The US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit yesterday issued a ruling in defense of the lucrative red light camera program in Chicago, Illinois. Mayor Richard Daley (D) has made it clear that expansion of the existing 136 cameras, which so far have generated $110 million, is designed to increase the number of citations issued and close a gap in the 2009 budget. The three-judge federal court panel found this to be a good reason to install cameras. “A system of photographic evidence reduces the costs of law enforcement and increases the proportion of all traffic offenses detected; these benefits can be achieved only if the owner is held responsible,” Chief Judge Frank H. Easterbrook wrote for the unanimous panel. “That the city’s system raises revenue does not condemn it.”
Category: Taxes
The recent historic drop in fuel consumption has translated into a $3b drop in taxes going into the Highway Trust Fund year-on-year. It’s a crisis! It’s a good thing that GW Bush signed into law the “Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act” back in August ’05. The Act empaneled the National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission (NSTIFCT), and directed it to devise a new way to finance the Highway Trust Fund. Reuters has secured a draft copy of the commission’s final report. NSTIFCT’s recommending that Congress should raise U.S. gasoline taxes by 10 cents a gallon later this month, to “fix bridges and ease congested highways.” But that’s not all! “The gas tax is broken, so any increase in gas tax is just a Band-Aid,” commission member Adrian Moore said. “It gets you through a very short term. It doesn’t even remotely solve the problem.” Actually, the only thing broken about the federal gas tax is that it’s fixed at 18 cents per gallon. The tax hasn’t been adjusted for inflation– or any other factors– since it was last increased in 1993. But Mr. Moore doesn’t point out obvious fixes like indexing the federal gas tax to inflation, or otherwise periodically adjusting the tax based on the needs for highway spending. Anyway, Mr. Moore is down with pay-as-you go, we-know-where-you-are road pricing. Privacy concerns? No worry, Big Brother will not be a government agency, but a consortium of private road builders looking for a profit. Sort of like health insurance companies, only more intrusive. So which would you rather have, private toll roads and FasTrack monitoring everywhere, or gas taxes adjusted as needed to keep our highways in an adequate state of repair? Here’s hoping we get to make that choice.
Accidents more than doubled at the Houston, Texas intersections where red light cameras are installed, according to a study released Monday by Rice University and the Texas Transportation Institute (TTI). This result posed a dilemma for TTI and the city of Houston which had requested the study. Houston Mayor Bill White was furious when he saw the report’s draft text in August. He banned the document from publication and ordered a re-writing of the text that would reflect a more positive result. To accomplish this task, White was able to turn to the study’s primary author, Rice University Urban Politics Professor Robert Stein. Stein’s wife, Marty, is employed by the city of Houston as a top aide to the mayor. Stein’s newly revised report now concludes that “red light cameras are mitigating a general, more severe increase in collisions.”
Yup, it’s deja vu all over again, as New York Times star columnist and flat earther Thomas L. Friedman once again echoes the Gray Lady’s conviction that a federal gas tax is a good thing. No surprise there. In case you didn’t realize it, Friedman has no problem telling people what to do with their national economies. In fact, it’s clear he feels what was once called noblesse oblige. “I’ve wracked my brain trying to think of ways to retool America around clean-power technologies without a price signal — i.e., a tax — and there are no effective ones. (Toughening energy-effiency [sic] regulations alone won’t do it.) Without a higher gas tax or carbon tax, Obama will lack the leverage to drive critical pieces of his foreign and domestic agendas.” You want him to tax that gas. You need him to tax that gas. “Today’s financial crisis is Obama’s 9/11. The public is ready to be mobilized. Obama is coming in with enormous popularity. This is his best window of opportunity to impose a gas tax. And he could make it painless: offset the gas tax by lowering payroll taxes, or phase it in over two years at 10 cents a month.” And then Tom trots out the “H” word, and you just know someone somewhere is gonna pay.
