Taxing (and Antiquing) Them Off the Road

Guest Post by Eric Peters

 

For planned obsolescence to work, you’ve got to keep the conveyor belt rolling. And most of all, prevent anyone from getting off.

It is a problem if people “cling” to their old cars instead of regularly trading them in – ideally, to be crushed – for new ones – hopefully, heavily financed.

But how to get rid of the old cars when people decline to get rid of them voluntarily?

Democratic politicians in Oregon have just the thing.

It is House Bill 2877 and – if it becomes law – it will impose heavy taxes on cars 20 years old or more to the tune of $1,000 payable every five years, in perpetuity – unless the owner obtains Antique Vehicle registration and tags for the vehicle.

-----------------------------------------------------
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal

-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)

The Antique tags, of course, cost extra – and once registered as an Antique, the vehicle may no longer be legally driven regularly but only occasionally, to “parades” and “shows” and so on. It’s one step away from drilling holes in the engine block and turning the car into a static display.

The legislation would make older cars either functionally useless – or usuriously expensive to drive . . . if you insist on clinging.

A grand every five years. So, two every ten. Four every twenty. In exchange for the privilege of being allowed to keep “your” car.

And that’s in addition to all the other assorted fees, such as annual registration dunning-for-nothing (unless you consider a little government-issued sticker getting something in return for your money) and the mandatory “safety” and emissions rigmarole.

Old car collectors might be able to afford it – though that’s a pretty twisted standard, when you think about it: Punishment applied based on the victim’s ability to absorb the blow. Don’t kick the old lady; sucker punch the young guy instead! He can take it.

This is, of course, the operating principle behind what is called “progressive” taxation, of which this is a sub-species.

And it is punishment that we’re dealing with here.

The Bill reeks of how dare you own an old car. Its language is victim-blaming, describing the punitive taxes as “impact fees,” as if the state were merely recouping money for costs imposed.

But what is this “impact,” exactly?

It is not specified in the Bill itself (PDF here, if you’d like to read the thing) but whenever that term is used in the context of cars you should always assume they mean environmental impact.

The magic words.

Older cars are not as “clean” as new ones – which is true, as far as it goes.

But it doesn’t go very far.

New cars are slightly cleaner than circa 1990s-era cars.

Slightly meaning a percentage or two; maybe three – that’s it. Really. People don’t grok this, in part because it is never explained to them.

You have to go way back to the era before three-way catalytic converters and computer-controlled fuel injection (which would be early 1980s and older) to find cars that produce significantly higher Bad for Gaia exhaust byproducts and now you are dealing with cars more than 35 years old – and the number of those still in use as daily drivers is so small – fewer than 3 percent of the cars registered – as to render whatever their exhaust emissions may be irrelevant as a public health issue.

However many pre-early ‘80s cars may be running around in Oregon (or any other state) they are emitting a fraction of the Bad for Gaia materials that the government’s vast fleets of exempt-from-any-emissions-controls-whatsoever MRAPS and Humvees and assorted Peasant Control Units in inventory spew every single day.

This is never explained, either.

Instead, the impression is left that any car not brand-new or nearly new is a kind of mobile Chernobyl and its owner a vile misanthrope who probably also pours used motor oil down the storm drain.    

And of course, such people must be dealt with.

Note that it’s not even material whether the old car is actually running. Many cars more than 20 years old are not. They are in the process of being restored – or just being stored for now. In which case, of course, such a car is as much a “zero emissions” car as a new (and Green Approved) electric car.

Still, its owner must either pay the impact fees – or accept what amounts to vehicular disfranchisement, his car prohibited from ever again being more than an occasional-use-only toy.

Which brings us to the real heart of this particular darkness. It is an elitist measure – ironic, given the peasant-hugging pretensions of the Democrats pushing it.

If he’s not a collector, the owner of a car 20-years-old or older is probably someone just trying to live inexpensively. He probably owns his car. He bought it for cash, perhaps. He’s not in debt. His insurance costs are lower. He pays less in personal property taxes – which are based upon the retail value of the car.

This is good for him but bad for the state, which is not getting its pound of flesh out of him.

And the beast’s belly growls.

The guy who drives a 20-year-old or older car probably also does most if not all of his own repair work, too. Those cars are simpler – and they lack a lot of the creepy Big Brother Tech that new cars have.

This is freeing – which is another reason why the New Car Reluctant are being targeted – and not just in Oregon, either. Whether this bill sinks or swims, it’s not the last – and it’s not an isolated canker sore.

We just can’t tolerate people driving around in cars they can fix themselves, that are paid-for and which aren’t generating enough “revenue” for the government.

They won’t put it in such honest language, of course.

They never do.

 

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
12 Comments
Covenanter
Covenanter
March 29, 2017 1:28 pm

So what happens when 2011 Nissan Leaf’s are now 20 years old? That will happen before you know it.

What about my 2002 Toyota Prius? Will I have to pay the fine, even though it is arguably much ‘cleaner’ than a 2017 Ford F-350?

