• Hildegarde@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      Tire wear is proportional to vehicle mileage and weight. A tire tax would effectively do the same thing while being easier to implement.

      Incentivizes not replacing tires which is bad for safety and all.

      • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Is it easier to implement? Maybe, but not really.

        An alternative and would just be an annual inspection. Some states already require this, many just emissions. Just have it as a blanket annual safety inspection requirement for all vehicles, including emissions for the necessary vehicles.

        • mx_smith@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          19 hours ago

          I don’t know why you’re being down voted, but yes the mileage every year is recorded and taxed. In my state if you drive less than 10000 miles a year you get a discount on your inspection.

          • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            12 hours ago

            It’s because some people despise the idea of inspections.

            Because ensuring the basic safety of a 2-3 ton hunk of metal flying down the road at speeds up to 80mph is apparently government overreach. Or because it’s an inconvenience to have to take it in once a year. Or whatever other bullshit reason they try to justify in their heads that basic safety inspections are a waste of time and resources. You know, shitty people.

      • OminousOrange
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 days ago

        It is until tire manufacturers get an incentive to sell decreased wear tires, likely at the expense of other features. Along with people putting off tire replacement even longer, this would just be asking for a significant decrease in road safety.

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      In Oklahoma they used to tax vehicles according to sale value. A lightweight, fiberglass Corvette could be an easy $600 a year while my friend’s 2-ton dump truck had antique plates at $20 a year. Guess which one tore up the roads.

      I think they changed that system long ago, and at the time Texas taxed according to vehicle weight.

      • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Antique and Classic plates usually have pretty restrictive use policies associated with them. Assuming you don’t ignore them and risk a ticket every time you drive outside those uses.

        For Oklahoma for instance:

        Affiant further states that the vehicle described above will travel highways of this state primarily incidental to historical or exhibition purposes only.

        From the application form: https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/service-oklahoma/Documents/mv-forms/license-plate/763 Classic Vehicle Plate.pdf

        Given the antique registered vehicle is supposed to only be used on public roads in very limited scenarios, the small cost is appropriate, regardless of the specific vehicle.

        • brygphilomena@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          21 hours ago

          “Primarily” does a lot of heavy lifting there. Basically, it doesn’t outlaw using it in other manners so it wouldn’t be easily enforceable by a traffic cop. It would only really be brought forward as fraud if a prosecutor could prove you used it “primarily” for other reasons.

          And thats beyond saying that driving it, on its own, is not an exhibition purpose.

    • piccolo@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      Tires have limited mileage, so effectively the same result and you dont the gov invading your privacy.

        • piccolo@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Sure… except thats very unlikely to be implmented for the millions of vehicles when modern cars already have all the means to remotely report information. Pilot programs already opted to use dongles for remote reporting.

      • spooky2092@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Tires are also a consumable that, if used to the point of failure, become a hazard to the driver and anything around them. Adding the tax to the tires would encourage those with lesser means to use them to the point of being dangerous.

        • piccolo@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          So add vehicle inspections to the list. And taxes can be prorated if the tire failed before being fully consumed.

          • spooky2092@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            So add vehicle inspections to the list. And taxes can be prorated if the tire failed before being fully consumed.

            L. O. L.

            So rather than just take the mileage of the vehicle at registration/renewal, we’ll add more red tape to the process and make everything cost more so we can use a silly proxy to get the amount of use of the vehicle.

            That’s the American way I’m used to.

            • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              There are several states already that require safety inspections.

              Hell emissions tests are required for ICE vehicles in nearly every state, and guess what they do when those roll through for emissions testing? They record the mileage.

              There’s no additional red tape here, it’s the same red tape that was there before it was an EV that didn’t need emissions testing.

              • brygphilomena@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                21 hours ago

                I wish they took my mileage into account for my emissions testing. If it’s under 500 miles between the two year emissions testing period, I’d appreciate them being more lenient.

            • piccolo@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              You think the government gonna hire thousands of people to read millions of odemeters a year when they can just contract third parties to install a dongle to track it remotely, and we’re just trusting they wont suck down all kinds of other information…

              And we dont have to speculate, its already been implemented in pilot programs in some states. And was planned in Biden’s instrastructure bill.

              https://atr.org/bipartisan-infrastructure-bill-paves-way-miles-traveled-tax/

              Outlines tools used to track driver’s miles driven

              The bill lays out the various “vehicle-miles-traveled-collection tools” that would be used by the federal government to track drivers. These tools include third-party onboard diagnostic devices (GPS tracking devices), smart phone apps, data from automakers and data obtained by car insurance companies.