# Proposed NH Tax on Efficient Vehicles



## snocross1985 (Jan 22, 2016)

Here in "tax-free" NH it is being proposed that a fee (tax) be assessed on vehicles that get more than 21 MPG. Those that get more than 21 MPG would see an added charge of $30 during registration and vehicles getting more than 50 MPG would see an added charge of $150. Keep in mind this is an annual fee based on assumptions. Seems a huge step in the wrong direction. Since heavy trucks and SUVs add more wear to the roads and bridges wouldn't it be better to charge based on vehicle weight? This current proposed charge means that someone with a small car that drives 8,000 miles a year would be charged a fee where someone that drives a pickup 15,000 miles a year does not. 

NH sees a lot of tourist traffic year-round. These out of state cars put wear on the roads and bridges and would not see any charge other than highway tolls. Perhaps it is time to explore implementing a small sales tax so the burden is shared by residents and tourists.

https://politics.concordmonitor.com...30-to-150-may-be-coming-to-the-granite-state/


----------



## Lake Girl (Jan 22, 2016)

Definitely not a green philosophy going on in the state legislature in NH!  Do they own shares in oil/gas?  Either increase the gas tax a bit more, start using tolls or institute a general sales tax.


----------



## semipro (Jan 22, 2016)

As long as we fund our roads with fuel taxes this will be a problem. 
We need to move to a tax based on miles driven and vehicle loads on the pavement (e.g., weight, load per tire contact patch, whatever).
That way whether you're driving a Tesla or a semi truck you're paying your fair share.


----------



## woodgeek (Jan 23, 2016)

Georgia put a extra registration charge on EVs that is equivalent to the gas tax paid by Hummer owners at typical miles/yr.  

Gotta prevent those efficient vehicle 'free riders' from taking advantage of the system!

OR, we could raise the gas tax to the amount needed to pay for road work (versus the 1/3rd or so it pays for now) and index it to inflation.  Seems like now would be a great time to do so.  Nah, let's just add a prius tax.  LOL.


----------



## begreen (Jan 23, 2016)

Same talk out here. Putting in a disincentive tax can be counterproductive.  Mileage tax gets very complicated. For example, what about the mileage when one is driving out of state or country? It also hits poorer rural areas where one has to drive longer distances harder. Could a carbon tax, that is revenue neutral be more equitable?


----------



## peakbagger (Jan 23, 2016)

NH has the largest house of representatives in the US  by law they are paid a very minimal amount. The majority of the representatives are retirees, housewives and part timers. There are some positives to such a huge house and small population but one of the major downsides is that all sort of bills get introduced. and go up for consideration.

The reality is mileage based road fees adjusted for road weight of the vehicle is the most fair system but it is major disincentive for rural folks. The adjustment for road weight is a major part. The damage and wear to the road bed goes up exponentially  with the weight. Of course the cost to plow roads and salt them is the same for a car as a big truck so it will be an interesting calculation. Even if the calculation starts out fair, various interests like the trucking industry will scream heavily.


----------



## woodgeek (Jan 24, 2016)

Of course, the recent bill raises ~$6B for infrastructure by selling oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

Remember: Buy High, Sell Low!  

http://www.energyfuse.org/congress-...-mechanisms-in-long-term-transportation-bill/


----------



## begreen (Jan 25, 2016)

peakbagger said:


> NH has the largest house of representatives in the US  by law they are paid a very minimal amount. The majority of the representatives are retirees, housewives and part timers. There are some positives to such a huge house and small population but one of the major downsides is that all sort of bills get introduced. and go up for consideration.
> 
> The reality is mileage based road fees adjusted for road weight of the vehicle is the most fair system but it is major disincentive for rural folks. The adjustment for road weight is a major part. The damage and wear to the road bed goes up exponentially  with the weight. Of course the cost to plow roads and salt them is the same for a car as a big truck so it will be an interesting calculation. Even if the calculation starts out fair, various interests like the trucking industry will scream heavily.


Do they apply a discount if you don't have studded tires or chains? They tear up a road quicker too.


----------



## begreen (Jan 25, 2016)

woodgeek said:


> Of course, the recent bill raises ~$6B for infrastructure by selling oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
> 
> Remember: Buy High, Sell Low!
> 
> http://www.energyfuse.org/congress-...-mechanisms-in-long-term-transportation-bill/


----------



## billb3 (Jan 29, 2016)

you could privatize the roads and then all those crazy tourists that (used to) come and ski  and spend money would be paying their fair share.


