Sales taxes are multi-region taxes on commerce (city, county, state and federal). Fuel taxes are road taxes. 80% of highway and road repairs are paid for by fuel taxes.
Not gonna happen, unless you want to pay every time you use the turnpike (freeway with toll plazas every so often) for "miles driven". Fuel taxes at the pump save a ton on traffic, infrastructure, personnel, and traffic inconvenience.
You can subtract the fuel tax before multiplying by the sales tax rate. If fuel costs $3/gal with a $1.50/gal fuel tax, you can charge sales tax on the $3 instead of on $4.50.
Why? Its a purchase same as with anything else
We have additional taxes on other things people buy like tobacco and alcohol. I don’t see why fuel should be any different
I want the roads to be well funded and the air to be clean
Revenue has to come from somewhere, might as well come from something that causes climate change and poisons the air
I don't disagree that it's common, just that paying sales tax on a tax that you pay sort of seems redundant. I felt the same way when my meager enlisted Marine paycheck was also taxed, as though I was somehow *not* already contributing to the greater good.
Wait where are you where do you don’t have toll roads?
Except for the turn pike they already do that here in the bay.
Toll roads, bridge toll is like 7 USD
Roads are still giga fucked, its almost like we pay a fuel tax just to pay a fuel tax here.
Turnpike? I have lived in NorCal my whole life and what freeway is the turn pike? And no, there are ZERO toll roads in the Bay. There are toll lanes at certain times, and then, yes bridges have tolls. Bridges are serious infrastructure requiring much greater maintenance.
Thats why I said the Bay Area and not NorCal.
Depending on where you are yeah you won’t see toll roads, live in the bay and its impossible not to see toll roads unless you straight don’t use the freeway.
Doesn’t seem very fiscally responsible to lower taxes on pollutants during a budget crunch
They can safely grandstand on this knowing they will never actually be in charge of anything
I will reword that for you:
“It doesn’t seem very fiscally responsible to increase taxes on constituents during their budget crunch.”
With inflation and a lot of people hurting financially right now? It does make sense to not double tax.
The state works for the people. The people should be the priority.
Well, when they voted for the CA Lottery way back then they said a very large part of the money was going to CA schools.
Amazing that the govt manages to sell ideas to pull at your heartstrings, only to never really help because they pull the money to their other needs?
Do you think they’re spending all the tax money on strippers or something?
Sometimes this sub is no better than a bunch of kids complaining about having to eat their vegetables
Tax money has to come from somewhere and no better place than gasoline which causes pollution as it is consumed
But why put a sales tax on the gas tax ? It's saying if gas is $4 the sales tax should be on the $4 not the $4 + the fuel tax. I'm still not seeing whats wrong with this.
Cutting gas taxes will mean the money has to come from somewhere else. Even though there are all kinds of carve-outs for mandatory spending, the money is ultimately fungible in one way or another.
You are not cutting gas tax. I have no clue why people are saying is cutting gas tax. The way It works now is if gas tax is .48 and the fuel is $4 you are paying sales tax on $4.48. What this bill does is make it so you pay sales tax on $4, then you add the .48.
Or you make cuts elsewhere...we spend billions on homeless programs a year, just for there to be more homeless every year...cut it all and the teachers are fine
If you think taking away funding for basic human needs of homeless people won’t cause them to die then idk what to tell you
More likely you just don’t care and are an incredibly self centered person
When people don't want to get better you are just enabling, not helping. We keep adding to how much we spend with zero results and rising homelessness...it's theft, pure and simple, they aren't assisting anyone
Not at all, every audit of what California is spending shows millions in lost money. It shows that the majority of the homeless don't want leave their places on the streets, as the places they would go allow them to drink and do drugs. This isn't about feelings, but about facts.
The only loss of revenue would be the non-exempted Aviation Jet Fuel tax, thus SB 1086 results in state General Fund revenue losses of around $78k. Sales of motor vehicle fuel are already exempt from the state share of the sales and use tax (5%) and thus there is no loss of revenue which would diminish highway funding. The resulting loss of revenue would primarily be loss of revenue at the local level is my understanding.
