 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / March 2007Guy runs car on vegetable oil - State demands he pay motor fuel tax
http://www.herald- review.com/articles/2007/03/01/news/local_news/1021491.txt : Thursday, March 1, 2007 8:24 AM CST State makes big fuss over local couple's vegetable oil car fuel By HUEY FREEMAN - H&R Staff Writer (snip) The agents informed the Wetzels that they were interested in their car, a 1986 Volkswagen Golf, that David Wetzel converted to run primarily from vegetable oil but also partly on diesel. Wetzel uses recycled vegetable oil, which he picks up weekly from an organization that uses it for frying food at its dining facility. "They told me I am required to have a license and am obligated to pay a motor fuel tax," David Wetzel recalled. "Mr. May also told me the tax would be retroactive." Since the initial visit by the agents on Jan. 4, the Wetzels have been involved in a struggle with the Illinois Department of Revenue. The couple, who live on a fixed budget, have been asked to post a $2,500 bond and threatened with felony charges. (snip) Tax on what? The Diesel fuel? Of course. The vegetable oil? Do people with electric cars have to pay a fuel tax? If they do, it is in their electric bill. Aaron Hirshberg > Tax on what? The Diesel fuel? Of course. The vegetable oil? Do > people with electric cars have to pay a fuel tax? If they do, it is > in their electric bill. > > Aaron Hirshberg Fuel tax revenue is to pay for your use of the public roads: If you use the roads, you pay tax on your fuel. That's why farm equipment and some construction vehicles are usually eligible for credits. I didn't see the original post, but different states have different exemptions and credits. >> Tax on what? The Diesel fuel? Of course. The vegetable oil? Do >> people with electric cars have to pay a fuel tax? If they do, it is [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Fuel tax revenue is to pay for your use of the public roads: If you use > the roads, you pay tax on your fuel. Read the article, it's classic IL government in action. IL wants 51 years of tax in advance and compliance with complicated licensing requirements. That is what is called market protection through legislation. It's a clear waste of taxpayer funds to even go after the couple not paying $4 a month in fuel tax. But the way this works is to make an example of someone to keep others from doing it. > In article <UramirezxxX-3757E6.15251307032...@comcast.dca.giganews.com>, Umberto Ramirez wrote: > > In article <1173294440.105479.227...@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > month in fuel tax. But the way this works is to make an example of > someone to keep others from doing it. Government SOP here: any American does something that will benefit the citizens, the government will set it up to the government's advantage. This incident reminds me of the stories circulating over the past 30 years or so (probably urban legends) of engineering students designing cars that would get 100 mpg, only to have the designs confiscated under the excuse of "would ruin competition" - for who, Japan? Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), MLOM said in rec.autos.driving: << reply limited to r.a.d >> > Government SOP here: any American does something that will benefit the > citizens, the government will set it up to the government's [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > designs confiscated under the excuse of "would ruin competition" - for > who, Japan? For Halliburton, Occidental, Shell, Exxon/Mobil and the Gores, Cheneys, Bushes and their ilk....  Signature-- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." --Benjamin Franklin >> Read the article, it's classic IL government in action. >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> month in fuel tax. But the way this works is to make an example of >> someone to keep others from doing it. > Government SOP here: any American does something that will benefit the > citizens, the government will set it up to the government's [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > designs confiscated under the excuse of "would ruin competition" - for > who, Japan? Well there are the super milage competitions... Those are cars nobody would want to use even just for fun... unless someone thinks it's fun laying down in something made with bicycle parts and managing switching from full throttle to off (coast) to get that 100+mpg. I believe most or close to all of the oil companies quashed a technology stories are just BS, urban myth. The one I think has some merit is that of the guy who built coral castle in FL. The reason for that is simply because he demonstrated that he indeed had invented some sort of technology by building the place. > Well there are the super milage competitions... Those are cars nobody > would want to use even just for fun... unless someone thinks it's fun > laying down in something made with bicycle parts and managing switching > from full throttle to off (coast) to get that 100+mpg. You can close to 100mpg in some perfectly acceptable European super-minis with diesel engines. Graham On Mar 8, 4:06 am, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > Well there are the super milage competitions... Those are cars nobody > > would want to use even just for fun... unless someone thinks it's fun [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Graham The laydown wide-open-and-coast jobs get 1000 mpg. 100 mpg is easy. I'll build one at the White House myself. 