Hybrid Owners of America Pushes for New, Better Tax Incentives
by Jeff McIntire-Strasburg, St. Louis, MO on 10. 6.06
New non-profit Hybrid Owners of America bills itself as "a new and 100-percent independent organization created to organize and advocate for the interests of the more than half a million Americans who already own hybrid gas-electric cars and other highly fuel-efficient vehicles." That many hybrid owners means a lot of organizing and advocating, but HOA is already off to an ambitious start with its campaign for a "hybrid-friendly agenda" in Washington, DC. Among the initiatives the organization wants Congress and the White House to support are broader and more permanent tax incentives for hybrid buyers, additional incentives for converting traditional models to plug-in hybrids, increased federal purchasing of gas-electric vehicles, and support for US automakers' research and development of hybrid technology by helping out with health care costs (the Barack Obama plan). HOA believes such government action could push the number of hybrid owners closer to one million, which they claim would save the US one million gallons of gasoline a day.
You can support this agenda by emailing leaders through the campaign site. You can also join the organization, whether you own a hybrid or not, to also show your belief that hybrids are one personal transportation option that can do a lot of good for the economy, the environment, and public health. ::Hybrid Owners of America via SustainableBusiness.com
In the mid 1980s, Honda sold a Civic CRX that got 67 mpg on the highway and 51 in the city.
Until hybrids can easily beat these numbers on a regular basis (plug-in, anyone?), they shouldn't get any more tax breaks.
In the mid 1980s, Honda sold a Civic CRX that got 67 mpg on the highway and 51 in the city.
The best numbers a CRX ever posted was the HF version in 1988-89, getting 50 city/56 hwy/52 combined.
Until hybrids can easily beat these numbers on a regular basis (plug-in, anyone?), they shouldn't get any more tax breaks.
The Insight gets 60 city/66 hwy, and was rated even higher when it came out in 2000 -- 61 city/70 hwy/65 combined.
As you know, the tax breaks for hybrids are based on emissions, not fuel economy. That's why the Insight gets a $1,450 credit, whereas the Escape gets $2,600 and the Prius over $3,000 (before the phase-out began).
When the Feds cut out the tax breaks (which are factors larger than hybrid tax breaks) for vehicles which don't even have to meet fuel economy standards - since they're so big - then maybe your proposal would hold water.
This is a critical national priority (esp. plug-ins), so thanks for posting it.
Regarding tax breaks, the federal government gives away $35-40 billion a year to energy industries, most of which does nothing to reduce energy use or protect the environment. Until everyone buys the most efficient vehicles, I support incentives for purchasing them.
Regards,
Thomas O. Gray
American Wind Energy Association
www.awea.org
www.ifnotwind.org
Anonymous 1:04pm: The third generation ('84-'87) Honda Civic CRX with the base 1.3L engine in the US got an EPA rating of 51 city and 67 highway. Go look it up.
Go look it up.
I already did - otherwise I wouldn't have made my previous comment.
The only year the CRX got those numbers was in 1984, according to the Civic history page on Edmunds. Subsequent years of that generation saw the mileage drop to 52/57.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Features/articleId=68272
Fueleconomy.gov only offers searchable data back to 1985 - before that one needs to download the datasets as zip files.
Regardless, you've got both the Insight and Prius getting better fuel economy numbers in the city, and the Insight doing better on the highway -- all with modern creature comforts, sound dampening, and safety equipment. In the Prius' case, there's an extra 1,500 pounds on board and about double the horsepower of the 3rd generation CRX's with high fuel mileage.
Regardless, you're cherry picking one single vehicle in one single year and then disregarding all sorts of things (including emissions) to set it as some sort of artificial benchmark for proposing no tax breaks. And you didn't respond to the issue that vehicles that routinely getting 10 mpg get tax breaks factors greater than hybrids -- with no expiry date or phase-out.
Oh, and here's an explanation for why the numbers went down between 1984 and 1985:
"Since the 1970's, EPA has relied on data from two laboratory tests to determine city and highway fuel economy estimates posted on the window stickers of new cars and trucks and published in the Fuel Economy Guide and the Green Vehicle Guide. In 1985, in order to bring these estimates closer to the values vehicles actually achieve under real world driving conditions, the calculation of these estimates was revised to adjust the city and highway fuel economy estimates downward by 10% and 22%, respectively.
If you take a look at the complete data files, you'll see that starting in 1985 they published adjusted and unadjusted figures next to one another. Before that, the numbers were unadjusted.
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/download.shtml
So, if you want to make an apples-to-apples comparison, take a look at the unadjusted numbers for the 2000 Honda Insight:
68 city/89 hwy/76 combined
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/epadata/00data.zip
That's a 33-34% improvement over the '84 CRX with a 1.3L engine.
For the 2006 model year, the Insight (both manual and CVT), the Prius, and the Civic Hybrid all exceed the fuel mileage of the '84 CRX 1.3L.
So wait, tell me again why my tax money should be spent on people buying and using wasteful cars? Instead of creating more and more tax breaks (as a reaction to tax breaks for "the other guy") for little niche markets or products (often in order to get votes from that niche), they should do away with tax breaks on all sides. No tax breaks for hybrid owners and no tax breaks for large oil companies. That would be more fair, and wouldn't put more tax burden on those people who do good but don't have a tax break for their niche (like riding a bike).
So wait, tell me again why my tax money should be spent on people buying and using wasteful cars?
Probably because cars are a fact of life and will be here for a very long time. Government frequently incents things that improve the status quo. Would you rather they do nothing and have more wasteful and polluting cars on the road instead?
You also realize they aren't spending your tax money. They are reducing tax duties for specific individuals. There's a difference.
[T]hey should do away with tax breaks on all sides.
Great idea. But, one major reason tax breaks occasionally are enacted for worthwhile goals is that it is impossible politically to do away with the ones that aren't directed toward worthwhile goals.
Tom