Skip to comments.Car Dealers Fear State Tax Increases Will Put The Brake On Sales
Posted on 02/21/2009 11:13:16 AM PST by Steelfish
Car dealers fear state tax increases will put the brake on sales
Dealers say tax hikes used to help close California's budget gap will raise the cost of buying a car and drive away customers.
The levies, imposed to help close a $42-billion projected state budget deficit, will add almost $400 to the price of the average new car.
By Ken Bensinger February 21, 2009
California's auto dealers are worried that the state's new budget will put an even bigger dent in already miserable sales.
Increases in the sales tax and vehicle license fees were key components of the measure signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Friday.
Both raise the cost of buying a car.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Ve haff vays of making you people ride der bus.
Stop the presses...you mean higher taxes don’t stimulate the economy and fuel growth in sales! What about the economic boom in 1993 after Clinton’s tax increases...did the media tell a fib?
I did it a few years back and have not looked back.
the tax increase just stopped my purchase of a new car will drive my 98 sable into the ground and then wear out my f-150
Even Arnold agrees with this (see link)...oh, wait that was in 2003. What a fraud.
A friend told me that a person who retires on a California state pension has to live in California or lose the pension. Does anyone know if that is true? I don't think that is the case in my state.
Going to be mighty difficult here. A few months ago they took away our twice-daily service (6 AM into town, 6 PM back). My wait for the next bus to come along is probably measured in years.
I generally retire my vehicles at about 250k miles. I have about another 100k to go on my '92 Suzuki Tracker.
Smart damn advice if you aks me.....
Kalifornia is committing suicide with these tax hikes.
Part of the liberal plan to force you to stop driving. We’re living at the hands of petty dictators.
Cut back on entitlements and send the illegals back to Mexico.
I have no complaints on my '96 Sidekick except that the front seals have a propensity to go out, requiring the timing belt to be replaced. Have seen the same thing on other Suzuki/Geo three and four cylinder motors. Other than that, they seem rather bulletproof given normal maintenance.
Not enough stupid rich folks left to tax. With a $42B hole to close (so they say - I believe it’s closer to $50B), you could jack up the top end rate to 100% and not even come close.
The smart ones either moved out of state completely, or are domiciled out-of-state and still living in CA in their “second homes”.
Personally, this scrubs the plans we had to replace our two cars (one nine and the other seven years old) this year. From what I hear from other folks, lots of rumblings about cutting back on taxable purchases and/or moving out of state.
Guess those dealers are either going to have to sell the public on the idea that sales tax on a new car is now deductable as an adjustment to income, or they’re going to have to eat a few hundred more bucks per car.
The strategy seems to be DIG the HOLE even DEEPER.
But you must make a solemn oath to make sure that what happens in Kah-lee-for-neeya stays in Kah-lee-for-neeya!
Thanks for the heads’ up. The repair costs so far have been pretty minor for the mileage — fuel injector failure, wiper motor failure and failed seal on 4WD front hub.
To all of you who think about this:
Do NOT even consider coming to Massachusetts. Our governor makes the Governator look like an beginner. In a state that is partially dependent on a TOURIST trade, he is in the process of HUGELY raising the cost of driving here. Stay away, for your own sake.
California is screwed up.
I don't think you lose it, but California is claiming the right to levy state income tax on it, no matter where you move.
I did it a few years back and have not looked back.
Good for you but times have changed. The new departure tax makes it almost impossible for most of us to leave.
Besides the tax there is a maximum amount of household goods one can remove from the state now and the child abuse laws are so far very fuzzy on the trama children suffer moving out of state. /s
Wealth Tax. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute.
Summary Date: 01/28/09 Circulation Deadline: 06/29/09 Signatures Required: 694,354
Proponent: Paul McCauley
Imposes one-time tax of at least 55% on property in California exceeding $15 million if single, $20 million if married. Imposes one-time tax (between 36.5% - 54.3%) on income exceeding $10 million when resident dies or leaves California. Imposes additional 17.5% tax on total incomes of taxpayers with income exceeding $150,000 if single, $250,000 if married; 35% if incomes exceed $350,000 if single, $500,000 if married. Creates tax credits. Requires State to acquire shares of specified corporations to influence environmental practices. May exempt new revenues from education funding requirements. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: One-time increase in state revenues potentially in the low hundreds of billions of dollars from imposition of a wealth tax, and ongoing increase in state revenues potentially in the billions of dollars from imposition of the tax on certain people dying or leaving the state. This revenue would be allocated to accomplish various goals related to environmental protection. Potential annual net increase in personal income tax revenues in the tens of billions of dollars annually. At least $8 billion annually would be allocated to the state General Fund with additional revenue allocated for environmental protection. Unknown state and local revenue reductionspotentially in the tens of billions of dollars annuallydue to changes in taxpayer behavior. (08-0020.) (Full Text)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.