California gasoline tax pisses me off more because it's higher than anywhere else and the money seemingly goes nowhere.
1. Close to 20 years ago I read about someone who converted a car to an EV with an old electric forklift motor, but then couldn't register the car. It was a model year that still required smog checks, but it couldn't pass a smog check because the original emissions equipment wasn't installed anymore.
2. My brother inherited our dad's 1992 pickup, and tries to keep it in running order mostly out of nostalgia. He would like to replace the engine with a newer model that would burn less fuel, produce more power, and correctly installed, no doubt would have lower emissions. But then it wouldn't pass the smog check, because it wouldn't still have the original emissions equipment.
Having said all that, I agree that it disproportionately impacts the poor, because the poor tend to drive older cars that are more likely to need repairs to pass an inspection, and because the inspection fees make a larger impact on the budget of the poor, and because the employment flexibility to be without their car for half a day for the inspection, or longer if repairs are needed, is not as common among the poor. You could subsidize the inspections for low value cars, which would help with the cost aspect, but I don't know a way to solve the other aspects beyond trying to find the minimum amount of inspection that meets the policy goals.
My car is a bit older but its perfectly reliable. It doesn't require a monthly subscription, it doesn't track my location, it doesn't have a remote kill switch, and the title isn't owned by some bank. It would even blow fine on an emissions test. I still couldn't use it in California though because some of the original emissions equipment has failed and original replacements are impossible to find so alternative replacements have had to be used instead.
The rules mostly penalise the poor (and often unfairly).
You are severely underestimating how hard "done right" is.
I'm from New Zealand and the yearly car checkup is burdensome. About $75 and an hour wasted minimum to get car checked.
However the workshop profits come from fixing faults so their economic incentive is to find faults.
It costs you way more time if something needs fixing (parts delays, getting car and from workshop, etc.)
Our warrant of fitness regulations are ostensibly for safety (yours and others). However the jobsworth wonks have zero incentive to balance the risks versus the costs. The rules get stricter every year for goals that have no measurable outcome.
Many of the safety regulations are sensible, but many are just bullshit.
Alas, it looks like VTNZ was privatised and the exact outcome you would expect happened.
But really I think the government incentives are the root cause.
Fortunately I can still find workshops that care about doing a good job (more than they care about ripping off customers). But I feel bad for anyone who can't pick good services: which takes skill and costs time.
I never used VTNZ because I found them to be overly picky when I tried them. I thought VTNZ followed the rules too strictly and you didn't get any fair relaxation. I didn't know the history you have mentioned.