ad valorem tax

Finally paid them to just get rid of it.

Dollar versus total cost.

 

That's why they get away with it. It's cheaper for one driver to pay the tax rather than to fight it. That's why it'll take a group effort to end it.

 

Have never understood why there isn't just one fee aside from IFTA to pay for running a truck. Think how many divisions(wasted expenses) would be eliminated if you could just pay X to one entity & then a fuel tax quarterly based on where you run.

The ad valorem tax is a bunch of **** & another excuse for them to audit, fine or otherwise make your life as miserable as theirs.

 

Roadmedic, I like most of your post in other threads because the way your tactful about it, even though I don't always agree with your post. Likewise with this one, I disagree with it just being "the cost of business". I don't know the legal stuff, but paying personal property tax on your equipment in both your home state and in another state seems like double taxation. Also I consider the equipment as a business investment instead of personal property. Afterall I technicaly can't even take a truck to my house and when I had a truck I never used it for personal stuff. Regardless of all the legal language, it's just wrong to keep taxing the death out of truckers. My only thinking as to why Kansas does this is maybe becaues they think that other o/o or maybe even bigger companies will start basing their trucks out of Kansas since they have to pay there anyway. Why pay personal property tax in both your home state and Kansas if you only have to pay in the state of Kansas. That's probably not the reason, but it makes me wonder?

If people like Jerry C can fight this, I'm all for it and will do what I can to support him. Although I'm not sure if he want's my involvment since I seem to take a radical approach to things.

 

I agree if they are lucky.

The reason of the comment on the cost of business is that they charge you for mileage driven in their state. It is just like IFTA but an additional charge. They set the rate and all.

I do not agree with it, but the way things are anymore it is frustrating to say the least.

OOIDA and others have never jumped on the bandwagon for this because it lacks high dollars and image.


Since I rarely entered the state with my authority, I paid the minimum and let it slide.

I have to buy permits in the following states:

New Mexico
Arizona
Nevada
Idaho

I have to buy permits in Sask and BC as well in Canada.

The thing that irritates me in Arizona is that a friend of mine has the same type of vehicle and is licensed in Arizona. Since his licensed there he does not pay their mileage tax they assess me.

 

It's been a few years since I owned a truck. Arizona, Nevada, and Idaho are doing like New Mexico now?

 

I pay because I am under 26,000.

 

If the tax is mileage based, then it's apportioned, and the courts will probably uphold it.

I'm not sure, though, that there's a constitutional justification for a minimum charge. If they did it the other way, i.e., if you didn't drive there enough to generate a certain minimum tax level, then they just waived it, that'd be reasonable.

The Arizona situation definitely sounds discriminatory against interstate commerce. Maybe we should look at all the states that do this and pick the one with the most unconstitutional tax and start there. Arizona may be it.

Lego, I take a somewhat radical approach, too. I have no qualms about taking on the Goliaths.

If somebody will post the statutes, I'll do the initial research into them for free. If it looks like a good challenge, maybe we can put together a fund to fight it.

It shouldn't cost that much for the first round. There won't be any facts in dispute, so it'll be resolved on summary judgment, with no trial, once we get it into federal court. If it has to go to appeal, we're looking at low 5 figures for a budget.

Finding the ideal plaintiff should be pretty easy. There are plenty of them out there.

Ideally, we'd do this under an existing nonprofit like OOIDA, but if they won't support it, maybe somebody else has some other ideas. First, let me look at a few state statutes and see if we have a good case.

Statute numbers would be ideal. Links would be great, too.

Post them on this thread rather than PMing them. I'd love to get other opinions, too.

Best,

 

I'm off tommorow and I'll get up in my attic and see if I can find my old tax forms. If I had a scanner I'd post them on here, otherwise I'd be more then happy to mail a copy of them to you. I'll pm you tomorrow.

 

I don't need the tax forms. I need the statute under which they are collecting it. That's where the challenge will be.