----------



## DickRussell (Jan 30, 2016)

It's been argued that taxing according to miles driven penalize those who drive a lot out of state (mainly border-hopping to work in MA). But that argument can be applied to the gas tax also; buy gas in NH, drive over MA roads to work. So what's the difference? There is no totally fair way to do it, but to tax fuel efficiency seems completely wrong. We ought to tax according to extent of road usage and weight of vehicle used if we really want to do it fairly.


----------



## begreen (Jan 30, 2016)

Border hopping is one thing but what about when vacationing or traveling to a winter home in Florida?


----------



## woodgeek (Jan 31, 2016)

Perfect 'fairness' was never a goal of govt taxing and spending.  

I fail to see why it should be for vehicle taxing and infrastructure spending.


----------



## Where2 (Jan 31, 2016)

begreen said:


> Border hopping is one thing but what about when vacationing or traveling to a winter home in Florida?


I've got their back covered in FL, if they have my back covered as I transit through their state to get to my summer home at 45.8°N (yes, it's on the other side of NH).  



woodgeek said:


> OR, we could raise the gas taxes to the amount needed to pay for road work (versus the 1/3rd or so it pays for now) and index it to inflation.  Seems like now would be a great time to do so.


While oil, concrete, and steel prices are low would be a great time to upgrade/repair a bunch of US infrastructure too...

Throwing up a toll booth or a weigh station to equitably charge everyone breaks down at some point. There's one toll booth I pass through in NYS (traveling between FL and my summer home) where I typically sit in a ~1 mile bumper to bumper traffic jam to get to the toll booth. When I get to the booth, there is _no toll charge_ based on my ticket, but I still waste fuel sitting in bumper to bumper traffic for a mile just to get to the toll booth. I'm not sure who that toll booth charges, but the state reaps plenty of additional fuel taxes by making everyone sit in traffic.


----------



## EatenByLimestone (Jan 31, 2016)

Why not pay a flat fee when registering the vehicle?  Every vehicle being registered pays $100... I bet fewer cars would get registered and driven on the road.


----------



## begreen (Jan 31, 2016)

I like the way Great Britain does it. Charge a base fee and then add a gas guzzler tax. That encourages conservation and puts a higher fee on heavier and more polluting vehicles.


----------



## Lake Girl (Jan 31, 2016)

There are drawbacks to that approach too ... Canada found the the gas misers were not produced here so did not encourage manufacturing in country.  For Ontario, there was an argument to be had that we in Northern Ontario rely on those four wheel drive gas guzzlers to survive our winters as we get far more snowfall than southern Ontario.  For our house, we have a four-wheel drive 1/2 ton and a Spark.  We have had a fuel efficient car since the 1990s...

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...-tax-firing-on-wrong-cylinders/article722277/


----------



## begreen (Jan 31, 2016)

Yes climate can affect choices. No Subaru?


----------



## Lake Girl (Jan 31, 2016)

It's on the short-list for the next vehicle


----------



## nola mike (Feb 1, 2016)

How about gas tax + base tax + weight tax. Then your heavier guzzlers are paying substantially more, and there's an imputed mileage tax as well with the gas tax. Lighter always pays less (less wear on roads). Fuel efficient (likely low weight as well) still pay a floor. High mileage fuel efficient vehicles would I suppose not pay their "fair share", but this would encourage their use...


----------



## semipro (Feb 25, 2016)

related news on vehicle miles traveled based fees: 
http://fleetowner.com/regulations/support-taxing-vehicle-miles-grows


----------



## vinny11950 (Feb 25, 2016)

We are stuck on stupid right now when it comes to infrastructure spending and funding.  Lots of good reasons to do this now: low raw materials and commodity prices, low interest rates to finance these projects with fixed long term bonds, demand is high for better infrastructure, and oil prices are low.

Indexing the fuel tax to inflation, like Woodgeek says, is a great way to start.

But I imagine we won't do the smart thing now.  Instead more roads and utilities will be auctioned off to the private sector just so politicians can say the didn't raise taxes.


----------



## greg13 (Feb 26, 2016)

It depends on what the "Fee" is actually for. Here in NY you pay a tax (not fee) on every gallon of gas. This was supposed to be used for highway maintenance costs, but somehow the fund got derailed and ended up in the state's GENERAL fund. Now the roads are in terrible shape and no money ti fix them. 
It's just like the counties banking on sales tax revenue to balance their budgets, the price of gas drops so does the tax money. Now they have to figure out how to get more money. I wish I could just go to the boss and say "I need more money, give me a raise".
OK I'll put the soap box back in the closet.


