Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Car fee can be tax deduction

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
jamesinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 07:57 AM
Original message
Car fee can be tax deduction
Edited on Tue Oct-07-03 07:58 AM by jamesinca
Car fee can be tax deduction

Kathleen Pender Tuesday, October 7, 2003


The tripling of the motor vehicle license fee in California -- assuming it's not overturned by the winner of today's election -- will hit some taxpayers harder than others.

That's because the fee is tax deducible if you itemize deductions on your tax return.

The deduction can take a big bite out of the increase for those who itemize. People who take the standard deduction, instead of itemizing, will bear the full brunt of the increase.

Almost 40 percent of returns filed by California taxpayers claim itemized deductions.

The vehicle license fee, nicknamed the "car tax," is 2 percent of the vehicle's value. The value falls as the car gets older.

Starting Oct. 1, the state eliminated the 67.5 percent discount car owners had been getting on the vehicle license fee since 1999. That effectively triples the fee on new and existing cars.


Let us not forget that the person who takes the Gov. title today will be sworn in tommorrow at 12 noon and will then have 3 1/2 days to finish all business, like getting rid of this car fee or keeping it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
radwriter0555 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 08:10 AM
Response to Original message
1. well it's not possible to eliminate the car tax. pete wilson put that in..
and it would something like an act of someone's god to overturn it. It's based on economic factors when it kicks in, it's not about being greedy or unwise or democrat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
sam sarrha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 09:24 AM
Response to Original message
2. so my piece of sh*t car is going to be taxed by bluebook estimates
and not by the fact it isn't worth a full tank of gas?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
fob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 09:30 AM
Response to Original message
3. The "tripling of the car tax" is a bunch of shit
During the Clinton years of Peace and Prosperity, a reduction of the VLF was passed that was contingent on the economic times. As long as there was a decent economy the rebate continued, but if the economy/budget turned sour there was an automatic trigger for the rebate to be rescinded. The problem with that was that in the future the no-good son of a cia operative would grab the reins of government and promptly drive the US into the ditch.

So I ask those that complain about the "car tax", what did they do with the savings from 1998 - 2002? Why should their ignorance of the situation be held against Gray Davis? Please explain how such farsighted legislation, rebate in good times, no rebate in lean times, is such a bad idea. Also since the VLF goes down as the vehicle ages, the effect of the restored VLF is mitigated. In effect, I STILL get a rebate, although on a much smaller degree, because the full VLF is now based on a much lower value. Thank You Democrats!

Disclaimer: 1998 may not be the starting year of rebate, I'm doing this from memory. I know it was in effect in 1999, the first year I ever bought a brand new car.

I saved over $1000 thanks to Gray Davis and Bill Clinton, the lean times are directly attributable to bush* and texas energy companies.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
jamesinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Another thing that people forget is this
They are at the same rate they were when Wilson was in office. He by the way is one of Arnolds handlers. He had no desire during his terms in office to lower these fees.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Jeff in Cincinnati Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Thanks for that information
As a non-Californian, I didn't realize that the Repubs were being to duplicitous on this issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
shanti Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-07-03 11:13 AM
Response to Original message
6. and the poor won't profit from this
because they usually don't itemize deductions, the rich do tho.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Jan 19th 2018, 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC