Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A tax is a tax is a tax. Call it whatever you want but the outcome is still the same.
Nonsense. Taxes are drafted for various reasons. There are taxes specifically targeted for redistribution of income. There are taxes that fund public expenditures in specific areas (example is the gasoline tax which is used to fund road construction). And there are taxes meant to discourage the use of certain products that have a negative effect on society (cigarette tax, SUV tax, etc).
The tax can have negative effects if it is poorly targeted or too low/high. It can also have positive effects.
Haha.. oh tell me you arent serious... Try doing research on the luxury tax, and how this put tens of thousands of americans out of work, and about how it was so harmful to America that even the Democrats supported its repeal.
If you aren't going to raise taxes on SUVs, at least repeal the tax breaks that are currently in place. Right now, the government is basically encouraging their use.
If you aren't going to raise taxes on SUVs, at least repeal the tax breaks that are currently in place. Right now, the government is basically encouraging their use.
Actually the government is encouraging the use of hybrids, by way of a tax credit on the purchase year of the vehicle, but they no longer give tax breaks on the purchase of SUV's...
Nonsense. Taxes are drafted for various reasons. There are taxes specifically targeted for redistribution of income. There are taxes that fund public expenditures in specific areas (example is the gasoline tax which is used to fund road construction). And there are taxes meant to discourage the use of certain products that have a negative effect on society (cigarette tax, SUV tax, etc).
The tax can have negative effects if it is poorly targeted or too low/high. It can also have positive effects.
We're not talking about taxing everyone who uses roads for the purpose of construction. A SUV does not take up any more space, nor any more wear and tear on a road.
There would be 2 reasons to put such a tax into place.
1) luxury tax, to tax those that can afford it.
Your talking about taxing those that can afford to purchase larger vehicles, simply because they can afford them, this equates to a luxury tax, which when previously put into place, resulted in tens of thousands of individuals losing their jobs.
What happenes when people dont buy a larger vehicle? Well the rare cases that they do use the extra space, they are forced to take 2 trips, or take 2 vehicles.. What does that accomplish? Example: I could take a family vacation, and car poll with my family, and take my friends family with us. Well with the new luxury tax (which is what the proposal here was that started the conversation) it means that I would need to take my family in a car, and my friend another vehcile.. = more gas consumption, not less.
2) Consumption tax, such as cigarette taxes, but when we review the outcome of the cigarette tax, tax revenue goes down, not up when you raise taxes... The revenue that goes into the government goes down when you tax something and discourage its use. States see less tobacco tax revenue - U.S. business - MSNBC.com
Yes, raising taxes does cause a change in individuals purchasing habbits, but raising taxes on specific items, rarely results in a tax revenue increase, it simply means that people find reasons to work around the new laws.
Some people need larger vehicles just due to the type of work they perform. What would we do, provide those that need these jobs for work a tax credit, further complicating the tax process?
We're not talking about taxing everyone who uses roads for the purpose of construction. A SUV does not take up any more space, nor any more wear and tear on a road.
There would be 2 reasons to put such a tax into place.
1) luxury tax, to tax those that can afford it.
Your talking about taxing those that can afford to purchase larger vehicles, simply because they can afford them, this equates to a luxury tax, which when previously put into place, resulted in tens of thousands of individuals losing their jobs.
What happenes when people dont buy a larger vehicle? Well the rare cases that they do use the extra space, they are forced to take 2 trips, or take 2 vehicles.. What does that accomplish? Example: I could take a family vacation, and car poll with my family, and take my friends family with us. Well with the new luxury tax (which is what the proposal here was that started the conversation) it means that I would need to take my family in a car, and my friend another vehcile.. = more gas consumption, not less.
2) Consumption tax, such as cigarette taxes, but when we review the outcome of the cigarette tax, tax revenue goes down, not up when you raise taxes... The revenue that goes into the government goes down when you tax something and discourage its use. States see less tobacco tax revenue - U.S. business - MSNBC.com
Yes, raising taxes does cause a change in individuals purchasing habbits, but raising taxes on specific items, rarely results in a tax revenue increase, it simply means that people find reasons to work around the new laws.