10 hp boxer twin derated to 4 hp to run lean, 2-seater recumbent fore- and-aft, no exotic materials, styrofoam streamlining, articulating trike... 100 mpg EASY. Build your own for circa $3000--- A human-powered streamlined recumbent went over 600 miles in 24 hours on the power of one human, but that was with exotics and an extreme athlete. Rick Hohensee >> Well there are the super milage competitions... Those are cars nobody >> would want to use even just for fun... unless someone thinks it's fun [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >You can close to 100mpg in some perfectly acceptable European super-minis with >diesel engines. "The Smart for Two Diesel was the worst car we tested in many years" -- Consumer Reports SignatureThere's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one. >>> Well there are the super milage competitions... Those are cars nobody >>> would want to use even just for fun... unless someone thinks it's fun [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > "The Smart for Two Diesel was the worst car we tested in many years" > -- Consumer Reports "Not having enough cup holders makes the Smart for Two a dangerous car." --Consumer Reports SignatureThere are only two kinds of Republicans: Millionaires and fools. > >> Well there are the super milage competitions... Those are cars nobody > >> would want to use even just for fun... unless someone thinks it's fun [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > "The Smart for Two Diesel was the worst car we tested in many years" I wasn't referring to the Smart actually. How about a link to that report ? Graham >> >> Well there are the super milage competitions... Those are cars nobody >> >> would want to use even just for fun... unless someone thinks it's fun [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >How about a link to that report ? It's not available online except to subscribers. That particular statement appears in the April 2007 issue. SignatureThere's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one. > >> >You can close to 100mpg in some perfectly acceptable European super-minis with > >> >diesel engines. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > It's not available online except to subscribers. That particular > statement appears in the April 2007 issue. Have you read it in full yourself ? What was the nature of their complaints about it ? Graham > In article <UramirezxxX-3757E6.15251307032...@comcast.dca.giganews.com>, Umberto Ramirez wrote: > > In article <1173294440.105479.227...@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > month in fuel tax. But the way this works is to make an example of > someone to keep others from doing it. Bingo. This is how GM and Ford have become useless monstrosities. Market protection. The vehicle safety regs are the same deal. Allow GM to define safety. Rick Hohensee >> In article <UramirezxxX-3757E6.15251307032...@comcast.dca.giganews.com>, Umberto Ramirez wrote: >> > In article <1173294440.105479.227...@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > >Rick Hohensee BS. The original article here was about a FUEL TAX, and the fuel issue isn't about GM and Ford, it's about the oil companies. Ever heard the term "unwritten contract" Rick? That's what the oil companies have with the auto companies. > In article <1173294440.105479.227...@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > eligible for credits. I didn't see the original post, but different > states have different exemptions and credits. Some jurisdictions have dyed fuel for farm use. If they get caught with dyed fuel in their road vehicles, thay are in trouble. (I wonder that would happen if the farmer had a bottle of the same dye handy and dsaid e used it to keep corrks from stealing his fuel. How about the folks who are using their home heating fuel and have been for 40 years? (During the heatig season, obviously.) " Oh, officer, I do a lot of painting and use it fpr cleaning my brushes." <g> > Tax on what? The Diesel fuel? Of course. The vegetable oil? Do > people with electric cars have to pay a fuel tax? If they do, it is > in their electric bill. > > Aaron Hirshberg There's been talk about how electrics are going to be taxed,for road use and highway fund reasons. When some level of electric auto use is reached,they will be taxed somehow. The Feds are not going to allow them to go untaxed and lose all that revenue. SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net > There's been talk about how electrics are going to be taxed,for road > use and highway fund reasons. > When some level of electric auto use is reached,they will be taxed > somehow. The Feds are not going to allow them to go untaxed and lose > all that revenue. Maybe - maybe not. If they want to encourage people to buy electric cars, it might be wise to not tax them. They could make up the lost revenue by hitting suv owners with a huge property tax. Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS, who is the premier connoisseur of gay kid porn, spewed forth this crap in rec.autos.driving: > Maybe - maybe not. If they want to encourage people to buy electric cars, > it might be wise to not tax them. They could make up the lost revenue by > hitting suv owners with a huge property tax. Better yet would be a huge tax on gasoline in general and on motoroil sold in stores so that people like you with your oil burning gas guzzling POS beaters will take it right in the a.s. SignatureSpeeders & Drunk Drivers Are MURDERERS demonstrates its Bartlo quality forecasting abilities: "At least they did where i live. It'll be $3 by turkey day and $4 by Xmas as exxon tries to make up for the money they lost lowering prices to help their bud Bush." Ref: http://tinyurl.com/y35dzw Msg ID:g1b6m2toqvke4g7jampip7d32kalsvvn74@4ax.com > Tax on what? The Diesel fuel? Of course. The vegetable oil? Do > people with electric cars have to pay a fuel tax? If they do, it is > in their electric bill. > > Aaron Hirshberg When it becomes worth the gov'ts effort to collect, then the answer is yes. Remember the EV-1 with that fancy inductively coupled charger plug? My guess as to why they built such a strange plug (instead of using a standard 3-prong compatible with any 120V outlet) is that this would have restricted charging the vehicle to equipment with the appropriate metering (and tax collecting) capabilities. I've always wondered about the IQ of all of the people who convert to home brew bio-diesel, plug in hybrids, etc. and then brag about it to the media. Can't they imagine some revenue agent watching the program and preparing the subpoena? SignaturePaul Hovnanian mailto:Paul@Hovnanian.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ Incorrigible punster -- Do not incorrige. > > Tax on what? The Diesel fuel? Of course. The vegetable oil? Do > > people with electric cars have to pay a fuel tax? If they do, it is [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > the media. Can't they imagine some revenue agent watching the program > and preparing the subpoena? http://www.itsnoteasybeinggreen.org/ He paid the duty straight off. Graham "Paul Hovnanian P.E." <paul@hovnanian.com> said in rec.autos.driving: >I've always wondered about the IQ of all of the people who convert to >home brew bio-diesel, plug in hybrids, etc. and then brag about it to >the media. Can't they imagine some revenue agent watching the program >and preparing the subpoena? The reason is that many of the costs of driving are hidden, either in taxes or in the costs of goods and services. Driving costs are so well hidden that PEOPLE THINK DRIVING IS FREE - they don't realize that they are actually paying for the roads they drive on and the parking spaces they park in. They are genuinely surprised when they inadvertently circumvent the taxation schemes and get called on the carpet for it. SignatureI'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it! > "Paul Hovnanian P.E." <paul@hovnanian.com> said in rec.autos.driving: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > inadvertently circumvent the taxation schemes and get called on the > carpet for it. The problem is what the gov't considers to be the threshold for 'inadvertently circumventing' isn't clearly defined. At what point am I not using enough fuel to pay my way and I must be assessed additional fees? Our state (Washington) briefly considered (and dropped) a surtax for economical cars. They were concerned about the number of people that were escaping revenues by purchasing more efficient vehicles. If you think this is bad now, watch what will happen when more non driving related programs try to get their hands on fuel excise taxes. I can just see the state revenuers come after someone who walks to work to collect imputed taxes that they 'avoided'. Heck, I think all the unemployed hobos sleeping on park benches should be cited for avoiding income tax. SignaturePaul Hovnanian mailto:Paul@Hovnanian.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ I love guns. Its bullets that I can't stand. "Paul Hovnanian P.E." <paul@hovnanian.com> said in rec.autos.driving: >The problem is what the gov't considers to be the threshold for >'inadvertently circumventing' isn't clearly defined. At what point am I >not using enough fuel to pay my way and I must be assessed additional >fees? Probably the moment you use any fuel on which you didn't pay fuel taxes. >Our state (Washington) briefly considered (and dropped) a surtax for >economical cars. They were concerned about the number of people that >were escaping revenues by purchasing more efficient vehicles. If you >think this is bad now, watch what will happen when more non driving >related programs try to get their hands on fuel excise taxes. Like I keep saying, the only fair way to make sure every vehicle pays its fair share of costs is to make every road a toll road. Then even if you have a solar-powered car you will still pay your fair share of road building and maintenance costs. >I can just see the state revenuers come after someone who walks to work >to collect imputed taxes that they 'avoided'. Pedestrians cause no wear to road surfaces, so their share of the costs are insignificantly small. SignatureI'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it! >Remember the EV-1 with that fancy inductively coupled charger plug? My >guess as to why they built such a strange plug (instead of using a >standard 3-prong compatible with any 120V outlet) is that this would >have restricted charging the vehicle to equipment with the appropriate >metering (and tax collecting) capabilities. Or to anyone who could build a supply for it. >I've always wondered about the IQ of all of the people who convert to >home brew bio-diesel, plug in hybrids, etc. and then brag about it to >the media. Can't they imagine some revenue agent watching the program >and preparing the subpoena? Probably most of them don't even consider that they may be evading taxes. As far as I know, the plug-in hybrid people aren't; electicity isn't covered by motor fuels taxes. SignatureThere's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one. >>Remember the EV-1 with that fancy inductively coupled charger