Hacker News Reader

Comment by teeeg | Hacker News Reader

Can we start charging car owners 2.5% when they leave their personal property on public streets

2.5% of the value of the vehicle? Last time I checked, I paid 9.x% sales tax + >1% per year in registration taxes, and who knows how much in fuel or electricity taxes.

I’m pretty sure anyone buying a scooter would also be paying sales tax, plus taxes on fuel and electricity.

The only difference is a property tax of 2.5% assessed every year.

That being said, I would be surprised if this 2.5% property tax didn’t apply to car rental companies cars as well.

Fuel is taxed explicitly to fund roads.

Property tax likewise to pay for roads and how they're used.

Electricity taxes don't go to fund roads or sidewalks, sales tax is likewise not for that.

I don't get why these aren't free-for-all. You abandon property on the sidewalk, seems like littering to me at best (something worse if you're doing it as part of some coordinated effort or plan). In most jurisdictions, you lose your claim to trash once it's discarded. So....

The scooters were never abandoned. They had GPS and a whole network of people to service them. At best they were "mislaid". See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost,_mislaid,_and_abandoned_p...

Dumping scooters in the street is much more akin to a public nuisance if you want to get litigious.

I'd argue its a public good, its an alternate mode of transport that is very useful and reduces the number of car trips and their associated negative externalities. Certainly scooters take up less space than parked cars which seem to have been grandfathered in and getting rid of parking is fiercely opposed.

Bicycles are safer:

https://newatlas.com/urban-transport/study-e-scooters-injury...

Bicycles and even some buses are more environmentally friendly:

https://news.ncsu.edu/2019/08/impact-of-e-scooters/

Almost half of the trips are replacing healthier and safer walking trips:

https://www.itv.com/news/westcountry/2021-07-31/e-scooters-r...

I haven’t even mentioned the rental prices, which are crazy high compared to a public bus ride.

On top of that, scooters left on sidewalks are ugly and invade public space.

I’m fine with people using scooters but they should have to own and take care of them, and if scooter sharing companies are operating they should be required to ensure they are left in proper places or perhaps in designated docks. They shouldn’t be effectively stealing public land for their for-profit service.

> I’m fine with people using scooters but they should have to own and take care of them, and if scooter sharing companies are operating they should be required to ensure they are left in proper places or perhaps in designated docks. They shouldn’t be effectively stealing public land for their for-profit service.

Exactly this. If they'd paid for land to install racks/docks and taken measures to ensure the scooters ended up there, or partnered with local governments to create same (as in municipal bike rental racks) I'd have no problem with it. It's completely bizarre to me that it's fine to leave your crap all over the public sidewalk as long as you're a company with a scheme to make money off it.

How are people to know this? Stickers on them, sure, but anyone can attach a sticker saying anything on whatever they like, so how legitimate is that? Can I just toss all kinds of shit on the sidewalk if I attach a sticker first saying that it's cool and other people shouldn't mess with it? If they do mess with it, is that theft or vandalism? Doesn't seem like it ought to be. Seems more like I ought to have a fine coming my way, regardless of what happens to the junk I left lying around or what kinds of words I put on it first.

I'd not have known WTF these were when they showed up in my city, if not for reading HN. They look like a company intentionally littering all over public spaces.

Throwing something on the curb is the same as abandoning it, at least at most cities I've been in. Completely fair game.

Just because it has GPS in it doesn't mean it wasn't abandoned

My car is according to the state worth $0, but I still pay a sizable registration fee and gas taxes.

assuming you're in ca, $200/year for a tag and $0.50/gallon is not sizable

Isn't it? An average car gets ~25mpg and travels ~14,000 miles per year. That then adds up to a total of $480. Hard to estimate the average value of a car on the road, the average used car sales price is probably a good proxy (misses some value for first-owner cars, overvalues last-owner cars) which gives $28000 (2021 was likely abnormally high and this'll actually drop some, but still). So then, you're talking 1.7% when parent was asking for 2.5%. I wouldn't call that "not sizable".