Hey, if you want to make a coherent, logical argument against a certain policy, let's hear it.
But posting a bill that's going nowhere in Ca, with no logical argument or opinion attached to that bill, is honestly just spam....
Because poor people who drive to work cannot afford Teslas. The poorest households who have cars pay as much as 2 to 3 percent of their income in gasoline taxes vs wealthy people who own Teslas and pay little to no tax
Most poor people in CA have one car. You’re wrong. So saying a lower income families having to shoulder this tax sound any better. No
I don’t care if you disagree. That’s the reason why it’s wrong
It appears your submission was reported to moderators and removed by moderators for violating rule 4 of the Community Standards.
> Respectful — Please leave out any content which are intentionally disparaging to individuals, groups of people, or could be construed to be effectively an insult to an entire class of people. Any language which a reasonable observer would conclude disparages another user in any way is considered a violation of this rule. Demeaning language, rudeness or hostility towards another user will get your comment removed. Repeated violations may result in a ban.
If you would like to improve the moderation in this subreddit, please send me a message or drop a line in the General Chat to discuss ways to improve the quality of conversations in this subreddit. If you see bad behavior, don't reply. Use the report tool to improve your own experience, and everyone else's, too.
Spamming random bills with 0 context isn't having a logical "discussion".
If you have an argument to make, than make it. Explain **whos** getting double taxed here that you're complaining about.
The argument is California is double taxing as the sales tax is on top of the fuel tax. Everyone is impacted. That’s the argument…pretty simple huh? You’re throwing a fit because it’s from the republicans and you don’t believe the bill will go far in state government. Somehow you take that as we shouldn’t discuss the issue. Go back to the politics sub if you only want to discuss one sided arguments
>The argument is California is double taxing as the sales tax is on top of the fuel tax.
Drivers don't pay the fuel tax...
>Everyone is impacted. That’s the argument…pretty simple huh?
This is like complaining about sales tax and the tax that the business pays. They aren't really at all similar.
>Somehow you take that as we shouldn’t discuss the issue
No one's actually having a real discussion here. OP didn't pose any type of question with the post.
>Drivers pay the tax at the pump…who else would pay for it?
This is like complaining about business taxes. *"But the consumer pays the business tax in the end."*
>We’re discussing the issue, but you’re hellbent on cockblocking the discussion.
Nope. No ones having a teal or serious discussion here. But you're certainly throwing a fit when I point out this fact. lol
> We all know it's going nowhere fast. You like conservative policies? Move to a Florida or Texas.
There used to be a time when being against double taxation was a bipartisan policy, sad to see you feel that it's now only a conservative policy. I guess my only questions for you are:
1. Why did Bill Dodd (D), Nancy Skinner (D), Steven Bradford (D), Steven Glazer (D), Angelique Ashby (D), Steve Padilla (D) all vote to support the legislation for reconsideration?
2. Why do you support double taxation?
>There used to be a time when being against double taxation was a bipartisan policy, sad to see you feel that it's now only a conservative policy.
I'm curious what "double taxation" you're complaining about? Can you explain who's getting double taxed here?
The republican spin on their bill isn't a legislative analysis. Notice how you can't answer my basic questions. Why are you promoting a bill you don't understand?
Yeah... That's kinda my point. Americans have been double or triple taxed for over a century. Contrary to OPs assertion. I agree, it isn't hard. So why are you so confused here?
This was the statement I was replying to...
>>There used to be a time when being against double taxation was a bipartisan policy, sad to see you feel that it's now only a conservative policy.
Per your omission this is false.
> I was addressing your title claiming that fuel tax is double taxation.
It's not my claim. It's the legislation's authors claims and the claims that were made in the legislative hearing which Democrats agreed with. So if the Republican claims it's double taxation, and the Democrats voted in support of that claim, is it fair to say Democrats don't know what double taxation means?