plug? My >>guess as to why they built such a strange plug (instead of using a [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > taxes. As far as I know, the plug-in hybrid people aren't; electicity > isn't covered by motor fuels taxes. You forgot a "yet." However, IMHO we ought to be encouraging the development of technology by holding off on taxing, at least until the newer technologies are developed enough to viably compete with gasoline. nate Signaturereplace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel > Probably most of them don't even consider that they may be evading > taxes. As far as I know, the plug-in hybrid people aren't; electicity > isn't covered by motor fuels taxes. And it's never in the pro-electric calculations either. The pro-electric calculations even delete the taxes that are on electricity but keep gasoline taxes on the gasoline side of the equation. After all, the taxes are line items on the electric bill... "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS" <xeton2001@yahoo.com> said in rec.autos.driving: >The agents informed the Wetzels that they were interested in their car, a >1986 Volkswagen Golf, that David Wetzel converted to run primarily from [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >motor fuel tax," David Wetzel recalled. "Mr. May also told me the tax would >be retroactive." Electric and alternative fuel vehicles are precisely why they should stop using taxes to pay for roads and switch to tolls. Then it wouldn't matter how the car is powered, everyone would still have to pay their fair share AND the costs would be readily apparent, not buried deeply in the cost of some other goods. SignatureI'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it! > "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS" <xeton2001@yahoo.com> said in > rec.autos.driving: [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > pay their fair share AND the costs would be readily apparent, not > buried deeply in the cost of some other goods. For freight transport I can see it. For private travel it is completely unreasonable for government to have access to such information, tax purposes or not. Since passenger car wear and tear on roads designed to support large trucks is trivial, a less than perfect system that protects our privacy is fine. > "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS" <xeton2...@yahoo.com> said in > rec.autos.driving: [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > pay their fair share AND the costs would be readily apparent, not > buried deeply in the cost of some other goods. Great idea. Replace the practically perfect system of taxing fuel and substitute incomprehensible amounts of unneeded infrastructure, and hardware and software, to be purchased and maintained by consumers and the state. Contract the whole thing out to Halliburton? I don't believe you have given your idea much thought... well, maybe you've given it all you have... ----- - gpsman > Electric and alternative fuel vehicles are precisely why they should > stop using taxes to pay for roads and switch to tolls. That would assume the driver is on large roads. Property taxes usually pay for the local surface streets. Collecting tolls instead would be a real nightmare. Just tax the gas, and raise the taxes as necessary. When the alternatives are large enough to warrant worrying about it, we can conjure up another method of collecting road money. On Mar 7, 2:04 pm, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS" <xeton2...@yahoo.com> wrote: > http://www.herald- > review.com/articles/2007/03/01/news/local_news/1021491.txt [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > (snip) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Good lesson here; keep your sh.t to yourself! > On Mar 7, 2:04 pm, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS" ><xeton2...@yahoo.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Good lesson here; keep your sh.t to yourself! On Speed Channel yesterday,Truck Universe discussed converting used veg oil to biodiesel fuel;it takes some simple chemistry,you have to add lye to deal with the fatty acids in the V-oil,and you have to measure how much fatty acids are in the oil you are converting,it's not the same for all batches of Veg oil.There also is some waste product you have to dispose of. (how or where,I didn't catch..) They were showing off a company's at-home system to make it an easier job. SignatureJim Yanik jyanik at kua.net On Mar 7, 2:04 pm, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS" <xeton2...@yahoo.com> wrote: > http://www.herald- > review.com/articles/2007/03/01/news/local_news/1021491.txt [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Wetzel uses recycled vegetable oil, which he picks up weekly from an > organization that uses it for frying food at its dining facility. No surprise. Perfectly consistent with the reality that all traffic enforcement is for revenue purposes. > On Mar 7, 2:04 pm, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS" > <xeton2...@yahoo.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > No surprise. Perfectly consistent with the reality that all traffic > enforcement is for revenue purposes. Damn! I'd better camouflage that Mr. Fusion unit sticking out of the back of my DeLorean before the revenuers come after me. SignaturePaul Hovnanian mailto:Paul@Hovnanian.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ In theory, practice and theory are the same, but in practice they are different. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.