Should Vehicle Registration be Mandatory?

[J.T]

What's the purpose of a vehicle registration tax? Nothing except a greedy government seeing another way to collect revenue.

The entire system seems to be a means of enforcing the insurance mandate by requiring you basically advertise that you've proven to the State that you have the mandated insurance. Of course, there's the question why they can't simply require the insurance companies to prove a sticker or something every 12 months indicating the VIN of the vehicle for which one has an insurance policy in the state and require drivers to display these, as that would seem to achieve the same thing with a lot less bureaucracy and cost.

On a somewhat related note,

Car registration is calculated according to a number of different factors, including the car’s age, make and model. Registration for newer cars is typically higher than registration for older cars.
http://www.streetdirectory.com/travel_guide/214875/cars/why_car_registration_is_important.html


What is the reasoning behind this, exactly? Does it cost more to type 1996 than to type 1976?

[ConHog]

The entire system seems to be a means of enforcing the insurance mandate by requiring you basically advertise that you've proven to the State that you have the mandated insurance. Of course, there's the question why they can't simply require the insurance companies to prove a sticker or something every 12 months indicating the VIN of the vehicle for which one has an insurance policy in the state and require drivers to display these, as that would seem to achieve the same thing with a lot less bureaucracy and cost.

On a somewhat related note,

Car registration is calculated according to a number of different factors, including the car’s age, make and model. Registration for newer cars is typically higher than registration for older cars.
http://www.streetdirectory.com/travel_guide/214875/cars/why_car_registration_is_important.html

What is the reasoning behind this, exactly? Does it cost more to type 1976 than to type 1996? This seems to be nothing more than a punitive tax on those with older vehicles. Save for restored classics, I'd say most people with the same car for 10+ years are less wealthy than those who get a new one every 3 years. This would appear to make this practice a regressive tax punishing these people for not being able to afford a new vehicle (something they're likely already punished for in many cases through higher fuel and maintenance costs)

It seems like you have it backwards. The quote you posted says that the registration for new vehicles is usually higher than for old.

In Arkansas the cost is tied to vehicle gross weight, so a truck costs more than a car, but a 25 year old car costs the same as a 2 year old car assuming similar weights. Well actually that is not entirely correct because once a vehicle reaches 25 years old it is eligible for a lifetime antique tag that need never be renewed.

In either case, it is nothing but a revenue generation for the state.

[Noir]

You have to here, you also have to say when youre not driving your car and it's so stupid it's silly, I forgot to unregister my last car when it broke down and got a letter the other day saying I owed them £40 (about $60) for not filling in a SWORN form, saying my car was off the road >,>

[J.T]

It seems like you have it backwards. The quote you posted says that the registration for new vehicles is usually higher than for old.
*facepalm*

Not sure how I managed to misread that twice (the first time, plus proofreading the post)... I blame Jessfor distracting me :rolleyes:


In Arkansas the cost is tied to vehicle gross weight
Is this supposed to account for expected wear on the roads or something?

once a vehicle reaches 25 years old it is eligible for a lifetime antique tag that need never be renewed.
Well, so much for the mandate-enforcement theory. In that case, i can't think of any other reason for this whole system to exist other than taxing people without saying outright that there's a tax on anyone with a car.


In either case, it is nothing but a revenue generation for the state.
Looks like. They shot down the only excuse I can think of when they passed the never-expiring tag thing.

So... can anyone explain why this system/bureaucracy should continue to exist or can we move forward on abolishing it, since it's apparently not really needed?

[J.T]

You have to here, you also have to say when youre not driving your car and it's so stupid it's silly, I forgot to unregister my last car when it broke down and got a letter the other day saying I owed them £40 (about $60) for not filling in a SWORN form, saying my car was off the road >,>

wtf?! How the hell do they justify that?

[ConHog]

You have to here, you also have to say when youre not driving your car and it's so stupid it's silly, I forgot to unregister my last car when it broke down and got a letter the other day saying I owed them £40 (about $60) for not filling in a SWORN form, saying my car was off the road >,>

In Arkansas it is on the books that if you register your vehicle late the fine is the same amount as the registration fee. For an average car that is $22.50 so they will double it, BUT if you tell them your vehicle was broke down and you haven't been driving it, they will waive the penalty. I have never heard of ANYONE paying the penalty.

[Trigg]

You have to here, you also have to say when youre not driving your car and it's so stupid it's silly, I forgot to unregister my last car when it broke down and got a letter the other day saying I owed them £40 (about $60) for not filling in a SWORN form, saying my car was off the road >,>

just out of curiosity how did they know you weren't driving it. Did you not renew the license plate?

we just picked up a car for my daughter and even though she can't drive it for at least 6 months we still have to register and license it, even though it will sit in our driveway then entire time.