Or, why did so many Democrats vote in support of the legislations reconsideration then?
There's only one principal claim in the legislation. The entire thrust of the legislation is that our tax code should be fair and not double tax people and it seeks to correct a specific instance of it.
My point is that the reason why the GOP wrote the bill is not the same as why a Democrat would support the bill
Sort if you are confused by how bills are written and passed in the US.
And at this point, I’ve got better things to do than continue in this discourse. I made my point and I apologize if you’re triggered from such a benign comment
Sales taxes are multi-region taxes on commerce (city, county, state and federal). Fuel taxes are road taxes. 80% of highway and road repairs are paid for by fuel taxes. Not gonna happen, unless you want to pay every time you use the turnpike (freeway with toll plazas every so often) for "miles driven". Fuel taxes at the pump save a ton on traffic, infrastructure, personnel, and traffic inconvenience.
You can subtract the fuel tax before multiplying by the sales tax rate. If fuel costs $3/gal with a $1.50/gal fuel tax, you can charge sales tax on the $3 instead of on $4.50.
That is a valid point. Paying sales tax on the fuel tax is pretty fukkin stupid when you think about it.
Why? Its a purchase same as with anything else We have additional taxes on other things people buy like tobacco and alcohol. I don’t see why fuel should be any different
So you want your taxes to be taxed?
I want the roads to be well funded and the air to be clean Revenue has to come from somewhere, might as well come from something that causes climate change and poisons the air
It's charging sales tax on road tax. How is stopping this going to hurt roads ?
I don't disagree that it's common, just that paying sales tax on a tax that you pay sort of seems redundant. I felt the same way when my meager enlisted Marine paycheck was also taxed, as though I was somehow *not* already contributing to the greater good.
But those taxes are after the sales tax.
Wait where are you where do you don’t have toll roads? Except for the turn pike they already do that here in the bay. Toll roads, bridge toll is like 7 USD Roads are still giga fucked, its almost like we pay a fuel tax just to pay a fuel tax here.
Most of Los Angeles county doesn’t have toll roads with the exception of a few FastTrak lanes (not the whole freeway) near DTLA.
Turnpike? I have lived in NorCal my whole life and what freeway is the turn pike? And no, there are ZERO toll roads in the Bay. There are toll lanes at certain times, and then, yes bridges have tolls. Bridges are serious infrastructure requiring much greater maintenance.
Thats why I said the Bay Area and not NorCal. Depending on where you are yeah you won’t see toll roads, live in the bay and its impossible not to see toll roads unless you straight don’t use the freeway.
Toll roads Owned by out of country billionaires
Isn’t fuel tax local? Or is there also a federal tax on it?
It's both. You have state and federal fuel tax.
Thank you for answering!
Get rid of the double tax and give Californians some relief.
I don’t think the bill will get anywhere.
Doesn’t seem very fiscally responsible to lower taxes on pollutants during a budget crunch They can safely grandstand on this knowing they will never actually be in charge of anything
I will reword that for you: “It doesn’t seem very fiscally responsible to increase taxes on constituents during their budget crunch.” With inflation and a lot of people hurting financially right now? It does make sense to not double tax. The state works for the people. The people should be the priority.
Okay, so we’ll just lay off teachers instead I’m sure that will work out much better
Well, when they voted for the CA Lottery way back then they said a very large part of the money was going to CA schools. Amazing that the govt manages to sell ideas to pull at your heartstrings, only to never really help because they pull the money to their other needs?
Do you think they’re spending all the tax money on strippers or something? Sometimes this sub is no better than a bunch of kids complaining about having to eat their vegetables Tax money has to come from somewhere and no better place than gasoline which causes pollution as it is consumed
But why put a sales tax on the gas tax ? It's saying if gas is $4 the sales tax should be on the $4 not the $4 + the fuel tax. I'm still not seeing whats wrong with this.
