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.
Never heard of any tax breaks for owning a car. In fact, where I live you pay personal property tax on your vehicle every year in addition to the taxes you pay each and every time you buy gas.
My town has added lots of bike lanes in the last few years. They're in the form of a designated lane on either side of the street that only bikes (no cars or foot traffic) can use. So why shouldn't the bike riders pay personal property tax to help maintain the bike lanes just like drivers pay via their taxes to maintain the rest of the road?
After all, if tomorrow we all chose to bike instead of drving, the roads will still have to be repaired and repaved at regular intervals. Where is the money going to come from if no one is paying any vehicle taxes?
If there was a sudden mass conversion from autos to bikes, the cost of maintaining roads for them would plummet enormously. Bikes and pedestrians don't put the wear and tear on roads that cars and trucks do (although trucks do the most.) Assuming trucks were still around, they would take over the highways (which would be useless to bicycles and pedestrians) and would have to shoulder the burden of cost, or the right-of-way could be used for electric interurban passenger/freight lines. I assume that bicycle riders might have to pay a small registration fee or property tax for roadway maintenance, but it would be chickenfeed compared to the amount of money needed to maintain our existing automotive right-of-way. The constant need for lane expansion would become a thing of the past, as would a lot of safety infrastructure that only became necessary when autos became commonplace: stoplights, crash barriers, ramps, center dividers, passing lanes, etcetera.
Most cities and towns would suddenly be left with massive extra capacity on all their roadways, since cars need so much more space for everything--the biggest expense would be avoiding excessive decay of the unneeded roadway infrastructure and parking lots, until something more useful could be built on top of them.
If there was a sudden mass conversion from autos to bikes, the cost of maintaining roads for them would plummet enormously. Bikes and pedestrians don't put the wear and tear on roads that cars and trucks do (although trucks do the most.) Assuming trucks were still around, they would take over the highways (which would be useless to bicycles and pedestrians) and would have to shoulder the burden of cost, or the right-of-way could be used for electric interurban passenger/freight lines. I assume that bicycle riders might have to pay a small registration fee or property tax for roadway maintenance, but it would be chickenfeed compared to the amount of money needed to maintain our existing automotive right-of-way. The constant need for lane expansion would become a thing of the past, as would a lot of safety infrastructure that only became necessary when autos became commonplace: stoplights, crash barriers, ramps, center dividers, passing lanes, etcetera.
Most cities and towns would suddenly be left with massive extra capacity on all their roadways, since cars need so much more space for everything--the biggest expense would be avoiding excessive decay of the unneeded roadway infrastructure and parking lots, until something more useful could be built on top of them.
Trucks and buses would still have to use city roads and streets to deliver goods and ferry around folks who prefer not to bike. And they would continue to pay the lion's share of the road expenses via taxes and registrations. I also agree that bikers should pay a yearly registration fee toward road maintenance.
Most large thoroughfares have landscaped medians. Would it be more feasible to make them curbed, fenced bikeways, like streetcar railways? Bikers would be more visible. They'd only be crossing one side of the street instead of both cross traffic flows to get to another side. They'd share the road only with left turning vehicles, and again, they'd at least be more visible. Lack of safety keeps a lot of people off the road, and more visibility makes the choice aspirational.
I like that there's an opportunity for green and shrubbery in those medians, but it's mostly a waste of space.
Trucks and buses would still have to use city roads and streets to deliver goods and ferry around folks who prefer not to bike. And they would continue to pay the lion's share of the road expenses via taxes and registrations. I also agree that bikers should pay a yearly registration fee toward road maintenance.
You're kind of putting words in my mouth there. I don't think cyclists should have to pay yearly registration fees towards road maintenance in the current milieu--but if automobiles dropped from favor and bikes became the predominant mode of transportation, it might be necessary to add a small surcharge to the cost of purchasing a bike for cycle-lane infrastructure.
Because the amount of wear and tear on a road from bicycles is a tiny fraction of what cars do (which is a tiny fraction of what trucks do), there is no need to charge registration fees on bicycles now--and doing so would only discourage people from switching modes. Bikes do about as much damage to a roadway as pedestrians.