While occasional NYT carmudgeon Ezra Dyer’s busy celebrating high horsepower motor cars, his paymaster’s editorial board has announced their desire to have the incoming administration tax the bejesus out of the go-juice fueling Dyer’s cool whips (Bryan?). After bemoaning the lowered price of fuel’s dampening effect on Americans’ desire to buy the fuel-efficient vehicles that Uncle Sam, in his infinite wisdom, has mandated, The Times gets down to business. “There are several ways to tax gas. One would be to devise a variable consumption tax in such a way that a gallon of unleaded gasoline at the pump would never go below a floor of $4 or $5 (in 2008 dollars), fluctuating to accommodate changing oil prices and other costs. Robert Lawrence, an economist at Harvard, proposes a variable tariff on imported oil to achieve the same effect and also to stimulate the development of domestic energy sources.” BUT WHAT ABOUT THE POOR PEOPLE? “In both cases, the fuel taxes could be offset with tax credits to protect vulnerable segments of the population.” Uh, is a major recession really the best time to raise the price of a basic commodity? No but…
It’s ALWAYS Christmas in D.C.! Indiana democrat Senator Evan Bayh would like to say hello to the New Year with $1.63b worth of grants to American automotive battery makers. “For a fraction of what the federal government has spent to bail out Wall Street, we can create the next generation of high-mileage vehicles,” Bayh pronounced, neglecting to mention the $38.4b the feds have allocated to the domestic auto industry as of late– which doesn’t include the tens of billions headed to the newly-created GMAC bank. Local angle? You betcha! “Indiana can lead the way with cutting-edge technology being made right here within our borders,” Senator Bayh’s statement said. “Our state can help America move past Band-Aid solutions and help ensure the long-term viability of the domestic automobile industry.” That’s kind of low-key– given the level of PC bluster surrounding the incoming adminstration’s push for “green jobs.” Take two…
Thanks to soaring gasoline prices and the ongoing recession, motorists traveled 100b fewer miles in fiscal 2008. Transportation officials seized upon these facts to argue that the gas tax is unsustainable and that the country must quickly shift to tolling to save the highway trust fund. “As driving decreases and vehicle fuel efficiency continues to improve, the long term viability of the Highway Trust Fund grows weaker,” Transportation Secretary Mary Peters said in a December 12 statement. “The fact that the trend persists even as gas prices are dropping confirms that America’s travel habits are fundamentally changing. The way we finance America’s transportation network must also change to address this new reality, because banking on the gas tax is no longer a sustainable option.” Turns out it was an argument built on sand…
Yesterday, voters in the UK city of Manchester overwhelmingly rejected a congestion charging plan. Officials had spent millions promoting the scheme. And yet, with over one million votes counted, all ten boroughs said no to the plan– despite the promise of £2.8b ($4.2b) in mass transit spending from the central government upon approval. The final tally stood at 79 percent against and 21 percent in favor. Officials had hoped to have the complex congestion tax infrastructure in place by 2013 so that they could charge commuters an initial rate of £5 (US $7.50) to drive into Manchester city center during work hours. The average motorist would have paid an extra £1250 ($2500) per year, although once in place the rates would likely have increased.
Date: 12/08/2008 Ref. number: Marketing / Programs and Promotions / G_0000017071
Subject: GM Dealership Employee Discount for Family
——————————————————————————–
Beginning Monday December 8, 2008, GM is offering a temporary program allowing GM Dealership Employees the opportunity to offer GMS (Employee Discount) pricing to the same eligible family members that GM Employees do.
This means that GM Dealership employees can offer GMS pricing to their spouse, children, stepchildren, grandchildren, stepgrandchildren, grandparents (including in-law and step), parents, stepparents, siblings (including full, half and step), mother/father in-law, sons/daughter in-laws, brothers/sisters in-law, and same sex domestic partner (SSDP) where applicable (NOTE: Eligible SSDPs are treated the same as spouses, and therefore, their dependent children and stepchildren are also included).
Eligible family members must take delivery by January 5, 2009 and may only purchase GM vehicles that the employing dealership location is franchised to sell or from GM dealerships owned by the sponsoring Dealer Operator at the time of delivery. The program excludes Saab vehicles.
To get an authorization number for your family member, log in to gmded.com and select “Dealership Employee Discount for Family” along the left. Enter your eligible family member’s date of birth and zip code and get you authorization number
Authorization numbers for this program must be submitted for payment to BARS by January 5, 2009.
——————————————————————————–
Contact name: Program Headquarters E-Mail:
Department: Marketing and Advertising – CRM NVPP Marketing Phone: XXX
Intended roles: Internet Sales Person, UItest, Parts Manager, General Sales Manager, Medium Duty Sales Manager, Internet Sales Manager, Wholesale Sales Person, Warranty Administrator, Used Vehicle Sales Manager, Used Vehicle Sales Consultant, Title Clerk, Systems Manager, Service Manager, Service Advisor, Parts Inventory Manager, Parts Counter Person, Parts & Service Director, Office Manager, New Vehicle Sales Manager, New Sales Consultant, Medium Sales Coordinator, Inventory Manager, HR Manager, General Office Support (Cashier), General Manager, Fleet/Commercial Manager, Fleet Sales Consultant, F&I Manager, F&I Director, Dealer, Business/Accounting Manager, Body Shop Technician, Body Shop Manager, Sales Functions, Sales Management
Archives: 01/08/2009
Fortune Magazine’s Allan Sloan writes that “It’s Time to Raise the Gas Tax.” And he’s right. Many people blame Detroit for not putting more money and effort into developing more fuel-efficient cars. Some have suggested that Detroit should promise to develop high-efficiency cars as a condition for getting any bailout money. But it has never made sense to force Detroit, through Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) or other legislation, to develop more fuel-efficient vehicles. Why not? Because it never makes financial sense to put money into developing products that consumers aren’t demanding. Maybe they’ll demand them in the future, if and when fuel prices spike? Businesses prefer products for which there is a more certain demand. There’s only one proven way to get manufacturers to develop fuel-efficient vehicles: raise fuel prices to the point that consumers naturally demand these vehicles, and then keep them there. This is what worked for Europe and Japan. And it’s what would work here, in the U.S.
