Bummer: Illinois Proposes Massive Tax Hike On Electric Vehicles

This has EV owners (who are so often upper middle class and people considered “rich”) Very Upset

Illinois might start charging $1,000 per year to own an electric vehicle: ‘It’s outrageous’

A proposed hike in Illinois’ annual registration fee for electric vehicles, from $17.50 to $1,000, is being called unfair by current EV owners, and a sales disincentive by manufacturers — just as the new technology is beginning to gain broader traction.

“It’s outrageous,” said Nicoletta Skarlatos, 56, of Chicago, who bought a Tesla Model S five years ago. “I thought Illinois was progressive and would want to encourage EV ownership.”

Aimed at raising money to make overdue road improvements across Illinois, the proposed legislation would also more than double the state’s gas tax to 44 cents a gallon and raise the registration fee for standard vehicles to $148, from $98, among other elements.

But the kicker is a nearly 60-fold increase in the electric vehicle registration fee — one that is sure to cause sticker shock across a nascent segment of the auto industry, which has depended on government incentives to entice early adopters.

This does not cover hybrids, both regular and plug-in

The justification for the dramatic hike? Electric vehicles don’t provide the state with any gas tax revenue.

“There’s definitely a push, because electric vehicles don’t pay any gas taxes,” said Pete Sander, president of the Illinois Automobile Dealers Association.

Realistically, it wouldn’t raise all that much, since there aren’t that many pure EV vehicles out there, but, more people are purchasing them (for the life of me, can’t figure out why. Just seems too much of a pain in the behind). Remember, though, what we’ve seen over the past 10-15 years is a push to raise gas and other automobile taxes and fees because autos are getting much better fuel economy, so there was less revenue coming in to the treasuries. And much of the better gas mileage was due to government mandates on auto manufacturers. So, much is a problem caused by government solved by raising your taxes for saving money on gas used.

For Skarlatos, a self-employed software developer who bought her Tesla using $7,500 in federal incentives and $4,000 in state incentives, the idea of suddenly having to pay a $1,000 registration fee to own an electric vehicle in Illinois is “unfair,” and would have dissuaded her from an environmentally motivated purchase. The $11,500 in incentives, she said, persuaded her to take the plunge.

If you have to offer a big tax incentive to get people to purchase, perhaps the product isn’t that great.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

27 Responses to “Bummer: Illinois Proposes Massive Tax Hike On Electric Vehicles”

  1. Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

    Paying back their “fair” share? https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

  2. judgeroybean says:

    Tax should be retroactive going back to day of purchase.

  3. alanstorm says:

    “For Skarlatos, a self-employed software developer who bought her Tesla using $7,500 in federal incentives and $4,000 in state incentives, the idea of suddenly having to pay a $1,000 registration fee to own an electric vehicle in Illinois is “unfair,” and would have dissuaded her from an environmentally motivated purchase. The $11,500 in incentives, she said, persuaded her to take the plunge.”

    This person’s lack of awareness is staggering.

  4. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    It means we’ll have to realign how we tax as more and more people buy EVs. Ten years from now we won’t be able to depend on gasoline taxes to support highway maintenance.

    Regarding subsidies to encourage the sales of EVs, note that we subsidize supposedly billionaires to buy, sell and construct buildings with tens of millions of dollars in tax breaks.

    • formwiz says:

      Ten years from now we won’t be able to depend on gasoline taxes to support highway maintenance.

      You really think we do now?

      Regarding subsidies to encourage the sales of EVs, note that we subsidize supposedly billionaires to buy, sell and construct buildings with tens of millions of dollars in tax breaks.

      Yes, but those provide jobs to thousands of people and enrich communities. Subsidizing cars nobody wants is just another boondoggle.

    • Hoss says:

      The calculus when you give a corporation a subsidy is that you’re going to get your money back times X. You’re not getting anything but feel goods when you give subsidies for EVs.

      My house has more furnace (high efficiency) than it needs because the previous owner wanted to take advantage of a tax incentive. My heating/air guy laughed when he saw it. If you want to get rid of all subsidies you’re not going to get any complaints out of me.

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:

        Got it. Tax breaks to corporations good, tax breaks to citizens bad.

        By the way… according to Covian Dogma, tax breaks are not subsidies.

        • formwiz says:

          As I’ve explained several times, Trump’s cuts were across the board, but our little entrepreneur doesn’t want to hear that.

          He’s still invested in the lie the average working stiff got nada (even if that were true, the boom in jobs would have been gift enough).

          This is what happens when you blindly follow dogma without bothering to think.

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            You’ve explained nothing although you’ve typed a lot.

            The gap between rich and poor continues to increase and we’re experiencing record deficits! The tax cuts helped the rich a bunch, and the working stiffs a little.

        • Hoss says:

          I never know if you’re being deliberately obtuse or just willfully ignorant, or both. If you read from my comment what you regurgitated, I’ll run with both.

