California Adds $52 Billion Gas Tax, $100 Annual Fee For EV Owners

2019 Chevy Volt

MAY 3 2017 BY MARK KANE 101

California Governor Jerry Brown signed into law SB-1 Transportation funding bill, which is intended to generate an additional $52.4 billion from taxes over the next decade for road infrastructure maintenance and development (mainly roads and bridges).

Eye-catchers: The new Opel Ampera-e and the Golden Gate Bridge.

While most of the weight falls on cars that consume petrol or diesel (see list below), there is also a new $100 annual vehicle registration fee (with an inflation adjustment) on zero-emission cars.

The fee targets all-electric and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles from model year 2020 and is expected that cumulatively will provide only $200 million.

  • $7.3 billion by increasing diesel excise tax 20 cents (currently $0.13) on 1 November 2017.
  • $3.5 billion by increasing diesel sales tax to 5.75% on 1 November 2017.
  • $24.4 billion by increasing gasoline excise tax 12 cents (currently $0.30) on 1 November 2017.
  • $16.3 billion from an annual transportation improvement fee based on a vehicle’s value starting 1 January 2018
  • $200 million from an annual $100 Zero Emission Vehicle fee starting 1 July 2020.
  • $706 million in General Fund loan repayments.

Normally we find issues when states start a fee on electric vehicles, but generally such an action is just arbitrarily decided (without a good reason/use for the proceeds), and often in those cases, there is not an equal (or greater) offset to drivers of petrol cars.

So for the California EV fee, its more of a “everyone has to do their part for the common good” tariff, and on that count, we can go along with the decision for an annual EV fee.

While the zero-emission fee is rather negligible, raising the cost of gasoline and diesel could provide a side effect of more interest in fuel efficient models, or directly plug-ins.

source: Green Car Congress and Reuters

Categories: General

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

101 Comments on "California Adds $52 Billion Gas Tax, $100 Annual Fee For EV Owners"

newest oldest most voted

Soooo PHEVs don’t pay an additional fee?

That’s how I understood it. Maybe that will force people with PHEVs to plug in more vs. driving around in Hybrid mode.

I wish Michigan would have went this route.

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

There’s also requirements (old news really) for hybrid and PHEV’s to get smog checks after it is 5 years old. They’re talking about changing that to 3 years old.

I actually assumed I would have to get my PHEV smogged just like an ICE. Kind of annoying but I guess it makes sense as not everyone probably puts as high a % of EV miles on their PHEV.

You’d think with modern cars it could be longer not shorter.

“PHEV’s to get smog checks after it is 5 years old.”

My Volt is more than 5 years old. My most recent California Renewal says “NO SMOG” check…

Maybe Volt is different afterall. It is an EREV!!!

So EVs are delayed until they pay in July 2020? All model years or 2020 and later?

Seeing how my EV electric bill is about $30/mo (or less if I don’t use DCFC), $100/yr will add about 30% to my energy use. If I drove SparkGas, it’d only add about $45/yr, which is less than 10%. This is CA’s way of saying “get your butt out of EV and drive gasser!”

This “tax to fix road” is nonsense. They’ve squandered money for roads (hence, need to raise tax), and they’ll do it again with this tax increase.

“This is CA’s way of saying “get your butt out of EV and drive gasser!””
I don’t think so.
Average miles/year = 12000
Average MPG = 25
Average gas used/year = 480
Tax rate will now be $0.42
That amounts to $201.60, which means the average gas car will be paying twice as much as ZEV cars at $100.

If you’re talking about 25 MPG car, that’s Telsa-like cars. Sure, Tesla drivers may not be impacted as much, but I’m talking about Spark and Golf which get about 30 MPG. Most EV drivers lease their cars, and typical is 10K miles.

Calculating for 30 MPG gasser driven 10K miles per year,

10K miles / 30 MPG = 333 gal
$0.12/gal * 333 gal = $40/yr

Do this for more efficient gasser that gets 42 MPG (ie, mostly highway on Chevy Cruze), and you’re only paying $28.50 extra per year. Increased tax for EV is over 3 times that of gasser.

Rather than use anecdotal “30mpg” and “10,000 miles”, I used the typical fleet averages. You can always game a situation, but it’s better to look at how it will affect everyone.