Or do you also want pedestrians to register their shoes every year to pay for sidewalk maintenance?
You're kind of putting words in my mouth there. I don't think cyclists should have to pay yearly registration fees towards road maintenance in the current milieu--but if automobiles dropped from favor and bikes became the predominant mode of transportation, it might be necessary to add a small surcharge to the cost of purchasing a bike for cycle-lane infrastructure.
Because the amount of wear and tear on a road from bicycles is a tiny fraction of what cars do (which is a tiny fraction of what trucks do), there is no need to charge registration fees on bicycles now--and doing so would only discourage people from switching modes. Bikes do about as much damage to a roadway as pedestrians.
Or do you also want pedestrians to register their shoes every year to pay for sidewalk maintenance?
Bicyclists should pay registration fees b/c they use the roads. I don't know if you've every driven in a place where there are a lot of bicyclists on the road; let me tell you-it can be awful. Bicyclists constantly break the rules of the road laws. They're also more subject to getting themselves killed even when they're not breaking the law b/c a car is much bigger than they are.
As we have had a lot of 90 degree weather these last two months (20 days in July and 24 so far in August), biking doesn't seem like much fun.
Tsk Tsk.... posting an article from June 28, 2007 and not mentioning that the tax law was changed.
Perhaps folks would be more interested in the CURRENT rules of the Business Vehicles - Section 179 Tax Deductions. On the website, they even call the past rules the "Hummer Tax Loophole" and state that changes were specifically made to close the loophole. But, nice try.
Of course none of this has to do with making biking more mainstream. Cities are doing so by adding bike lanes at a rapid rate. Cars aren't going anywhere anytime soon, but there's certainly nothing wrong with giving people a choice.
Tsk Tsk.... posting an article from June 28, 2007 and not mentioning that the tax law was changed.
Perhaps folks would be more interested in the CURRENT rules of the Business Vehicles - Section 179 Tax Deductions. On the website, they even call the past rules the "Hummer Tax Loophole" and state that changes were specifically made to close the loophole. But, nice try.
Of course none of this has to do with making biking more mainstream. Cities are doing so by adding bike lanes at a rapid rate. Cars aren't going anywhere anytime soon, but there's certainly nothing wrong with giving people a choice.
WHoah, hold on there, not so quick there with your, Tsk Tsk.... IIRC, and I am pretty sure I do, you wrote that you never (I believe that does include the past) heard of a tax break.
Quote:
Never heard of any tax breaks for owning a car.
Nothing there about tax breaks currently available, and no qualification whatsoever, which now you specify "currently", so I was just going by what you wrote. Saying that you never heard of tax breaks for owning a car led me to believe you never heard of tax breaks for owning a vehicle. So now you have heard of a tax break. It does happen. Or maybe it just slipped your mind. Thanks for the additional qualification.
WHoah, hold on there, not so quick there with your, Tsk Tsk.... IIRC, and I am pretty sure I do, you wrote that you never (I believe that does include the past)heard of a tax break.
Nothing there about tax breaks currently available, and no qualification otherwise, so just going by what you wrote. So now you have heard of a tax break. It does happen. Or maybe it just slipped your mind.
Yes, businesses being able to depreciate assets did slip my mind. In my original post, I was thinking of the average Joe driving about in his personal car.
Mea culpa.
But, now that you so wisely pointed it out, it slipped into my mind that businesses are allowed to depreciate any assets used directly in the transaction of said business. I guess that means that if a company purchases bikes, they also are the beneficiaries of tax breaks. The many NYC Bike Messanger companies come to mind.
Yes, businesses being able to depreciate assets did slip my mind. In my original post, I was thinking of the average Joe driving about in his personal car.
Mea culpa.
But, now that you so wisely pointed it out, it slipped into my mind that businesses are allowed to depreciate any assets used directly in the transaction of said business. I guess that means that if a company purchases bikes, they also are the beneficiaries of tax breaks. The many NYC Bike Messanger companies come to mind.
Wouldn't that be great.
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.