      • Professor Hale says:

        There is no calculation like that. What really happens is a lobbyist has a private meeting with a lawmaker and at some point the lawmaker inserts a new subsidy into a bill, which then becomes law. Then the people who benefited from the subsidy pay the lobbyist. Sometimes, by complete coincidence, that same beneficiary will also make a large donation to the politician to help him get re-elected and support his life of luxury. But that isn’t bribery. There are no current subsidies that even make a claim of increasing revenues to the government at any level. Stadiums used to make this claim, but actual historical facts have proven that revenues never reached parity and were hugely overestimated. Meanwhile costs were universally underestimated. But politicians got box seats, season tickets, and premium parking so it was all worth it.

  5. Kye says:

    “Regarding subsidies to encourage the sales of EVs, note that we subsidize supposedly billionaires to buy, sell and construct buildings with tens of millions of dollars in tax breaks.”

    A “tax break” is not a subsidy. A tax break is allowing the person to keep his own money while a subsidy is giving one person another person’s money.

    • Jl says:

      That fact still goes right over J’s head…..

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      But TEACH typed: “If you have to offer a big tax incentive to get people to purchase, perhaps the product isn’t that great.”

      Wouldn’t that also apply to multi million dollar tax incentive for builders to build?

      Is it an unfair subsidy to give tax credits to someone buying a Chevy Volt, but a wise investment to give tax incentives to a “real estate mogul” like Brokeahontas?

      Do you think Brokeahontas is racist since it ridicules a native American name?

      • formwiz says:

        Wouldn’t that also apply to multi million dollar tax incentive for builders to build?

        Did the state or city of New York give Donald Trump tax breaks they gave no one else?

        Is it an unfair subsidy to give tax credits to someone buying a Chevy Volt, but a wise investment to give tax incentives to a “real estate mogul” like Brokeahontas?

        Our little Commie doesn’t seem to realize all those wonderful taxes make it hard as Hell to do business, so, in order, to get the economy going, tax cuts encourage new projects and more jobs.

        Our little entrepreneur doesn’t seem to get it.

        You notice he’s pushing this like he used to push the idea The Donald would resign once Mule Ears’ devastating report came out.

        Do you think Brokeahontas is racist since it ridicules a native American name?

        Of course not. It ridicules an American Indian name.

    • formwiz says:

      Astutely put.

  6. formwiz says:

    Listening to our little Stalin (or Hitler if that’s your dish of lapsang souchon) talk about taxing and coercing people to change their behavior shows the old wheeze about scratch a Lefty, find a tyrant is really true.

  7. Professor Hale says:

    I just love how Trump is making all the Democrats suddenly become experts in economics, tariffs and the Constitution. It’s as if they suddenly discovered over the weekend that Companies (and government) don’t pay taxes, consumers do. I wonder if they will remember this the next time one of them decides that corporate income taxes are too low.

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      So trump’s blatant ignorance and dishonesty on tariffs is a teaching moment!! Brilliant. Trump plays like 5 dimensional chess on us mere mortals! Or it could be he’s just that dumb, or thinks that you are.

      Certainly you don’t agree that China is paying the tariffs to us, LOL? Are you?

      The US importers pay the tariff (tax) to the US gov’t. It’s possible that the Chinese exporter might drop their price to keep the business to help the US importer. The US importer might take the hit or they might pass part to their customers, losing customers.

      If corporations pass all their taxes to customers, hence costing them nothing, why do corporations object to the taxes? Altruism? LOL.

      Here’s an article by Bruce Bartlett, a Reagan/Kemp/ conservative whose positions haven’t changed but has been relabeled a commie by the loony NuCons:

      Corporate taxes are absorbed by shareholders, workers and to a lesser extent, consumers.

      https://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/19/who-pays-the-corporate-income-tax/

      • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

        Again the gullible little 12 year old girl is buying into the falsehoods promoted by the NYT.

        https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-media-is-lying-to-you-about-trumps-china-tariffs-2019-05-14

        https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

        • Elwood P. Dowd says:

          Nice try, Lil Bitch. But you’re guilty of misdirection.

          Trump claims China is paying the US the tariffs, which is just nuts.

          from your citation:

          “Tariffs are simply federal taxes. That’s it. The extra costs paid by importers, and consumers, goes to Uncle Sam…”

          Which is absolutely the opposite of what Trump claims.

          Bruce Bartlett was making the point that corporate income taxes are not being passed to consumers.

          Seems even 12 year old girls and smarter and more honest than little bitch puppies. But we knew that.

          • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

            So the tariffs are not paid to the US government? How’s that work, little missy? https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            Lil bitch,

            Lil trumpy has claimed repeatedly that the Chinese are paying the taxes to the US. That is false. US importers are paying the taxes to the US.

            Stop changing the subject, lil bitch.

  8. Professor Hale says:

    My taxes were significantly higher in 2018 than in 2016. Damn Trump for making me earn substantially more. Hopefully, I will earn less next year so I can pay less tax.

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      My taxes were lower in 2018 even though I made more money! Thanks trump!!

  9. Professor Hale says:

    California has suggested doing something similar for the same reason. More people driving higher fuel efficiency vehicles are making politicians believe that the state coffers are being cheated from gasoline taxes they are due. Their solution was taxing everyone by the mile (in addition to gasoline taxes, of course).

Bad Behavior has blocked 9925 access attempts in the last 7 days.