[sundaydriver]

In either case, it is nothing but a revenue generation for the state.

Here in Pennsylvania it's $36 per year for a passenger vehicle and trucks go by gross weight, up to 5000 lbs. is $58 and age of vehicles does not matter except for classic and antique. If your vehicle was driven less than 5000 miles since the last emission testing you are exempt for the yearly test. Two of my four vehicles have never been emission tested due to the 5000 mile per year rule but I still am still charged $20 each for the two vehicles to do the paperwork that they are exempt from testing. :death: I do think the safety aspect of the inspection is a good idea though.

[J.T]

In Arkansas it is on the books that if you register your vehicle late the fine is the same amount as the registration fee. For an average car that is $22.50 so they will double it, BUT if you tell them your vehicle was broke down and you haven't been driving it, they will waive the penalty. I have never heard of ANYONE paying the penalty.

Doesn't such an obvious loophole defeat the purpose of the law?

lol... it's a stupid tax!

[darin]

....in WA state, Car-drivers also foot the bill for NON-car-drivers in the way of registration fees that fund mass-transit; which is a misnomer because there's nothing 'mass' about the transit they offer in Western WA. It's a racket pure and simple.

[Noir]

just out of curiosity how did they know you weren't driving it. Did you not renew the license plate?

we just picked up a car for my daughter and even though she can't drive it for at least 6 months we still have to register and license it, even though it will sit in our driveway then entire time.

I didn't renew the Tax Disk, so I have the option of paying the outstanding tax (about £120) or declaring it off the road (£40).

[J.T]

....in WA state, Car-drivers also foot the bill for NON-car-drivers in the way of registration fees that fund mass-transit; which is a misnomer because there's nothing 'mass' about the transit they offer in Western WA. It's a racket pure and simple.

How do you figure? I mean, ideally, funds from registration would go towards roads and buses would be funded separately (in an ideal world, they wouldn't need subsidies and would be profitable enough for the private sector to take care of it, but in reality everyone's taxes help fund them and the bus system is needed in many cities and the private sector can't provide this service sue to lack of profitability).

In practice, it all ends up serving as one giant slush fund, so I'm not seeing how you can say who's paying for what.


I didn't renew the Tax Disk, so I have the option of paying the outstanding tax (about £120) or declaring it off the road (£40).

Wtf is a 'tax disk'? You're weird, U.K

[Gunny]

How do you figure? I mean, ideally, funds from registration would go towards roads and buses would be funded separately (in an ideal world, they wouldn't need subsidies and would be profitable enough for the private sector to take care of it, but in reality everyone's taxes help fund them and the bus system is needed in many cities and the private sector can't provide this service sue to lack of profitability).

In practice, it all ends up serving as one giant slush fund, so I'm not seeing how you can say who's paying for what.



Wtf is a 'tax disk'? You're weird, U.K

You got that stupid and non-applicable word "ideally" in there. Ideally, this country wouldn't be fucked. But there you have it ....

[Noir]

Wtf is a 'tax disk'? You're weird, U.K

Every car (bike, truck etc aswell) must have three things to drive legally here. Tax disk, MoT certificate and insurance.

Insurance is self explanatory.

The MoT is a test that must be done once a year by a certified mechanic. To test the roadworthynes of the car, if it does not have an MoT it can't be driven (except to and from a mechanics)

Tax disk, the tax is calculated depending on the age of the car, how 'green' it is etc. You can buy tax for 6 or 12 months. My car was a small 1 litre, 1997. So a years tax cost about £120.

If you are missing one of the three it invalidates the other two, also tax and MoT disks must be displayed on the car from window, they are colour coded and have their expairy date on them so it's easy to tell at a glance if a car does not have up to date disks.

Here's an example disk http://www.abd.org.uk/images/tax_disk.jpg

[fj1200]

The MoT is a test that must be done once a year by a certified mechanic. To test the roadworthynes of the car, if it does not have an MoT it can't be driven (except to and from a mechanics)

Ah, the mechanics union/lobbying firm must be quite strong in the UK. :rolleyes:

[J.T]

You got that stupid and non-applicable word "ideally" in there. Ideally, this country wouldn't be fucked. But there you have it ....

You're an idiot. As usual, you add nothing to the discussion and totally fail to address the post you're responding to.

Here, I'll repeat it for you

In practice, it all ends up serving as one giant slush fund, so I'm not seeing how you can say who's paying for what.


Ah, the mechanics union/lobbying firm must be quite strong in the UK. :rolleyes:

Well, that was a stupid post. Did you think you were being witty?