Also, the total gas tax would be $0.42/gal, not $0.12

You are calculating incorrectly. You can’t take the total gas tax. The point is the increase in tax for all drivers. If we still drive gas @ 30 MPG (which I did a couple years back), then the average increase is ~$40. However, EV drivers are penalized with a $100 increase in tax (from $0). Almost nobody is hit with an increase in tax that high. Even the gas hogs.

It’s an arbitrary tax on EVs that has nothing to do with roads.

Just because ZEVs weren’t contributing to infrastructure costs before, doesn’t mean you can discount the gas tax others were paying before.

For SparkEV to say that this is a message to go out and buy a gas car, makes no sense. You need to calculate what the tax cost would be if you drove a gas car vs. a ZEV. To do that, you need to use $0.42/gallon, not just the recent addition.

Here’s a cliche for you. “The straw that broke the camel’s back”.

If you’re using $0.42/gal, we should pay $0.10/kWh for electricity like the rest of US. Fact is, we pay double that, much of that going to meet CA regulations (back door tax). You should read about what goes on in DWP giving kickbacks (aka, contributions) to politicians in SoCal.

Indirect tax on EV is enormous; ever wonder why EV that’s 4X efficient as gasser counterpart, yet only cost half as much to fuel? As it is, EVs are paying lots of taxes. They can take it out of existing taxes.

If you say “new tax is for the road”, you need to read about where the previous “road tax” money went. One way or the other, lots of this tax will end up in pockets of some crooked politician.

I think you need to look closer. The average price for residential electricity in the US is not $0.10/kWh. The figure I have here says $0.1282/kWh.

In the end, I guess you gotta vote with your feet. If you think the reduced cost of driving your EV (or whatever) in other states is so great, then move to one of those other states.

Oh yeah, and the same data says Californians pay $0.1868/kWh, not $0.20.

I used rough numbers, but the fact remains that CA pays much higher electric bill that the rest of US.

Vote with your feet, like some anti-Dump protesters wanted to move out of US? Not happening. You can flee and risk ending up in some hell hole or stay and fight to keep paradise (except for man-made impediments like taxes and regulations). Man made stuff can be changed, nature is lot harder to change.

Everyone is missing the point. A Gas tax is a roadway usage tax/fee. The perfect system would tax your annual milage in state. That’s basically impossible and so is taxing any type of milage at all. So we are left with the closest proxy to milage, fuel consumption. The only way to do this with EVs or anything similar would be self or OEM reporting…which isn’t going to happen. So we are left with annual registration fees for EVs which assume a certain average milage usage for EVs. If you barely drive yours…you get screwed but that is the growing pain of early adoption technology as it has always been.

Spark EV, as another Spark EV and Tesla owner California rates are much cheaper if you are on the EV rate schedule and charge off peak. I charge my cars at night for only $0.068 per kwh.

Comparing typical fleet vs typical EV driver who lease their cars is gaming the situation. I’m doing close to apples to apples comparison by comparing SparkGas to SparkEV in miles driven by typical EV driver (lease miles).

As for the amount, we’re talking about increase in tax, not the total amount. Gaming is to compare the total (gassers) to increase (EV). If you’re talking about total amount, include taxes you pay in electricity, health care for the poor, etc.

EVs are 1% of the market. Why not look at the 99% of people this will affect? When they see they will have to now pay 42 cents/gallon for road taxes, vs. $100/year for an EV, that may be enough to cause them to reconsider that 25mpg car they were going to buy, and opt for an EV instead.

People will not see that they’re paying $0.42/gal in tax. It’s just rolled into total bill, not itemized. Ask people how much gas tax they’re paying, and vast majority are clueless.

Extra EV tax will be plenty visible every year, most likely itemized and clearly visible that you’re penalized $100 extra for driving EV. This is anti-EV tax, plain and simple, when gassers won’t know there’s added tax while EV drivers get reminded year after year.

I have no problem with gas tax part of it, but I have a huge problem with this anti-EV tax.

If they look at the pump, it will clearly show how much is tax. But regardless, they can just look at the price of a gallon gas. It’s already very high in CA, and adding another 12 cents to it may be enough for some.

Regarding visibility, I bet many won’t realize they have to pay a $100 EV fee until the moment they are presented with that situation.