Some people need larger vehicles just due to the type of work they perform. What would we do, provide those that need these jobs for work a tax credit, further complicating the tax process?
A tax on SUV's and other low MPG cars would be a tax to bring the cost of those vehicles better in line with their cost to society. Such a tax would not be about raising income. It would be a tax to reduce consumption and cause less people to buy them. That is the point.
As far as people that truly need large vehicles, my understanding is that the UK provides those people with limited exemptions. But that is limited for various reasons. There are new hybrid SUV's that get much better gas mileage.
Face the facts, the VAST majority of people here in the US that buy these things aren't doing it because they really "need" them. They buy them for status reasons or because of some perceived safety issues with smaller, more efficient vehicles.
A tax on SUV's would not be about raising income. It would be a tax to reduce consumption and cause less people to buy them. That is the point.
As far as people that truly need large vehicles, my understanding is that the UK provides those people with limited exemptions. But that is limited for various reasons. There are new hybrid SUV's that get much better gas mileage.
Face the facts, the VAST majority of people here in the US that buy these things aren't doing it because they really "need" them. They buy them for status reasons or because of some perceived safety issues with smaller, more efficient vehicles.
So its back to a luxury tax? Again, go research the history of luxury taxes and see the outcome. Less people buying them = less JOBS...
People are buying the hybrid SUV's now, supply/demand is causing this because the public is not wanting to buy fuel at $4 a gallon. SUV's are the ONLY way that the average consumer could afford a SUV in the future, and supply/demand is resolving that.
I think its humorous to see people always go back to tax, tax, tax, especially when you look at issues like this, because people are buying hybrid suv's already, and it has nothing to do with taxes...
A tax on SUV's and other low MPG cars would be a tax to bring the cost of those vehicles better in line with their cost to society.
While we're on this subject.. what exactly is the "cost to society" Last I checked, they already paid more taxes due to a higher sales price, and higher taxes at the pump, simply due to their higher consumption.
Other then that, tell me how a Ford Explorer driver, costs "society" anything different then a Ford Taurus driver does.
So its back to a luxury tax? Again, go research the history of luxury taxes and see the outcome. Less people buying them = less JOBS...
People are buying the hybrid SUV's now, supply/demand is causing this because the public is not wanting to buy fuel at $4 a gallon. SUV's are the ONLY way that the average consumer could afford a SUV in the future, and supply/demand is resolving that.
I think its humorous to see people always go back to tax, tax, tax, especially when you look at issues like this, because people are buying hybrid suv's already, and it has nothing to do with taxes...
It is not a luxury tax. It is a tax to REDUCE consumption of a product that has negative consequences for the greater society. I don't think I can make myself more clear.
And yes, SUV sales are going down. Good. We can make them go down faster and encourage people to buy vehicles that have better MPG.
While we're on this subject.. what exactly is the "cost to society" Last I checked, they already paid more taxes due to a higher sales price, and higher taxes at the pump, simply due to their higher consumption.
Other then that, tell me how a Ford Explorer driver, costs "society" anything different then a Ford Taurus driver does.
They consume more fuel. They emit more pollutants. Those are two.
The sales price is a one-time charge and not an annual charge on the vehicle's cost to society. One does pay higher fuel but as I stated in another thread, the cost of fuel is not inline with the cost it exerts on society.
An annual duty on high mileage vehicles, along with a new lower mileage fleet requirement, would help to reduce the number of these vehicles purchased each year in the US.
It is not a luxury tax. It is a tax to REDUCE consumption of a product that has negative consequences for the greater society. I don't think I can make myself more clear.
And yes, SUV sales are going down. Good. We can make them go down faster and encourage people to buy vehicles that have better MPG.
call it what you may, but its a luxury tax.
Since your having difficulty understanding the difference here
Luxury tax = when you buy the item that would use the fuel
consumption tax = when you tax the gas...
Even though you want to call it a consumption tax, its not because me buying a SUV vehicle, and parking it in my drive way is not consuming anything.. its a luxury tax for having it sit there... It cant turn into a consumption tax until its actually consuming something.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