If you can't take it to the mechanic's, how are you to get it fixed. The same thing applies here if you fail emissions/smog- you're not allowed to drive the vehicle save to get it home after and to take it to a shop to get it fixed.

[ConHog]

Here in Pennsylvania it's $36 per year for a passenger vehicle and trucks go by gross weight, up to 5000 lbs. is $58 and age of vehicles does not matter except for classic and antique. If your vehicle was driven less than 5000 miles since the last emission testing you are exempt for the yearly test. Two of my four vehicles have never been emission tested due to the 5000 mile per year rule but I still am still charged $20 each for the two vehicles to do the paperwork that they are exempt from testing. :death: I do think the safety aspect of the inspection is a good idea though.


Not only do we not have emissions tests in Arkansas , we don't even have safety inspections. Oh, we used to. And in fact my dad used to do them at his shop. It was $3.50 and he checked the lights and well hat was about it. They stopped doing them in like 1997, and frankly I haven't noticed any difference in the quality of vehicles on the road.

[fj1200]

Well, that was a stupid post. Did you think you were being witty?

If you can't take it to the mechanic's, how are you to get it fixed. The same thing applies here if you fail emissions/smog- you're not allowed to drive the vehicle save to get it home after and to take it to a shop to get it fixed.

Clearly you didn't understand it then. I guess I should have bolded the exact phrase in question and not just pick a sentence or two. Apparently drivers in the UK are so blindingly incompetent that they are unable to judge "roadworthyness" for themselves and must annually have an experience professional, with an apparently very active union/lobby group, take it for a spin. Do you really think that Noir is so blinkered that he is unable to judge the status of his autocar for himself?

In the same thread where you are all up in arms about the state requiring registration for vehicles you stand in support of a law that's sole purpose is to make work for mechanics. Why can't you be honest with yourself for one whole thread for once?

I am now quite proud of your neg rep on that post because you are so stupid as to be unable to understand what's going on. Emissions testing? What a stupid response.

[Noir]

Wow people are quick to jump to insults. It's a thread about blooming vehicle registration. people calling eachother idiots and such, good grief xD

[fj1200]

Wow people are quick to jump to insults. It's a thread about blooming vehicle registration. people calling eachother idiots and such, good grief xD

Noir? Meet j.t.

[ConHog]

Noir? Meet j.t.



FUCK YOU RACIST













:laugh::2up::dance::laugh2:

[J.T]

Do you really think that Noir is so blinkered that he is unable to judge the status of his autocar for himself?

He has an emissions inspection station in his garage and is certified to do the job?

you stand in support of a law that's sole purpose is to make work for mechanics.
wtf are you babbling about?

The MOT, according to wiki, includes emissions testing, among other things. You could have argued against whatever parts of the inspection you don't think should be required. Unfortunately,you opted instead for being an idiot.

[logroller]

wtf?! How the hell do they justify that?

"facepalm, wtf"...did the anger management meeting get cancelled tonight? (That's waaay more witty than FJ's :laugh:)

It goes w/o saying their are some practices of the state which go beyond the call of duty. The issues as to how, and rather the purpose of, car registration is necessarily may seem confusing in a society so clearly dependent upon the automobile, where actions seem inappropriate. However, the use of automobiles certainly has effects which transcend the individual as an owner/operator; which purposes a justifiable state concern pursuant to regulation.

[J.T]

"facepalm, wtf"...did the anger management meeting get cancelled tonight? (That's waaay more witty than FJ's :laugh:)

Are you high?


It goes w/o saying their are some practices of the state which go beyond the call of duty. The issues as to how, and rather the purpose of, car registration is necessarily may seem confusing in a society so clearly dependent upon the automobile, where actions seem inappropriate. However, the use of automobiles certainly has effects which transcend the individual as an owner/operator; which purposes a justifiable state concern pursuant to regulation.I'll take that as a 'Yes, I'm totally baked!'.

Nobody in this thread is saying the government shouldn't have some say in what you do with your car (you know, like driving on the wrong side of the street). You were probably trying to sound heady and intelligent. In reality, you just sound like a stoner.

[logroller]

Are you high?
I'll take that as a 'Yes, I'm totally baked!'.

Nobody in this thread is saying the government shouldn't have some say in what you do with your car (you know, like driving on the wrong side of the street). You were probably trying to sound heady and intelligent. In reality, you just sound like a stoner.

Hell NO......why you got some????????

What else you got- Maybe a response and not personal insults? Barring that, I stand affirmed.

[ConHog]

Hell NO......why you got some????????

What else you got- Maybe a response and not personal insults? Barring that, I stand affirmed.

Yeah, I wouldn't hold my breath there sport. :laugh2:

[fj1200]

... according to wiki...

