|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|Jan 30th, 2008 4:02 pm|
You just had to know it was too good to be true!
If their true intent was to give people an incentive to purchase a more fuel efficient "vehicle", then motorcycles and scooters would have been included.
Their true intent was to make it *look like* they were giving people the incentive, knowing full well that:
a) there are very few cars that get that kind of mileage, and therefore
b) they won't lose very much in the way of tax revenue, AND
c) they still look "green" in the press releases for re-election.
Besides, with fewer cars on the road, there would be fewer traffic jams, and less wear and tear on the roads themselves. How could they then possibly justify to the Feds their need for highway funds for traffic pattern studies and road repairs?
See? You not having to pay sales tax on your bike would cost the state BILLIONS! :-)
Tat - K1200LT - 50MPG
Telle - Toyota Prius - 55MPG
(Hey, we live in Taxachusetts - nothing is free!)
|Jan 30th, 2008 5:17 am|
Originally Posted by KMC1
I would NEVER do that Kevin!
|Jan 29th, 2008 6:01 am|
|KMC1||Phreak.... Are you trying to push my buttons????|
|Jan 26th, 2008 7:24 pm|
Originally Posted by BMWphreak
100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3
|Jan 26th, 2008 6:03 pm|
|BMWphreak||I can understand the potential abuse of the intent of the tax break, but you could give, say, one tax exemption per tax return. I feel oppressed!|
|Jan 26th, 2008 2:10 pm|
My thoughts on why they probable excluded motorcycles. The idea is to give people an incentive to buy these fuel-efficient vehicles. People who buy motorcycles are not buying them for their fuel efficiency, and would buy them anyway, so they don't want to give up any money they can keep if it won't help the cause.
That said, if people paid the real cost of driving per mile, rather than it being subsidized by various other taxes, the problem would take care of itself without government trying to "fix" the things they broke. But, that's probably true of all government activities.
|Jan 26th, 2008 2:06 pm|
|Bobnoxous||My thoughts on why they probable excluded motorcycles. The idea is probably to give an incentive for people to buy these fuel-efficient vehicles. They|
|Jan 26th, 2008 6:09 am|
CT gives it to bikers (and not in a good way)
From the Connecticut government site....
Sales and Use Tax Exemptions for Purchases or
Leases of Fuel-Efficient Passenger Motor Vehicles
Purpose: This Informational Publication describes two sales and use tax exemptions for purchases and leases of fuel-efficient passenger motor vehicles. The publication has been revised to clarify that motorcycles do not qualify for either exemption.