Really? I only notice pumps saying “Price Per Gallon Including Tax”, “This Sale” (total price), and “Gallons”. Even gas receipts don’t breakdown the price between the various taxes and the actual price of gas paid. If they did, consumers would be furious.

Nice photoshop job, but you made a mistake on state amount. It should read $0.42, not $0.36. Where did you get $0.36 from?

While mandating such info at pump might help, it still only shows $0.42 out of maybe $50 bill. What would help is to have it itemized on the receipt for the entire tax burden.

Also electricity taxes are not used for road repair. I have now idea how you are roping health care into this.

If you think “road tax” is going to be used just for the roads, that’s just delusional. Look what they did with other road tax money, and you’ll get the idea.

Health care, etc. comes from the fact that “road tax” is not really road tax, but can (and will) go to general fund. In that regard, you must include all taxes related to EV vs gasser.

From the article:
“which is intended to generate an additional $52.4 billion from taxes over the next decade for road infrastructure maintenance and development ”

It also looks like the money will be coming FROM the General Fund.

“$706 million in General Fund loan repayments.”

If you think those will hold, you are seriously deluded. For example, CA high speed rail was sold to the votes as San Diego to Frisco for about $30B. After bond measure passed, the changed it to Burbank to SF for $70B. They can’t even meet that, so they’re talking Bakersfield to Fresno, any maybe commuter line for NoCal, and nothing for SoCal.

How do you think roads get fixed?

This ignores the fact EVs currently don’t pay any excise taxes. More like catching up to the average. Really they should just do a yearly charge on all vehicles. And keep the sales and excise gas and diesel tax to offset mitigation costs of ground contamination, health effects and climate change.

It may only “add” $45/yr, but the real question is what is the total tax?
Working backwords, it looks like you calculate about 375 gallons on a gas Spark. Annual Total CA fuel tax (excluding federal) on that in 2019 will be $287. That includes the excise taxes, tank storage fee, and 9% sales tax.

Federal Fuel Taxes would add another $69. At least some of that is used for CA Interstate hwys.

$100 is a not unreasonable, and still much less than an ICE pays. We use the roads. We need to pay for that use.

If you’re talking about total tax, add the taxes and regulatory “fees” utilities have to pay to make electricity prices what they are.

Nat gas is about $2/mmbtu (~250 kWh, or $0.008/kWh), yet electricity is $0.20/kWh, 25 times more expensive. Even if you assume 25% efficient, that’s still 6X more expensive.

Meanwhile, gasoline is only $3/gal ($0.09/kWh) whereas crude is $50/barrel ($0.03/kWh), factor of 3 even if you assume 100% oil-to-gas conversion efficiency.

Either oil companies are geniuses (doubtful), or we are way over-paying for electricity to our quasi-government utilities.

You should be powering your Spark with solar electricity not NatGas.

I’d love to, but unfortunately solar will cost more than from utility, especially since I don’t know when I’ll be moving. It’s too bad I can’t take the solar with me.

On the plus side, this will cause less gas to be burned, with more switches to EV’s and hybrids.

So, you’ll see a health savings of less asthma, and lung cancer.
If the marginal increase in EV’s leads to more Solar Panel sales, you’ll see addition clean air increases, and less cancer as well.

Along with More Local Jobs, and a stronger local economy.
Now if we did this nationally, Dubai, my have a small recession…

And Terrorist funding could dry up.

This increase in the gas tax will likely do nothing to increase adoption of EVs. If you didn’t care about the $ savings before the hike, you won’t care about it after since the tax increase is smaller on gas guzzlers than on EVs.

I did the math long before this came out (and using only the California portion of the gas tax) and the only way this is more expensive for EV drivers is if they drive a very short distance during the year.

If you only drive a few thousand miles, then the $100 is bigger than you would pay in gas tax. Otherwise the ICE people are paying more to use the roads than you are.

I’d like to see your math. See my math above. By driving SparkGas very aggressively, tax increase is less than half that of SparkEV. Conservative driving could result in less than 1/3 that of SparkEV.

I do not believe they’re going to use the extra tax money just on the roads. They haven’t in the past, there’s no reason to trust them now.