So which is it now? Wikipedia is now a valid source of information for MoT but not freemason? Why can't you ever be honest with yourself.

BTW, I judged my car roadworthy yesterday, I do it almost every day.

[J.T]

BTW, I judged my car roadworthy yesterday, I do it almost every day.

That's nice. Did you also test the emissions? Are you a certified mechanic? Do you have the emissions testing equipment in your garage?

You could have tried to save face by arguing the merits of a given aspect of the MOT and arguing whether changes should be made to it. instead you insist on sticking by your earlier moronic comments.

As for masonry, I already linked to sources if you actually want to learn about it.

[fj1200]

That's nice. Did you also test the emissions? Are you a certified mechanic? Do you have the emissions testing equipment in your garage?

You could have tried to save face by arguing the merits of a given aspect of the MOT and arguing whether changes should be made to it. instead you insist on sticking by your earlier moronic comments.

Considering that emissions has zero to do with roadworthiness (shown by the test not being added until later) your "point" is moot.

The list of items tested has been continually expanded over the years. Recently a sophisticated exhaust gases (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exhaust_gas) emissions test (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emission_standard) has been introduced for vehicles with internal combustion engines (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_combustion_engine); the required standard varies depending on the age and type of the engine. Some motorcycles and older vehicles are only required to pass a visual emissions check.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOT_test

You could act like a free thinking individual and state that the test may have had a purpose when originally instituted (especially considering the safety/quality issues of the British automotive industry, amirite Kerb?) but has been slowly expanded into a make work program even as automobile safety has made advances. That's what you don't understand about government programs always forward in regulation; never back.


As for masonry, I already linked to sources if you actually want to learn about it.

I linked to what proved you wrong; no need to go further.

[Gunny]

You're an idiot. As usual, you add nothing to the discussion and totally fail to address the post you're responding to.

Here, I'll repeat it for you

In practice, it all ends up serving as one giant slush fund, so I'm not seeing how you can say who's paying for what.




Well, that was a stupid post. Did you think you were being witty?

If you can't take it to the mechanic's, how are you to get it fixed. The same thing applies here if you fail emissions/smog- you're not allowed to drive the vehicle save to get it home after and to take it to a shop to get it fixed.

Well excuse the f-k out of me for not bringing an addition to the discussion on something intellectually stimulating like vehicle registration. Besides, responding to one of your posts doesn't require much thought. I WILL give you this: for once the thread is just a straight-forward question. Not sure how you slipped up and did that.

The fact is, you aren't going to get the same answer twice except by coincidence since all states use different excuses for forcing one to register a vehicle. The UK isn't the only one that forces you to declare a vehicle "not in use". Texas does too. Probably other states as well. They want their money, one way or the other. Some states have mandatory safety inspections and others don't. Another fee with the threat of a fine if not kept current attached to it.

Yes, it's just another way for the state to bilk us out of money. Big deal.

[Gunny]

Clearly you didn't understand it then. I guess I should have bolded the exact phrase in question and not just pick a sentence or two. Apparently drivers in the UK are so blindingly incompetent that they are unable to judge "roadworthyness" for themselves and must annually have an experience professional, with an apparently very active union/lobby group, take it for a spin. Do you really think that Noir is so blinkered that he is unable to judge the status of his autocar for himself?

In the same thread where you are all up in arms about the state requiring registration for vehicles you stand in support of a law that's sole purpose is to make work for mechanics. Why can't you be honest with yourself for one whole thread for once?

I am now quite proud of your neg rep on that post because you are so stupid as to be unable to understand what's going on. Emissions testing? What a stupid response.

The UK laws sound similar if not identical to TX vehicle registration laws. We have an annual safety inspection where the qualified, non-English-speaking mechanic takes your ride for a spin.

Virginia is worse. They pull one of your wheels and measure your brake pads, and scour your emission system for any sign of tampering.

CA even worse. If that sticker under the hood doesn't say "meets emission standards for CA, VA and some other states", you pay $1000. to register your vehicle there. FL used to do the same (charge a $1000 "impact" fee for moving to FL) but the FL Supreme Court overturned the law.

[ConHog]

That's nice. Did you also test the emissions? Are you a certified mechanic? Do you have the emissions testing equipment in your garage?

You could have tried to save face by arguing the merits of a given aspect of the MOT and arguing whether changes should be made to it. instead you insist on sticking by your earlier moronic comments.

As for masonry, I already linked to sources if you actually want to learn about it.

Actually, I DO have the emissions testing equipment. Anyone can purchase a scanner for around $1700 that will do exactly that. So just to assume a guy doesn't have the equipment certainly is a presumptuous assumption.

[fj1200]

The UK laws sound similar...

Thankfully I have not had to deal with that in MI and GA. phew.