topping on high traffic routes.

I beg to differ. Studded snow tires are agnostic, they don’t care what vehicle they are attached to. Any additional weight of an EV wearing studded snow tires has a negligible impact on the pavement compared to any other car equipped with studded snow tires. Any resurfacing is going to happen regardless of EVs.

 

[Fixbear]

I beg to differ. Studded snow tires are agnostic, they don’t care what vehicle they are attached to. Any additional weight of an EV wearing studded snow tires has a negligible impact on the pavement compared to any other car equipped with studded snow tires. Any resurfacing is going to happen regardless of EVs.

But studded tires do tremendous damage and surface wear. They are primarily used on cars. They actually chip the stone in the surface. With the new compounds that are used on the mountain ice tires they are no longer needed. But the Insurance company lobby keeps fighting for them. In this area, it cost $6000 per ft to top a road lane. Without studs, surface could easily go 5 years. (properly done) But with studded tires, it has to be topped annually. Back in the 50's, my mom was the tester for studs before they made the market. She had a school bus that covered the mountain route as a contract bus because the district could not do the hills.

 

[RandyMache]

The extra EV fees compensate the state for lost gas tax which is what pays for road repairs and the like. You still use the roads.

I'm not sure about all of you, but I already pay taxes on the electricity I use to charge my car...... I agree it is not a punishment, but just another theft by the government. How much of the "gas tax" per gallon actually makes it to road repair? I know in California the state keeps stealing gas tax revenue for other pet projects.

 

[rreddy3]

But studded tires do tremendous damage and surface wear. They are primarily used on cars. They actually chip the stone in the surface. With the new compounds that are used on the mountain ice tires they are no longer needed. But the Insurance company lobby keeps fighting for them. In this area, it cost $6000 per ft to top a road lane. Without studs, surface could easily go 5 years. (properly done) But with studded tires, it has to be topped annually. Back in the 50's, my mom was the tester for studs before they made the market. She had a school bus that covered the mountain route as a contract bus because the district could not do the hills.

I get that. I had studded snows in the 70s in Pittsburgh as I recall. That said, it was so long ago my memory of that could be a bit hazy.

I don’t dispute studded snows can be tough on pavement. That’s probably why some states including a few in the upper midwest ban them and why some states restrict there use to certain times.

We’re talking about two different things but likely agree with each other on the two subjects. I was talking about EVs versus ICE cars impact on paving wear because of weight differences. That spun off the user fee issue that is at the core of this thread. We all agree that EVs don’t accelerate pavement wear.

You introduced studded snows into the discussion. I understand your point and agree that experience indicates studded snows increase wear on the pavement. My point in response is that is not an EV centric issue. It’s an issue springing from tire type, ie studded snows. It’s not related to whether a vehicle is powered by a motor or an engine.

 

[SeattleSteveMe]

The extra EV fees compensate the state for lost gas tax which is what pays for road repairs and the like. You still use the roads.

I'd have to drive 60K miles a year in my old 20MPG Subaru to pay as much fuel tax as the $150 WA State charges me for my EV registration. Then they charge another $75 for electrification infrastructure as well.
I don't mind paying my fare share, but 10 times as much as I would pay to drive my gas guzzler is really annoying.

 

[SeattleSteveMe]

PA highways and interstates are the worst I've ever driven.. GA actually enacted an amendment to the state constitution that gas tax would be used solely for road maintenance and construction.

WA has that too. The taxes don't cover the costs of the roads, they still supplement the gas tax with millions of dollars from the general find, plus federal grant money.

 

[SeattleSteveMe]

As others have said, per mile would never work. Logistics would drive all costs up.
Loaded or unloaded to easy to cheat.
What I have not seen mentioned is road use fees, which is what we all pay annual at registration.
On page two someone posted a photo of a dump truck and a Mustang.
Whomever put that dump truck on the road pays ten to twenty times or more annual road use fees than that Mustang. Because of weight. Plus taxes on every gallon of fuel put in it.
That looks like brand new asphalt the dump truck is sitting on.
For those of you that want to do away fossil fuels and stop drilling for crude I ask you, what do you want to drive on? Dirt? Gravel?
Without crude oil we cannot have asphalt.
Asphalt is a petroleum product.

Concrete is a more durable paving material. That's why they use it on interstates. Unfortunately it's an environmentally horrible material too.

Sponsored