Then the money will be “fluid” in where it’ll be spent. We already pay enormous electric bill, much of it in taxes and regulations. In addition, EV do not contribute to killing people via deadly poison gas, especially along the highways where poor people live and depend more on public assistance for health care.

Others already did the math on this page. You are using only the change in tax. If you use the whole amount it is cheaper to drive an EV unless you drive a lot less distance.

This will raise California gas tax to $0.40/gal (plus the sales tax on the gas) and the EV tax is $100/yr.

If you drive 10,000 miles per year at 40mpg you are going to pay California $100/year on your hybrid (presumably hybrid) ICE (plus a bit more for the sales tax).

I can’t believe I’m dumb enough to argue with a person who simply says “they squandered the other tax they should just stop doing that”. I’m on a fool’s errand.

We’re talking about tax increase, and that’s $30 to $40 for gasser vs $100.

Even without looking at all taxes baked into electricity, I’m using lease miles. But if you look at used car data, average EV drivers (mainly Leaf) put on about 6K miles per year. They will pay like they’ve driven 10K miles. In fact, fewer EV miles you drive (eg. walk, bike, etc), the higher proportion you pay.

I can’t believe I’m arguing with someone who is so eager to pay even more to the state to squander the money, despite their past. Fool’s errand, indeed.

People put more miles on their EVs than you think.

I looked at used car data, year + miles. Do the math, and it works out to about 6K to 7K miles for Leaf (about 20K miles in 3 years). See my blog post, scroll down to “Nissan Leaf depreciation” for data.

Your logic reminds me of an old Ole and Lena joke. Ole comes back to MN from a fishing trip to Canada with his buddy Sven. Lena asks him…how many fish did you catch? Ole says ‘two’. ‘Two?!’ Lena cries. ‘At that rate they cost you $2500 each!’ Ole says ‘yeah…good thing we didn’t catch any more.’

Yaaah. Dat sure is a gut ting dey did not catch mor of dem fish dere.

When you guys reach 300% tax on fuel, you can complain !

That’s nothing, Georgia requires $200 to register an all electric vehicle…every year.

What I noted was that, in the article the fee for the EV was inflation adjusted, but there was no such adjustment mentioned for the gas tax.

The lack of inflation adjustment on gas {and diesel} sales is a large part of why the governments kept coming up short on road maintenance funds for a lot of years.

It sort of is. There’s two components. 1. a fixed excise rate per gallon but notice the second component which is a straight up sales tax rate. If gas prices go up so does the tax. i.e. it is inherently inflation adjusted.

In 2008, gasoline in my area was selling for $4.999/gal. This morning gasoline was selling for $2.089/gal.

IMHO, it needs to be a fixed amount, adjusted for inflation, so that it doesn’t track gasoline / diesel fuel selling price. A percentage of sales works good as long as the price of fuel doesn’t stagnate or drop.

12 of those billions will go to actually fix the infrastructure and the other 40 billion will go to hiring more government paper pushers.

Actually, a lot of it will go towards the idiot high speed train to nowhere. This whole tax was designed to generate much needed cash for a really terrible project in dire need of cash. Brown sold this tax to the people as an “infrastructure maintenance” project and the idiots in California bought it easily. However there never was a vote. The reason our bridges and roads and tunnels are crumbling is because the money that was supposed to go towards maintaining those things was siphoned off to pay for all manor of pet spending projects. This tax was an easy sell because… surprise, surprise, our roads are terrible. The problem is, it’s a “transportation fund” not a “fix the infrastructure” fund. Loads of money will go towards the dumb train instead of doing what people think it will do. Patch a few pot holes and Californians will think their money is “at work”. There was a time in California when trying to tax gasoline was political suicide, but we are now a one party state with an electorate that is at least 65% all in favor of a socialist nanny state that will fix all problems without having to… Read more »

This is a punishment for driving an EV, and added gas taxes don’t change that.

What they should do is call the $100 annual vehicle registration fee a “road use fee”, and add to all cars, not just EVs.

It’s called a compromise. The gas taxes would never pass without it. In the end it is still a net positive for EVs not only on the tax side but also California pays boat loads in direct tax subsidies to EVs. Additionally any rise in gas prices helps tip the scale in favor of economics of EVs.

I love California, but love living where I live. However, why not get corporations like Apple to pay their fair share instead of the lower socio-economic classes… Oh wait this is America and never has been fair.

