[Oeva-list] tax issues fair would be paying EV drivers
matwete at comcast.net
Sat Jun 16 12:02:56 PDT 2012
Long wind appreciated Don!
It's so easy to simply accept that the direction that policy makers are
taking us is right based on their knowing the situation, their getting broad
input and their being smart people without agendas. But there's a lot of
assumptions in that.
>From my personal experience now finally switching from a gas commuter to
pure electric, the change in consumption profile looks like this:
Item Before After
Fuel Consumed 100gal/mo 50gal/mo -50%
40gal/mo heating oil plus car fuel
Electricity Consumed 578kwh/mo 908kwh/mo +55%
330kwh/mo in EV energy
Solar Portion: 139kwh/mo 139kwh/mo 0
Now, since going with 2.5kw of solar power 3 yrs ago or so, we dropped all
the Green, Healthy Habitat, etc. due to what appeared as an unfair taxation
of our use: 2 of the 3 programs simply billed us fixed $5 and $3/mo, then
both Portland and MultCo taxed this amount whether we used any power at all
from PGE that month! So our energy profile has not been that green despite
going solar. With the addition of the EV load on our electrical usage,
we'll be adding back the green programs since we'll be going from around 25%
local solar to only about 14% local solar and since our monthly net usage
will now not come to near zero in the summer months.
So, we're cutting our personal consumption of oil by 50%, which is good.
But unless we go greener on our electric usage, we're going to be paying PGE
for a power that has a good percentage that is from coal, natural gas or
other extractive non-renewable fuels. Even if we don't switch to "clean"
source power, most or all of the non-renewable portions of our electrical
usage will still avoid coming from imported oil. So in that sense, we've
significantly reduced (50%) our part of the national addiction to foreign
oil. Better still, we should bike and ride mass transit as much as
Thanks again Don-
-Myles Twete, now commuting 50miles/day with a 2011 THINK
From: oeva-list-bounces at oeva.org [mailto:oeva-list-bounces at oeva.org] On
Behalf Of Theoldcars at aol.com
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2012 3:30 PM
To: oeva-list at oeva.org
Subject: [Oeva-list] tax issues fair would be paying EV drivers
While I am in agreement with you gas taxes should be raised. However the
majority of the voting public here does not see it that way. A gas tax in
Oregon has been voted down several times in past attempts. Between gas
prices and this economy I doubt a tax increase would have any chance.
ODT has been for a very long time been looking at ways to increase revenue.
So this really has less to do with the revenue generated by EVs. What it
would do is help ODT get everyone use to a different way to collect road
taxes. The use of an alternative fuel not paying for roads is a good
argument that works on the idea of fairness. After all even if the numbers
don't work its the thought that counts. Most people are fair and if focus is
roads then keeping things fair gives a reason for the change.
While the funding of roads or the repair and even more so the replacement of
bad bridges is valid concern. As a nation were currently on the fast road to
being bankrupt. We should encourage EVs use as a way to reduce shipping
dollars out of the country. The mass majority of drivers continue to buy gas
and it is a fuel our nation cannot afford. The impact on our economy at some
point will be even greater then the economic crisis of 2008. You simply just
can't keep printing money and not expect a catastrophic economic failure.
Its not a matter of if it will happen only a question of when. What good
are nice roads when fewer and fewer people will be able to afford driving on
them? Right now miles driven are down due to the cost of fuel and the
economy. What is pending in our future is far worse then the condition of
We should be doing everything possible to encourage the use of EVs at the
fastest rate possible. Consider one of the main reasons ICE drivers say EVs
are not practical "EVs cost too much." That you can buy a ICE for 12,000 but
an EV costs two or three times that amount. What is being overlooked here is
that new ICE is now costing all of us for the next ten or twenty years is
that fair? Buying a 12,000 dollar ICE encourages continuing dependence of
imported energy. Every ICE driver should be endorsing any method that leads
to less drivers competing for the same fuel. Less demand will help steady
prices and give us more time to move away from ICE vehicles.
The future of our country will depend on how many of us are willing to buy
EVs. An EV is not just an investment paying off for the EV owner with an
efficient motor and inexpensive fuel costs. It is a vehicle that helps every
person in this nation regardless if you own or don't own a vehicle. The
drivers of ICE vehicles are driving the value of our dollar down. Since this
is like 99.999 percent of the driving population majority rules. It is not
oil or gold going up it is the value of the dollar going down.
