It would also set off another wave of foreclosures as property values would drop in those far-flung suburbs.
I'm amazed that I'm the only one concerned about the privacy issues of the government putting a Federal Lo-Jack on your car.
I doubt location tracking will actually ever come to fruition when simply tracking total miles driven will do quite well.
Seems to me there is a lot of holes in this proposal and the people of the great US of A will not stand for it. Basically you are endorsing a triple tax for the privilege to drive a vehicle. This reminds me so much of inheritance tax. Your parents already paid a tax on their income, then they pass and the government can take 30% of that just to pass it to your hands. Talk about some fucking bullshit!
Exactly!!!!! This also reminds me of Clinton proposing a chip to be planted surgically to each individual, so it would eliminate identity theft. LOL
And yet, nothing in this proposal talks about doing away with the "gas tax". So basically you are double fucking the middle class. I am actually rich and can afford the tax; but I have many middle class friends that would suffer greatly. For example: One of my friends works at Edward's Airforce Base. The housing there is absolutely terrible. Worst school system, terrible entertainment, and 0 restaurants. He decided to live off base because he wanted to have his kids go to a better school. This area is 42 miles from where he works, since the security of the base has about 20 miles from the nearest city. So you mean to tell me, if this tax is passed, and they don't eliminate the gas tax (Because there is no way in hell they will give up that kind of money); my friend will be raped for just wanting to be in a better neighborhood and school system for his family.
Average Southern California Commuter daily miles = 82 round trip. Factor the average MPG is roughly 18. That is basically 4.5 gallons per commuter, per day. "federal excise tax which is 18.4 cents for gasoline and 24.4 cents for diesel fuel." Multiply this with the amount of population of millions of commuters and it's roughly 80ยข per head per day. Do you honestly think that the federal government will eliminate the "gas tax" because they implimented a "mileage tax"?! Are you fucking crazy?!?!
It's worse than a gas tax. You can generally choose to purchase a fuel efficient car or not (although the switchover costs are high). If you choose to drive a V-8, you pay more in gas tax than if you buy a hybrid. It's more difficult to change houses/locations than to change cars. This proposed tax is a tax on how far you drive, not just how much gas you consume. It also means you're less likely to change jobs if the new job is further from your home. No one wants to pull their kids out of their school if they can help it. Property values and rents close to employment centers will skyrocket. Far from employment centers, property values will plummet, causing all sorts of fiscal disruption in those communities. In the long run, the poor will be forced out of major urban areas, where they can be more easily served. I'm coming up with these without any real thought. There have to be all sorts of ancillary penalties that aren't being considered. But to address your post, they won't eliminate the gas tax. This will just be another layer of tax.
It would be an economic disaster. The issue with 2nd loans; with the assumption that they can leverage invest would be peanuts to the ramifications of a bill like this. Basically, you have absolutely no control on the amount of tax you pay for driving to work. Like you mentioned. It's much easier to buy a fuel efficient car, than it is to buy a home closer to work. And to top it off, there is absolutely no way the federal government will release a hundreds of trillion dollar revenue for their gas tax. It's just not fiscally possible. What a fucking waste of paper to file a bill like this.
Page 441. Section 4103. Maybe. I am not a lawyer. I do not speak legalize. "APPROPRIATION TO THE TRANSPORTATION TRUST FUND OF AMOUNTS EQUIVALENT TO CERTAIN TAXES AND PENALTIES.--" ore October 1, 2019, under the following provisions-- "(A) section 4041 (relating to taxes on diesel fuels and special motor fuels), "(B) section 4051 (relating to retail tax on heavy trucks and trailers), "(C) section 4071 (relating to tax on tires), "(D) section 4081 (relating to tax on gasoline, diesel fuel, and kerosene), "(E) section 4481 (relating to tax on use of certain vehicles), and "(F) section XXXX (relating to the [new energy tax])
It's a feasibility study. It's not a tax bill. Eventually, we are going to run out of oil. When that will happen, we can debate, but it will happen. Before it happens, gas prices are going to go up much more than anything you are worrying about here. Eventually, your middle-class buddy who commutes a long distance won't be able to afford to do it in his gas-powered vehicle, even with no mileage tax. Eventually, gas tax revenues go to zero because gas goes to zero. That's why government is studying this idea. They are facing declining revenues from gas tax. Worrying about whether you have to pay gas tax + mileage tax is really missing the big picture entirely. barfo
This has to be one of the worst ideas I've seen in a long while. Tax the poor. The rich will pay whatever anyway, and drive around in their expensive gas guzzlers. It's obviously bad for jobs, as workers will not be able to afford their rent and food along with the gas (it's precarious already).
I don't necessarily mind "floating" this plan. Someone's trying to solve problems by thinking outside the box, and bringing it up for debate. I don't think that it's a good plan, but I don't have a problem the government putting a plan out there for debate and voting. Now, if some committee somewhere behind a closed door came up with this, bribed a few senators to vote for it, and put it out there as a fait accompli I'd be upset by the lack of transparency in legislating our country.