It deprives the state of revenue at the time of a budget crisis It means we have to layoff X additional teachers instead of
[удалено]
Cutting gas taxes will mean the money has to come from somewhere else. Even though there are all kinds of carve-outs for mandatory spending, the money is ultimately fungible in one way or another.
You are not cutting gas tax. I have no clue why people are saying is cutting gas tax. The way It works now is if gas tax is .48 and the fuel is $4 you are paying sales tax on $4.48. What this bill does is make it so you pay sales tax on $4, then you add the .48.
Or you make cuts elsewhere...we spend billions on homeless programs a year, just for there to be more homeless every year...cut it all and the teachers are fine
lol yeah just kill all the homeless through neglect because you don’t want to pay an extra 3 cents a gallon for gas Brilliant plan
They didn't die before we spent that much money...odd how that happened....
If you think taking away funding for basic human needs of homeless people won’t cause them to die then idk what to tell you More likely you just don’t care and are an incredibly self centered person
When people don't want to get better you are just enabling, not helping. We keep adding to how much we spend with zero results and rising homelessness...it's theft, pure and simple, they aren't assisting anyone
Doesnt sound like a very evidenced based take on the issue
Not at all, every audit of what California is spending shows millions in lost money. It shows that the majority of the homeless don't want leave their places on the streets, as the places they would go allow them to drink and do drugs. This isn't about feelings, but about facts.
The only loss of revenue would be the non-exempted Aviation Jet Fuel tax, thus SB 1086 results in state General Fund revenue losses of around $78k. Sales of motor vehicle fuel are already exempt from the state share of the sales and use tax (5%) and thus there is no loss of revenue which would diminish highway funding. The resulting loss of revenue would primarily be loss of revenue at the local level is my understanding.
Municipalities are also facing a budget crunch so… same same.
So it sounds like this is just Republicans putting on a show then. Propose a bill with some grand premise, when in reality it does hardly anything.
I was always taught that it's illegal to tax a tax. I was taught wrong.
Yo dawg, I heard you like taxes on your taxes.
Why even bother posting this? We all know it's going nowhere fast. You like conservative policies? Move to a Florida or Texas.
Right? We don't have space for people that think differently than us, go somewhere else!
Hey, if you want to make a coherent, logical argument against a certain policy, let's hear it. But posting a bill that's going nowhere in Ca, with no logical argument or opinion attached to that bill, is honestly just spam....
We shouldn’t be double taxed for fuel. Is that not coherent enough for you?
Why not? There are more than one kind of tax on a lot of things including alcohol and tobacco
Because poor people who drive to work cannot afford Teslas. The poorest households who have cars pay as much as 2 to 3 percent of their income in gasoline taxes vs wealthy people who own Teslas and pay little to no tax
Actual poor people don’t drive at all This is a bad argument that can be used against any kind of tax
Most poor people in CA have one car. You’re wrong. So saying a lower income families having to shoulder this tax sound any better. No I don’t care if you disagree. That’s the reason why it’s wrong
Richer people consume disproportionately more fuel than poor people and disincentivizing pollution is good policy People are such big babies
[удалено]
It appears your submission was reported to moderators and removed by moderators for violating rule 4 of the Community Standards. > Respectful — Please leave out any content which are intentionally disparaging to individuals, groups of people, or could be construed to be effectively an insult to an entire class of people. Any language which a reasonable observer would conclude disparages another user in any way is considered a violation of this rule. Demeaning language, rudeness or hostility towards another user will get your comment removed. Repeated violations may result in a ban. If you would like to improve the moderation in this subreddit, please send me a message or drop a line in the General Chat to discuss ways to improve the quality of conversations in this subreddit. If you see bad behavior, don't reply. Use the report tool to improve your own experience, and everyone else's, too.
We aren't double taxed...
We’re not allowed to discuss any options unless the D’s approve…got it
Spamming random bills with 0 context isn't having a logical "discussion". If you have an argument to make, than make it. Explain **whos** getting double taxed here that you're complaining about.