I don’t pay taxes, haven’t for 35+ years, so I’m not worried, but then again I did loose significant hearing and sight when I was forcefully drafted, to stop that international Communism dominos from falling, guess that worked out well for the People’s Republic of Vietnam.

This doesn’t seem bad, especially since the gas taxes are going up now/soon, and the EV yearly fee only starts in 2020.

Really wish the fed gas tax would increase a good 25-50 cents and be tied to inflation.

The gas tax is a regressive tax. It penalized the poorest citizens. Those who have the least income, drive the cars with the worst fuel efficiency and their gas bills make the biggest dents in their income.

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

Too many of them drive large older model SUV’s and when they buy sedans, they buy the older large sedans and put 22″ wheels on them and lift them.

Don’t get me wring, not all do that but many more do than not, especially buying SUV’s.
They don’t need an SUV gas guzzler and they know that. They chose the gas guzzler when a used civic or accord will more than suffice.

There are methods to protect them, like additional tax allowances/credits for very low income individuals.

This is something that needs to be done. In the 1950s, we have pegged gallons to road fund dollars. Times are good when most cars back then get into the teens with MPG. In the 70s with OPEC, CAFE is created to increase the MPG so reduce our dependency. So, we have two conflicting programs and we cannot sustain this model anymore. I have a Prius PIP and a Spark EV, cars like these cannot be imagined in the 50s. California cannot sustain its roads based on fuel alone. This is a step in the right direction.

So it appears that I won’t be charged the $100 for each of my Volts (MY 2012 and MY 2013).

I’ve used a cumulative 230 gallons of gas between my two Volts since time of purchase. If I was to be assessed a retroactive $0.12 per gallon (I know that’s NOT how this works), that would be $27.60 ($0.12 x 230 gallons) over the past 5 years.

I definitely will not be complaining about this tax.

I guess a BMW i3 REX would not be subject to the $100 annual EV fee, but a BMW i3 would be, even though both will likely drive the majority of the miles on EV.

Value of i3REx just went up by $100/yr!

The California Government sold this increase on fixing and improving the roads; That’s now up an additional 12 cents to 40 cents per gallon. In the past they have also sold the idea of gas taxes for roads; but, used the gas tax to support mass transportation projects. Will this money be sneakily used on the bullet train>

I suspect it will as our taxes are never fully devoted to roads.

In 2019 the total gas tax in CA will be 76.7 cents. Ouch!

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

They already tried before the ink was even dry. They pulled it back because the media found out about it…….lol

Damn CA gooberment.

Aha! There’s the answer! Since Dump took office, high speed rail is even less likely to get funding from the fed. That shortfall has to be met somehow, and this “EV tax” is a way to drum up revenue. Their excuse could be “high speed rail could mean fewer cars, so rail project is kind of road repair.” Ugh, all the more reason why this new tax SUX!

I’m ok with paying the $100 for my Bolt.

One of the arguments that the right-wing lunatic fringe breitbarters like to use against EVs (and pretty much everything green) is that they are only toys for the “elites” and that everyone else subsidizes them, blah, blah, blah.

Its sad that some of the posters here are obviously fans of these alternative facts right-wing “news” type talking points.

You need to “Get Real” and try not to be so bigoted.

You need to Get Real. Not everyone can afford $30K EV. I know many retirees who bought SparkEV, and many poor will buy used EV. They will see their registration go up by $100, and painfully reminded every year.

Meanwhile, their gas car friends will never see any tax highlited in the receipt after fill up.

Problem with many (not all) on the left is that they have no empathy. They have no idea how the others live, yet get on the high horse to preach.

Their costs would go up if they have an ICE car too.

Dehumanizing those who disagree with you is not useful. Just because someone disagrees doesn’t mean they are heartless.

The problem is that despite the common plaint of “I’ve paid enough already” the roads can’t be maintained for free. And simply saying it must have been squandered doesn’t cut it. It’s a simply complaint from a person who really would have no way to know what it really does and should cost to maintain roads.

SparkEV does have a point.

Yes, they will pay more at the pump as a result of this, but it’s not transparent at all (since neither pumps not gas receipts display the tax breakdown), so to them it’s business as usual with the prices of gas fluctuating week by week for who knows what reasons.