It is not unusual to tax what we would like to discourage for the benefit of
society. Then to apply these tax funds to help reduce the number of the
population from continuing undesirable actions that affect all. It is also
not unusual to pay bounty when a problem becomes out of control or
overwhelming. Sure appears to me were at that point now with ICE vehicles.
There are many on this list who say it is only fair we all pay our share.
Usually if your talking about a fair situation I would agree. The majority
of people I believe want to do the right thing and on of them is not be
freeloading off others. In effect now what we have a general population that
feels it is entitled to use oil for transportation. That it has always been
this way and should continue to be this way regardless of the outcome. Well
its not fair that people continue to buy an imported energy that devalues
our dollar. Short of putting a warning on the pump and receipt. Most people
just don't seem to realize they are funding the problem.
Most people only think day to day about what they need to do and where they
need to go. The actual cost to them is not understood nor do they realize
the continued dependence on oil is like a chronic disease. The damage is
occurring over a long period of time. Since most everyone has the same
illness of driving an ICE. The disease is not viewed as a threat but as a
very necessary requirement to live life as you know it. Other wise they
would not be able to use ICE vehicle. Which to most owners is their first or
second largest investment.
There are numerous excellent reasons to use electric energy to power
vehicles. Many can be down played, dismissed or just plain disagreed on.
Right or wrong people will take a point of view based on false information
or mistaken beliefs. There are many examples of this in the past and I will
not bore you with details on hindsight. I believe the best valid argument to
subsidize EVs is the pending financial crisis looming in our future.
Continuing to buy oil from other countries is obviously is not sustainable.
Just as bad is the security risk to us and the rest of the world.
The one fact that no one can disagree with is, you can not continue to spend
more then you make. Everyone knows what the outcome will be if a person or
business does so. When it comes to the government many just dismiss it as if
the same rules don't apply. If you spend more then you take in your going to
be broke. If our country prints up more money then it takes in then the
value of the dollar will fall just as it has. The
bad part about this is you can be a very frugal person and yet your going to
be badly impacted along with everyone else.
IMHO this is where were headed with oil. Is it fair that our nation
continues down this path without encouraging the general population by
steering it in a different direction? By government I mean every level of
government including state, county and city to do what is best for everyone.
What is obviously best for all of us is if everyone really understood. The
more we delay the worse its going to be. One of our greatest problems we
face today is caused by ICE vehicles. Every public agency should be directed
to find ways to encourage EV use and this should include ODT.
Tax free EVs are more then fair and at this time would be the correct path
to take. The way our economy is today and based on where were headed. It is
in everyone's best interest to remove or convert as many ICE vehicles off
the road as quickly as possible.
I believe EVs should get a free ride until their numbers reach the point
where we no longer need to import oil. Until this happens were printing up
money which is a nation not acting responsible for its actions. Now if we
can get to this level with solar, wind, geothermal then fine. Until that
happens I feel there is no excuse to do anything that would not encourage
more EVs or shift more costs away from ICE drivers.
At this time I say forget about having EVs pay for the roads. EV numbers are
insignificant and will be for a very considerable amount of time. What would
be better is to pay EV drivers by the mile. EVs should receive a tax break
for every mile driven both state and federal. Now that would not only be
fair it would be smart. Even if you never want to own an EV it rewards
others for keeping the cost of your fuel down and saving our nations
economy. So your children and the children they have don't have to figure
out how to get out of the mess we passed on to them.
After all many of us know how inconvenient owning an EV is. They only have a
limited amount of range and it can take hours to recharge. For the privilege
of ICE drivers avoiding all the hassles of owning an EV. It seems reasonable
the ICE driver incur a tax for the luxury of driving an ICE at everyone's
expense. An easy option for many ICE drivers would be to replace their
second or third vehicle they own to be an EV.
Sorry about the long winded post. I will try and contain myself.
In a message dated 6/12/2012 12:00:26 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
oeva-list-request at oeva.org writes:
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 11:59:06 -0700
From: patrick0101 at gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Oeva-list] tax issues.
To: OEVA <oeva-list at oeva.org>
<CAJTfAAW=gvH3HG0LtHuC=EDxDYYZYUH3N51CR2zryDS684+mXg at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
I like the idea of an odometer based tax (rather than GPS). I also like the
idea of a taxes on tires (including (or especially) studded). Tire wear
would have a high correlation to road wear. I also think the Oregon gas tax
should be raised. Oregon's gas tax is lower than Washington's and
Sunlight will never cost $4/gallon
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Oeva-list