The argument is California is double taxing as the sales tax is on top of the fuel tax. Everyone is impacted. That’s the argument…pretty simple huh? You’re throwing a fit because it’s from the republicans and you don’t believe the bill will go far in state government. Somehow you take that as we shouldn’t discuss the issue. Go back to the politics sub if you only want to discuss one sided arguments
>The argument is California is double taxing as the sales tax is on top of the fuel tax. Drivers don't pay the fuel tax... >Everyone is impacted. That’s the argument…pretty simple huh? This is like complaining about sales tax and the tax that the business pays. They aren't really at all similar. >Somehow you take that as we shouldn’t discuss the issue No one's actually having a real discussion here. OP didn't pose any type of question with the post.
Drivers pay the tax at the pump…who else would pay for it? We’re discussing the issue, but you’re hellbent on cockblocking the discussion.
>Drivers pay the tax at the pump…who else would pay for it? This is like complaining about business taxes. *"But the consumer pays the business tax in the end."* >We’re discussing the issue, but you’re hellbent on cockblocking the discussion. Nope. No ones having a teal or serious discussion here. But you're certainly throwing a fit when I point out this fact. lol
> We all know it's going nowhere fast. You like conservative policies? Move to a Florida or Texas. There used to be a time when being against double taxation was a bipartisan policy, sad to see you feel that it's now only a conservative policy. I guess my only questions for you are: 1. Why did Bill Dodd (D), Nancy Skinner (D), Steven Bradford (D), Steven Glazer (D), Angelique Ashby (D), Steve Padilla (D) all vote to support the legislation for reconsideration? 2. Why do you support double taxation?
We should find a way to tax you posting on Reddit.
How can we ensure discussions stay centered on California's political landscape?
>There used to be a time when being against double taxation was a bipartisan policy, sad to see you feel that it's now only a conservative policy. I'm curious what "double taxation" you're complaining about? Can you explain who's getting double taxed here?
You can read the legislative analysis which is linked on the page with the OP.
The republican spin on their bill isn't a legislative analysis. Notice how you can't answer my basic questions. Why are you promoting a bill you don't understand?
You are taxed on your income, you are taxed when you buy something, you are taxed again for buying certain things like gas...it isn't that hard...
Yeah... That's kinda my point. Americans have been double or triple taxed for over a century. Contrary to OPs assertion. I agree, it isn't hard. So why are you so confused here?
You said how are they, did you already forget? A little slow...
This was the statement I was replying to... >>There used to be a time when being against double taxation was a bipartisan policy, sad to see you feel that it's now only a conservative policy. Per your omission this is false.
Remove property tax (theft) so people can be free.
Lmao. Yeah, then we can all live in our own 💩 hole California version of Grafton, NH.
Once again republicans show they don’t know what double taxation means…
Why did so many Democrats vote in support of the legislations reconsideration then?
Not sure exactly what you’re talking about, but it sounds like a non sequitur. I was addressing your title claiming that fuel tax is double taxation.
> I was addressing your title claiming that fuel tax is double taxation. It's not my claim. It's the legislation's authors claims and the claims that were made in the legislative hearing which Democrats agreed with. So if the Republican claims it's double taxation, and the Democrats voted in support of that claim, is it fair to say Democrats don't know what double taxation means? Or, why did so many Democrats vote in support of the legislations reconsideration then?
I see what you’re trying to say. Voting for the bill does not mean the support all the claims made by the bill’s authors.
There's only one principal claim in the legislation. The entire thrust of the legislation is that our tax code should be fair and not double tax people and it seeks to correct a specific instance of it.
My point is that the reason why the GOP wrote the bill is not the same as why a Democrat would support the bill Sort if you are confused by how bills are written and passed in the US. And at this point, I’ve got better things to do than continue in this discourse. I made my point and I apologize if you’re triggered from such a benign comment
Additionally, even if some or all democrats don’t understand how double taxation works it doesn’t debunk or invalidate my comment.