The Manchester Evening News reports that President-elect Barack Obama’s transition team has contacted Jack Opiola, a transportation principal for the firm Booz, Allen and Hamilton. Opiola the brains behind a program to tax drivers £5 (US $8) when entering the city of Manchester during peak hours. “I was ‘noticed’ by key people in the Obama campaign and I have been providing input to his strategy team in Chicago, including information about Greater Manchester’s bid,” Opiola said. Previously, Senator Obama’s most specific transportation proposal was a proposal to create a $60b toll road bank. In March, Obama endorsed New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s scheme to charge a $9 toll on cars and a $22 toll for trucks that enter downtown Manhattan during working hours. Hoping to fill the gap with specifics, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) last month submitted a detailed $544 billion transportation re-authorization proposal designed to encourage the new administration to shore-up the domestic economy with heavy spending on infrastructure projects.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) on Friday announced the creation of a new office whose primary goal will be to lobby state governments to convert their freeways into toll roads. While some congressional leaders expressed hope that the change represented by FHWA’s new Office of Innovative Program Delivery would be reversed by the next administration, there is reason to believe that the incoming administration will continue supporting public private partnership (PPP) initiatives. For now, the toll road promotion office sits at the top of FHWA’s organizational chart to emphasize its primary place within the federal transportation department.
You might say that this plan– getting Uncle Sam to subsidize new car payments– is a warm-up for the main event: the big ass bailout. And you’d be both wrong and right. Right, because Detroit is using all the political leverage it can muster to extract whatever drops of sustenance it can secure from the federal teat. In that effort, Motown’s running all sorts of ideas up the proverbial flagpole, including perverting manipulating the federal tax code. And lo and behold, Toyota saluted it! “Toyota would be supportive of moves such as tax deductibility of auto loans,” ToMoCo’s U.S. Veep for corporate affairs said on his post- October-bloodbath conference call. Needless to say, GM was non-committally committed to the idea, in a general sort of way. “It’s really critical for the governments and the banks to aggressively help us to revive the credit market and facilitate consumer lending activities,” Mike DiGiovanni, a GM sales analyst, said on his conference call reported by Bloomberg. As for the “wrong” part, this measure, and the “cash for clunkers” initiative making the rounds, wouldn’t provide NEARLY enough relief for Motown’s mauled motoring mavens. But hey, you gotta start somewhere… Oh wait! They already got those $25b worth of D.O.E. low-interest retooling loans. Only not, ’cause they’re hung-up on “technicalities.” Sorry. Carry on.
Virginia House of Delegates rep David Poisson (D-Loudoun) has introduced legislation to create a system to track the driving habits of Virginia motorists, imposing a tax on every mile driven, opening the way for congestion charging. Poisson argues that the legislature should adopt so-called “Road Pricing” during the 2009 session to compensate for dwindling gas tax revenue. “Inflation and escalating construction costs have severely eroded the purchasing power of fuel-tax revenue,” Poisson said in a statement. “At the same time, tax receipts are dropping as soaring gas prices and a weak economy reduce traffic volume. When people do drive, it is in more fuel-efficient cars, which only makes our revenue problems worse. Clearly, we can’t continue this way.” Well of course not. Only the facts tell a slightly different tale…
Things must be really bad in Deutschland. Before, any German government of any persuasion raised taxes when times were good, and raised them more when times were bad. Debates before important elections usually are about how much taxes should be raised. Imagine McCain saying: “My friends, I will tax you more than that guy.” He’d get the vote in Deutschland. Well, the German government is now worried about auto sales. Scared scheissless is probably the better term. So scared they want to abolish the tax on cars. Totally. Well, at least for a while. And in a discreet green wrapper. Says so in today’s report by the German magazine Der Spiegel. Berlin’s cabinet left it to their Minister of the Environment, Sigmar Gabriel, to give the car crazy Germans the good news this morning: No tax on environmentally friendly cars for the next two years. Zilch. Nada. Nichts. “Environmentally friendly” is defined as compliance with the Euro 5 and Euro 6 norm. Which, for all intents and purposes, means no tax for all new cars coming to the market.
Recent Comments