----------



## stoveguy2esw (Feb 26, 2016)

the most equitable way is to install more toll roads, charge by the axle this is how some states raise highway funds (or should be as they are charging by use) fees for registration would be another method. when you get your license plates you pay for them, part of that money should be going to maintaining the roads driven on


----------



## DBoon (Feb 28, 2016)

greg13 said:


> Now the roads are in terrible shape and no money ti fix them.


Not my experience at all, and as someone who bicycles a lot (and notices poor condition roads much more while bicycling than driving) I can tell you that NY state roads are in much better shape overall than many, many other states.  Are some county or town roads in poor shape - perhaps, depending on the decisions made at the town or county level, but state roads area by and large in excellent shape throughout NY.  

And, after cycling across the US and experiencing many miles of poorly paved state roads outside of NY, I can tell you that it is far better in NY than outside of NY.


----------



## begreen (Feb 28, 2016)

stoveguy2esw said:


> the most equitable way is to install more toll roads, charge by the axle this is how some states raise highway funds (or should be as they are charging by use) fees for registration would be another method. when you get your license plates you pay for them, part of that money should be going to maintaining the roads driven on


That works if your state doesn't have an voter initiative option. Unfortunately WA state does and it has become an abysmal failure since one individual has made it his career to exploit the process. In the mid-1990's he was pissed because his heavy SUV had higher excise tax on it which is paid annually with the license fees. Those monies went directly into our state transportation budget which among other things manages the largest ferry system in the US. This asshat drums up a campaign to completely eliminate this source of funding with no replacement. He never used the ferry system so no skin off his nose. Our state is highly polarized between the agricultural east and the more urban west side of the Cascades. Killing the excise tax was popular with the eastern side (never used the ferry system) and those that hate paying for any govt. service. The initiative passed and we lost transportation funding. This fool filled with success has since made a career (and money) out of exploitation of our initiative system with populist measures to hogtie the very people we elect to keep the state running. 16 yrs later and we have bridges failing, a crippled ferry system, and a gridlocked legislature. And this dude now makes a paid career at destroying democracy. He is too cowardly to run for office and would rather get paid by the wealthy to help further their agendas.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Eyman
Fortunately he is now under investigation for misuse of funds. 
http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/politics-government/article35975415.html

side note:
In August 2006 a Thurston County judge blocked a tongue-in-cheek initiative (I-831)[43] proposed by Seattle-area computer programmer and blogger David Goldstein that would have allowed voters to criticize - or support - Tim Eyman by declaring, "The citizens of the state of Washington do hereby proclaim that Tim Eyman is a horse's ass."


----------



## stoveguy2esw (Feb 29, 2016)

I hear ya BG, its like "NIMBYISM" in a way, some folks want the goodies but don't want to pay for them, others don't want to pay for "other people's goodies" like the guy who tried to kill the ferry system because he didn't use it.

guess he doesn't mind driving on beat up roads huh.

taxes on gas was a wonderfully hidden way of gaining funding for highways and the like, but with the newer fuel efficient vehicles and electrics that don't use gas the revenue to maintain the roads dries up. so, you either increase the gas tax (which those driving EV's would be happy to support cause they don't use none) or you find "useage based" methods to supplement or replace the gas tax.

or you just drive on beat up, pothole filled, dangerous and destructive to your vehicle, roads.


----------



## Where2 (Mar 1, 2016)

stoveguy2esw said:


> Taxes on gas was a wonderfully hidden way of gaining funding for highways and the like, but with the newer fuel efficient vehicles and electrics that don't use gas the revenue to maintain the roads dries up. so, you either increase the gas tax (which those driving EV's would be happy to support cause they don't use none) or you find "useage based" methods to supplement or replace the gas tax.



With the privacy advocates all distraught about "usage based" methods and the "government knowing where you're at all the time". That puts us back to the anonymous method of raising fuel taxes, and stabbing EV owners when they renew their tags. If anyone cares to analyze highway motor fuel taxes, here are some resources for data: Wikipedia page "Fuel taxes in the United States", State Prices: AAA's Daily Fuel Gauge Report, Federal excise tax $0.184 (gas) & $0.244 (diesel).


----------