However, those with EVs also pay a bunch of hidden taxes in their electric bills (unrelated to this increase), but will definitely notice when they go to register their car the nice annual direct EV $100 fee.

“Dehumanizing those who disagree with you is not useful.”

I’m simply responding to GetReal’s comment that those who do not agree with him are alt-right.

Nothing in life is free, but EV drivers in CA are already paying more than their fair share in various taxes. This extra EV tax is irrespective of road-use. If gas car drive fewer miles they won’t pay the full 10K miles of road use fee, while EV owners must pay 10K miles worth of road tax even if they drove 1 mile per year. This isn’t right.

Sparky, you come off as whiny, and your logic is simply wrong. Just because the ICE driver doesn’t choose to notice that s/he is paying $0.42/gallon in taxes at the pump doesn’t mean they aren’t paying the tax. Obviously, they still are. Why don’t we use your same logic and say that the EV driver won’t notice the $100 in their registration, since it will be bundled with their other reg fees? Or, “Gee officer, I didn’t notice the speed limit sign, so there’s no speed limit.” Or, “This cupcake doesn’t really have calories, since I made it from home and there is no nutrition label.” I’ve been driving an EV since 2012 and wondering when an EV road fee would finally happen. $100/year is lower than I thought, and it doesn’t take effect for another 3 years. How is it fair that all of the ICE drivers have been subsidizing road repair for the past 5 years, but I have not? I have received $2500 from California twice (for the two EVs I have purchased), plus a recent $500 check from PG&E. And I have paid zero in gasoline taxes for 5 years. Plus, I’ve paid a lot less… Read more »

You come off as sounding like elitist a-hole who don’t care about other people, and willing to screw over anyone who’s not as rich as you (reminds me of Prez Dump). Yeah, you made out great with $2500 rebate, so that’s your reason to justify EV tax even for those who did not get the rebate?

For example, lots of people bought used EV, and they would not qualify for $2500 rebate from the state while taking the full brunt of $100/yr (about 10K miles worth) in road taxes. This is not only anti-EV, but even worse, anti-EV for the poor.

Are you ok with the hypocrisy of getting a CA funded rebate and then having to pay it back in the form of $100 annual fees? How about they only give you a $1500 credit for your Bolt and then not charge a $100 fee for the life of the car. Wouldn’t that make more sense?

Interesting, your front loaded, and rear loaded CA EV tax comparison. I think the latter is better for many early EV adopters,as less subsidy and less tax, “make more sense”. Less tax down the road, or future operating costs and taxes/fees, are welcome when driving past the pump!

This entire Bill and tax on roads is the biggest pile of S#$T! I honestly don’t even know where to begin. Ok, how about the last time they said they were raising taxes for roads, they used the money elsewhere. Read this bill closely and there’s language that allows for the same. Or how about the fact that CA just seems to thing that they can tax us until eternity for all of their needs. At a certain point you can’t continue to do this. How about you balance your budget and make cuts instead. Lastly, can we talk about the insanity of our state to give everyone who buys an EV a $2500 credit, but then complain that they aren’t getting enough revenue from gas/vehicles for roads and then imposing a $100/year additional fee?! It’s the same budget you idiots.

There is no sanity in Sacramento. The focus is very clear – how can I get more money, to buy more votes, so I can keep my power.

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

I predict that 75% of these funds will be funneled to non transportation kr@p.
In 2 years they will again raise taxes for road maintenance.

How about this: we adopt the Federal model and use income taxes to fund the roadsb thereby indirectly subsidizing oil companies? Because tjat is what is actually happening. My county just passed a .5% sales tax on everything EXCEPT fuel… To pay for road repairs! Now THAT is regressive!

EV rebate is to reward those rich enough to afford new EV. EV tax is to punish the poor who are not able to buy new EV, instead have to buys used ones. In effect, EV tax is to discourage the poor from driving EV.

Message is clear: if you’re not rich enough to afford a new EV, you must pay $100/yr extra per year on top of outrageously high CA electric prices (poor do not benefit as much from EV TOU rate).

You know, if you don’t like California you are free to move (if you even live in California to start with) since the right-wing lunatic fringe troll army (and their Fuherer Herr Bannon, er Trump is known to lie a lot.

You know, same can be said about entire population who didn’t vote for Dump to get the H out of US.