Obviously, these bills are what happens when money hungry republicans get in bed with environmentalist crazies. EVERYONE gets screwed. Except for big business.

Richo
Richo
  Covenanter
March 29, 2017 1:35 pm

One possible way to get around this is to somehow get registered as a farmer or rancher. Most of us farmers and ranchers have a number of older special-purpose vehicles used for things like hauling fuel to tractors, racks for hauling livestock, parts wagons, mounting snowplow blades, etc. I would think there would be enough hue and cry that there would be exceptions made for farm, ranch, construction, etc vehicles.

Peaknic
Peaknic
  Richo
March 29, 2017 2:01 pm

Yes, but don’t “farm vehicles” have just as many restrictions on them as far as when and where you can drive them? If so, that isn’t a solution.

Richo
Richo
  Peaknic
March 29, 2017 3:17 pm

Not that I am aware of. They are just ordinary old vehicles with ordinary license plates that I have driven everywhere my whole life. I am sure you have seen contractors vehicles and vehicles hauling horse trailers, etc. all over the roads.
My main point is that there is such a huge use for older vehicles that it will be politically impossible for any rural state senator to vote for such a measure. They would never ever be reelected.

JIMSKI
JIMSKI
March 29, 2017 1:56 pm

I remember using a 4 gas analyzer on a 97 buick gen1 v6 fast start motor. The tail pipe readings showed 0 ( ZERO ) Co Carbon Monoxide out the tail pipe. What was passing through the engine and not cleaned up was dropped to ZERO from the converter.

If you tried to run that vehicle in your garage to kill your self you would have to wait until the CO-2 had displaced all the Oxygen in the room. Of course then the engine shuts off…….

With MPFI and Converters in every vehicle since 1996 any additional gains are very small.

Zarathustra
Zarathustra
March 29, 2017 3:47 pm

It’s tempting to move back to Oregon if only to purchase something like a ’68 Chrysler Newport to tool around in, then carve a hand flipping the bird and glue it to the radio antenna just to make a point.

Trapped in Portlandia
Trapped in Portlandia
March 29, 2017 3:51 pm

Eric is making a mountain out of a molehill here. As a resident of the ultra liberal state of Oregon, I did a little research on the old car tax that Eric wrote about. Turns out the bill died in the Legislature almost as fast as it was introduced. Not only did the Rs jump on it, but the Ds leader said: “she had nothing to do with the bill and that it was essentially dead on arrival.”

Crazy-ass legislators (is there any other kind) are always going to introduce stupid ass stuff. Let’s just hope cooler heads continue to prevail.

digitalpennmedia
digitalpennmedia
March 29, 2017 4:39 pm

While this bill may have been DOA as mentioned in the comments I think the article, more to the implied side, is that this isnt a unique proposal. Useless and ignorant bills just like this one are continually attempted to be passed in municipalities and states across the nation. Whether the bills are attempting to show that government is doing something and is needed, or its a certain politician pushing their specific (and often ignorant) positions on the people of a particular jurisdiction these bills happen all the time. Too much government and too much tinkering only results in one thing, a loss of liberties of the people..the biggest issue is, however, that a persons reaction to it is to play along with the system and “get a farm/rancher registration”. For every little bill pushed through, it is this first reaction (to hide behind some other made up statutes) that enables governments to continue to tighten the noose around peoples throats. 20 years ago the bathroom laws would have been laughable and ludicrous…the soda tax wouldve been a trip to the asylum…and yet here we are… this law (while DOA now), what will it be in another 5 years?

mangledman
mangledman
March 30, 2017 12:06 am

Anti free speech, mandatory vac bills, bills against bullying. Etc. I saw a group of new cars with 600 and 1000 horses. It will take a lot less cars on the road, I thought there was a horsepower limit. It’s bicycles and roller blades or skates for peons. First they price us out of the market through maintenance, taxes and fees then price it too high for normal people. Maybe they will bring back clean affordable city transportation like uh streetcars.

mangledman
mangledman
March 30, 2017 12:16 am

I had a 1968 Chrysler imperial crown coupe to drive when I was 16. It was totaled then and had a lot of miles to go. I could fit 4 comfortably in the trunk for the drive in movies. 8 to 12 mpg in town, 18 hwy. Hmmmm. My troubled youth (sigh)

BUCKHED
BUCKHED
March 30, 2017 12:30 pm

My first car was a 67 Mustang with a 351W engine,with a 4 speed. I’ve been looking for a fully restored 65-68 Mustang lately. The ones I like I can’t afford,the ones I can afford I don’t like . I thought it would be great to own a car that will never go out of style and thirty years from now it’ll still be cool .

I told a friend recently that the show “Tiny House Nation ” was being shown to prep the people as to the kind of house many of them will be living in once the collapse happen…sometime between now and whenever .

artbyjoe
artbyjoe
March 31, 2017 5:06 pm

mangledman
awhile back i noticed that you could buy from Ford, a brand new “body only” 65 mustang for 15k. have seen nothing recent. if you really want it, do your own research.