Per mile tax-HB-1832

[kavm]

Originally Posted by Hemlock140

Yikes, at $1/mile I would be paying about $15,000/year for our 3 vehicles. Currently the total with full coverage at $250 deductibles is only about $2,400.

Not really. If you pay 1000 dollars a year for insurance and drive it 1 mile in the year, the price is $1000/mile. The insurance is only $250/year but the poster drove only 250 - hence $1/mile. The poster seemed to be talking about per mile insurance cost and not per mile road tax.

If that’s normal for the poster going forward, it’s better to sell the car. Or, keep it - as $250 / year isn’t going to break the back regardless of how much per mile it translates into.

[rantiquity]

Originally Posted by rkcarguy

My uncles Tesla weighs 4800#'s. We're all big and tall people so add 1000#'s for 4 people. That's almost 1500#'s a tire, for a car that pays no gas tax.

As far as laws being changeable, yes I realize that. I've been cited for a law where the legislators simply lined out what was an exemption. As voters, we have to look at each of these not just at face value, but how it can be revised to be more onerous and money-grabbing, because that's what they will do. I point it out, because many WA residents simply don't know this.
The income tax on the rich, for example. You know if one of those pieces of legislation ever passes it will get revised and we will ALL be paying income tax.

Any EV including a Tesla pays an additional registration fee of $150 per year and a hybrid pay an additional $50 a year. So if the per mileage rate is put into effect EV and hybrid would pay even more.
So yes EV and hybrids pay.
The people that will get hurt the most will be low income people who depend on their cars for getting to work at low paying jobs.

And yes the gas tax is a step in the direction of a future state income tax. The democrats will make it sound like a great deal to eliminate the gas tax in favor of a state income tax.
I mean what possibly could go wrong!

[rantiquity]

Originally Posted by kavm

Not really. If you pay 1000 dollars a year for insurance and drive it 1 mile in the year, the price is $1000/mile. The insurance is only $250/year but the poster drove only 250 - hence $1/mile. The poster seemed to be talking about per mile insurance cost and not per mile road tax.

If that’s normal for the poster going forward, it’s better to sell the car. Or, keep it - as $250 / year isn’t going to break the back regardless of how much per mile it translates into.

Well except maybe $250 a year to a low income or someone sole income is Social Security.

[kavm]

Originally Posted by rantiquity

Well except maybe $250 a year to a low income or someone sole income is Social Security.

Not sure what the point is. If someone is low income and doesn’t drive 250 miles in a year, they’d simply not have a vehicle when living in Redmond (with plenty of public transportation). Social security is not the sole income of the OP.

All I was saying was that if you don’t drive much, the cost of ownership of a vehicle looks exorbitant. Is there a problem with that?

[StealthRabbit]

Originally Posted by kavm

...
All I was saying was that if you don’t drive much, the cost of ownership of a vehicle looks exorbitant. Is there a problem with that?

If it is per/vehicle... I have a problem with that... (I have 48 vehicles, so individually they don't get too many miles / yr. Collectively they still don't get to many WA based miles / yr. I'm not keen on rain, so some years I spend less than 10 days in my domicile state of WA. (That's kinda spendy since I pay over $25k / yr in WA state property taxes (alone). + B&O, Personal Property, L&I, and other business related taxes.)

My ONLY positive net income is SS (single earner hourly factory (night shift) wages... SAHW has ZERO SS earned, but gets 50% of my meager SS)

I need a few more taxes from WA state,

Not to worry, I'm sure they're coming to all in WA.

[rantiquity]

Originally Posted by kavm

Not sure what the point is. If someone is low income and doesn’t drive 250 miles in a year, they’d simply not have a vehicle when living in Redmond (with plenty of public transportation). Social security is not the sole income of the OP.

All I was saying was that if you don’t drive much, the cost of ownership of a vehicle looks exorbitant. Is there a problem with that?

Low income people who work at low income jobs most likely drive as much as a high income person...many more miles because they don't normally live in the high rent district where they may have to work doing jobs high maintenance people won't do.
^^So what? Do you think low income people don't drive?

I have noticed a growing number of older people, most likely only have SS to live on, working at varies fast food establishments lately, include Walmart in that list.

Where I live on the peninsula is not considered a high rent district and public transportation is limited but I know Redmond is and can afford more public services.

[kavm]

Originally Posted by rantiquity

Low income people who work at low income jobs most likely drive as much as a high income person...many more miles because they don't normally live in the high rent district where they may have to work doing jobs high maintenance people won't do.
^^So what? Do you think low income people don't drive?

I have noticed a growing number of older people, most likely only have SS to live on, working at varies fast food establishments lately, include Walmart in that list.

Where I live on the peninsula is not considered a high rent district and public transportation is limited but I know Redmond is and can afford more public services.

You have a reading comprehension problem. Let us recap the interaction so far:

• leastprime: Post #13 - This makes our auto insurance at $1.00/mile driven
• Hemlock140 : Post #15 - Yikes, at $1/mile I would be paying about $15,000/year for our 3 vehicles
• kavm - Post #21 - Not really. If you pay 1000 dollars a year for insurance and drive it 1 mile in the year, the price is $1000/mile. The insurance is only $250/year but the poster drove only 250 - hence $1/mile. ... $250 / year isn’t going to break the back regardless of how much per mile it translates into.
• rantiquity - Post #23 - Well except maybe $250 a year to a low income or someone sole income is Social Security.
• kavm - Post #21 - All I was saying was that if you don’t drive much, the cost of ownership of a vehicle looks exorbitant.

leastprime doesn't seem to drive much but is by no means poor. In that context, I correctly noted that the insurance cost of $250/year isn't a big deal (for leastprime). Then comes a series of posts from you about how it's a big deal for the poor and low income people who work at low income jobs most likely drive as much as a high income person. Did I say anything different anywhere?

You are reading things that aren't being said and trying to push something into the conversation that wasn't said or has anything to do with the thread - per mile road usage tax being proposed in the bill. There is a difference between auto insurance cost (which is not per mile) and the per mile road usage cost being proposed in the bill. Auto-insurance costs aren't exactly relevant to the thread - $250 or $500, $1 per mile or $10 per mile!

Irrespective of the heartburn, the thrust of the bill is to get the Tesla (and other EV) owners to pay the road usage tax - regardless of whether they are poor or homeless. The gas tax in WA is 49.4 cents per gallon. So, anyone who gets worse than 20 miles per gallon (overall) will come out a little ahead and those who get better than that (including the EV drivers who get a lot more) will pay more. So, the per mile road usage tax unfortunately favors the gas guzzlers. I suppose the idea is that impact on the road wear and tear depends upon the miles driven rather than the mileage of the vehicle. Of course, this seems to favor the truck/tractor/heavy SUV drivers/owners.