Get Real Get Real. This has nothing to do with Trump. This is about CA politicians (mostly democrats) running this state into the ground. In fact CA has a democrat supermajority so basically the republicans are powerless, which means all of the blame is on the the other party. We are in massive debt, we have pension liabilities that are completely unrealistic, we are building a stupid “normal speed” train we don’t need, and politicians are only concerned with keeping cash flow going to public interest groups that fund super-pacs, that fund their campaigns so that the politicians give them more money. These are mainly unions BTW! They want this money funneled to their programs, to employ their workers, to pay their dues, and the robbery continues. In fact the governor basically bribed dozens of assemblymen and senators to get this bill through, allowing them to throw their pork projects into it. Your logic of “if you don’t like it, you’re free to move” is equally stupid. You shouldn’t be forced to tolerate a government that rips you off.

Looks like you were able to copy and paste all the right-wing talking points.

Anyways, if you don’t like it you can leave and move to a right-wing state and enjoy their climate-denial and crony-capitalism with the added bonus of blaming immigrants for everything since they already ran out the unions.

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

Nah. I’d rather protest and break other peoples shlt, set things on fire and loot.

That is so last “quarter century ago”!

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

“California Senate Democrats proposed spending $15 million on pet projects like restroom repairs at state parks and acquiring land for wildlife. After an outcry by Republicans, those Dems shelved their plans quickly.

Now $15 million out of several billion is not that much but it’s the principle of the thing. Does anyone believe they’re going to stop at $15 million? Those of us reticent about SB1 feared the Legislature would pass the increase and, despite assurances, end up diverting the money to other things. They have a history of it.”

This was also in the news media with concerns about where the money will actually be used for.

The tax doesn’t fall of with age. My older vehicles cost much less than $100/yr to register.

That seems to unfairly punish EV’s.

I agree. Overall, I think this bill has more good than bad, but I have always been opposed to a flat EV fee.

A better approach would be to have a yearly milage based fee (I know its got its issues, but anything is going to have winners and losers), ideally adjusted by vehicle weight.

A cheaper administrative option would be to increase registration fees based on the gross weight of the vehicle (EV and non-EV alike).

I’ve long held that the idea that there is a state rebate for an EV and then annual EV registration fee is schizophrenic at best. Why not reduce the rebate by $500 say, and have that amount go to the transportation fund for each EV sold?

Anyone else think its strange to oppose transportation funds be used to repair state-funded rest areas off freeways? I would love to see them get more funding, not less. I recall some states closing rest stops during the Great Recession do to lack of funds. Every rest stop should have a park and playground so your kids can run around a bit when you make a stop.

Looks like a good reasonable plan to me EVeryone pays a little more. The Gas tax finally gets adjusted for the 1st time in 20 years.
Now if they would just stop subsidies for OIL and tax carbon pollution. Maybe that will come next. In Europe they pay $8-10 a gallon for gas and Diesel. Now that’s about right.

So Cali wants to take back the $2500 credit it give me over the next 25 years…ok then.
Seriously, ev’s should pay for roads too so i don’t see what the big deal is here. Electricity costs too much? Stop wining and put some panels!

When do we get the edit function?

In all likelihood, ~mid July. Although, if I get the deciding vote/it falls to me…the feature won’t be added.

I like the “once you say it, it is written in stone” system, (=

…just for typos and such….

At 12 cents extra per gallon of gasoline, what will that cost people? If you assume that people drive 15,000 miles per year and get 30 mpg, that’s about 500 gallons a year or $60. That increases the annual amount for EV owners by 2/3 compared to non-EV owners.

There are plenty of people who drive a lot less than that, but with an EV, they’d still pay $100 per year. With an ICE, if they drive half as much as what’s in my example, they’d pay $30/year. That makes the cost for an EV owner with equivalent annual miles over 333% of what they are for ICE owners.

How about some perspective on gas taxes, which have not gone up much in 50 years, while number of gallons used per year in California is going down due to higher mpg – which means less revenue (tax is per gallon not per dollar). The cost of maintaining roads has not gone down in that 50 years, probably doubled or tripled.

A new tax system should be impact on roads – an index of weight of vehicle and miles driven, and life cycle impact per mile index on air quality and green house gases.