Comments on: New Yorkers Taxed (Again) for Not Owning Cars

By: david

david — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 16:20:38 +0000

I am being taxed as a freelancer of income over 10k. I work at home! I don't commute! STUPID. Too much. I can see why people leave ny.

By: John Mc

John Mc — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 01:29:44 +0000

Bostonians have been paying a similar tax for a few years now as well....

By: Ian Turner

Ian Turner — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 17:56:49 +0000

Mr. Adams,

I oppose any tax that would impede attempts to decrease automobile traffic.

However, you do favor policies that would encourage more automobile traffic. You are to be applauded for your rhetorical wrangling, if not for solid policy choices.

By: Nathan H.

Nathan H. — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 15:17:05 +0000

It's not enough to oppose taxes, you have to suport fair revenue streams to fill in the gap.

"To be fair, there are taxes on owning motor vehicles as well (keeping in mind that streets and highways "operate at a loss")."

I would just point out that car rental/sharing companies pay these ownership taxes and then some, so their customers are already paying them in proportion to their use. Above that floor, it is no-tax for car owners and special-tax for car sharers.

By: Steven O'Neill

Steven O'Neill — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 13:21:51 +0000

Thank you for your reply, Senator. I'm sure you can understand my frustration, especially within the context of this blog, in the lack of effective leadership in Albany on transportation matters.

By: NYS Sen Eric Adams

NYS Sen Eric Adams — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 04:08:06 +0000

Steven: I'm surprised you would conclude that I did not care about an important issue like this, especially since you acknowledge that you “got an understanding reply” from me. I have asserted many times that I am a public transportation advocate, and I oppose any tax that would impede attempts to decrease automobile traffic, including levies on rental cars.

I appreciate the occasional need for a vehicle, and the Zipcar quick rental system seems to be an efficient arrangement. I use it myself from time to time and I love it. (And by the way, I am not exempt from the tax.)

I opposed this tax increase when it was proposed and favored its defeat when it was brought to the floor, but the reality in the Senate is that 32 votes are required to stop a bill (and that includes items that are tucked away in a budget measure). Unfortunately, I didn't have 31 fellow Senators who shared my view.

Thank you, Steven, for bringing this issue to my attention.

By: Ken

Ken — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 02:52:17 +0000

Since I'm partially self-employed, I just received in the mail notice of the "Metropolitan Commuter Transportation Mobility Tax." This levies a .34% tax on "net earnings from self-employment allocated to the Metropolitan Commuter Transportation District (MCTD) that exceed $10,0000 for the tax year." I assume this is the new tax to help save the MTA that our state lawmakers, in their infinite wisdom, assessed in lieu of charging drivers who use the East River bridges. Once again, they drive and we pay so they can drive more. A heartfelt thank you to all four amigos.

By: Irvin Dawid

Irvin Dawid — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 21:37:31 +0000

What's NY MCT that the tax goes toward? I think fees on rental cars are a potential funding source for other transit modes as well, bear that in mind.

By: Andy

Andy — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 14:03:55 +0000

And that 6% rental ax used to be 5% a few months ago as well. I can see taxing rental cars, but short term rental cars systems (carsharing) are not meant for tourists. Because of application and membership fees, it's meant for people willing to pay a little upfront to have cheaper rates and the convenience to use a car at any time for a few hours. Carshares really need a tax exemption here to make them a cheaper more viable solution!

By: Steven O'Neill

Steven O'Neill — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 12:18:57 +0000

To be fair, there are taxes on owning motor vehicles as well (keeping in mind that streets and highways "operate at a loss"). But this setup violates what seems to be a tradition of taxing things in a way that makes sense. E.g. Some tolls go to improving mass transit because without transit driving would be (even more) untenable. But this new tax, connecting something that has absolutely nothing to do with commuting, has been levied simply to pick up some of the slack from people (I'm guessing many politicians think these people are all tourists) who aren't perceived to have any political significance. (I told Eric Adams exactly this and got an understanding reply, but he either didn't have enough influence himself, or didn't really care.)

By: da

da — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 05:24:39 +0000

I feel exactly the same way, Steve. Tax anything and everything in sight, except DON'T TOUCH MY CAR or my right to drive anywhere, any time, at no cost to me.

By: Clarence

Clarence — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 21:54:01 +0000

State Senators continue their record of exemplary service (this is where you would normally laugh, but it is too sad to do so.) Maybe next they can put a surcharge on bananas or popcorn or walking, dread anything but tolls.

If everyone in the state were to make a pact to vote against their current representation in Albany next cycle, I would certainly join that initiative - even though I have a relatively new one that looks sort of promising. It's time for a clean slate of new ideas.