If you're driving in CA with an average car and average number of miles, gas taxes will be another $400 per year (and it's $0.68 per gallon not $0.5)

On top of that if you bought an average priced car, the 7.5% sales tax would be another one time $4000 charge

Is $4000 + $600 per year on average not sizable?

$7000 for five years of unlimited access to californian roadways and vehicle infrastructure? Ignoring the damage done to the environment and community health, the state is on the hook for $70b in maintenance in the same amount of time. So no, not really

If you ever priced out how much is costs to store a vehicle on private property, the states taxes and fees are a good deal.

exactly. The taxpayer shouldn't be subsidizing good deals on parking

30 million vehicles registered in a recent year, about half of which are “automobiles” and commercial vehicles which are heavier get taxed a lot more

So yeah i think it’s an adequate tax

Sounds like a deal. I'm pretty sure I'm paying a lot more than that every year.

And if you leave it longer, someone might hijack it and hold it hostage for towing fees. Why shouldn't commercial scooters be subject to the same?

because electric scooters have a better carbon footprint compared to ICE vehicles and most cities have failed to implement reasonable public transportation therefore solutions like the scooters should be encouraged, not discouraged.

These scooters are not part of any solution, but rather the result of a successful brainstorming session to determine what money-losing idea can receive investment money. In theory, they are a practical way to travel 0-3 miles while overpaying, not being able to bring much, and introducing high risk of personal injury. Bicycles fit these use-cases much better.

What’s your thought about the random distribution of scooters in sidewalks that visually impaired or wheelchair-bound people are trying to navigate?

Or the one that knocked me out right onto the street, in front of oncoming traffic and caused six stitches on my face?

Don’t get me started on that! When I grew up bikes had to observe traffic rules and had to stay off the sidewalk. I would prefer that practice be restored, and for scooters to follow those rules too.

In California the registration fees you pay every year already includes personal personal taxes. (That's the reason why you can deduct that portion of registration fees in SALT.)

Y’know, could probably replace metered parking, public (municipal-owned) garage fees and parking permits with this.

I think we might have a deal.

Many/most counties do charge an excise tax on vehicles every year.

That said, TFA is about a property tax which only applies to businesses.

they don't say in article it's property tax for spots taken by scooters, so it's unrelated, could be as well their office buildings or whatever, this is equivalent of you not paying property tax for your house and gov seizing your car

You got yourself a deal. That's way cheaper than it is currently.

Car owners are already way too over-charged with various taxes. At least here, in our country.

Auto infrastructure takes up 52% of cities like Houston.

If autos were taxed their fair share - they should be taxed more than Real Estate - yet property taxes are a much larger portion of municipal revenues...

Gas taxes in most states have a very small percentage (or none) of municipal budgets (52% of the city that is roads and parking lots).

Gas taxes mainly pay for state routes (state level) and highways (federal level). This is a VERY small percentage of the total road network.

Property taxes also go to infrastructure to access the property.

With modern zoning laws, that means car infrastructure.

You'll need to elaborate so I can refute that point by point.

I want that written on a t-shirt.

Car owners are subsidized more by the state than pretty much any other group. Direct road construction and maintenance, public construction of parking spaces, construction and zoning laws requiring car infrastructure and parking, petroleum subsidies, petroleum transport infrastructure, anti-competitive policy blocking other forms of transportation, shields from liability for large-scale death (for both drivers/owners and manufacturers) and local pollution, etc. etc.

The negative externalities from driving far outweigh what automobile drivers directly pay in cash.

Automobiles clearly also provide great benefits. But they are a great example of a system with mostly personal/private gains based on mostly public/socialized costs.

What makes you think that? Are the fees excessive for the amount of infrastructure they require and negative externalities they cause?

The fact that they are basically taxes not tied to income is pretty annoying. If you're barely scraping by, the state should not be taxing you as heavily on a gallon of gasoline as a doctor that barely blinks as they fill up their Sclass.

The way to fix this is to give extra cash directly to everyone without strings and then let people make rational choices about how to spend it, not artificially reduce the price of activities which are already priced far below their costs.

Yes, the fees are way too excessive. Most of them also disappear no one knows where.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com