On Fri, 6 Jan 1995, R John Lye wrote:
> Duncan Bryan sez:
> >is an annual payment to even own the car.
>
> This is not so unusual on this side of the pond. Here they
> call it a "personal property tax" usually. Both Missouri
> (where I've lived recently) and Virginia (where I presently
> reside) have such taxes. In fairness, I should say that auto
> license fees have been much lower than in states that don't
> have such personal property taxes. In other words, as I see it
> you either pay the fee with one check at the DMV, or with two
> checks - one at the DMV and one at the county tax collector's
> office...
>
> John
There may be a signficant difference. When I lived in Missouri, the
personal property tax on a vehicle was based on its estimated value. They
used blue book values, and you could argue with them (often successfully)
if the valuation was not reasonable for your particular car. I can't
remember them ever arguing if I put down an estimated value of $50 or $100
for a 10 year old car, which made the tax negligible. It also was
feasible to avoid the issue by not declaring unregistered cars on the
personal property tax. Then, the only way they enforced the pp tax on
cars was to require a current pp tax receipt for registration, which was
not an issue if you did not register the car. Of course, the computer
revolution and the fact that old cars have been titled for ages in MO may
have made declaration on the pp tax difficult to avoid.
The proposal in England, as I understand it, is a flat tax. One argument
I have seen is that many road users somehow avoid road tax, and to make up
the income it makes sense (to somebody) to tax cars that don't use the
road. Those opposed to the idea argue it will send many desirable old
cars to the crusher. Of course, it might inspire some of those people who
have a dozen cars rotting in a field (which they intend to restore "some
day") to sell them to people who would save them. I do wonder how they
plan to enforce the tax.
Ray Gibbons
|