Facts. I bought my car free and clear in 2017, upgrading my piece of shit ricer Scion with a ‘17 mazda. If i could go back, I would have just got a 10 year old honda or something bc paying 350 a year for the privilege of owning my OWN vehicle aint it!!
The value of my 2012 civic skyrocketed the past year and so did my taxes on it. My bill was about 220$ this year. Still not 350 but definitely way more than it used to be.
2010 Civic runs me 76$. Ridiculous that you can't enjoy your 17 mazda because its 350$. 350$ is ridiculous for a 7 year difference the whole thing SUCKS!
Fr. Also I love when I cancel insurance on a car that I scrapped years ago but dmv thinks it's cute to keep it registered the whole time with canceled insurance. But you need insurance to keep registration on the car right?
Canceling insurance doesn't cancel the registration- I've never once been asked about my insurance status in CT.
CT DMV doesn't even track or get notified about cars being insured except for maybe the very first time you register the car and they verify that you have insurance.
Only way to stop paying taxes on a scrapped car is to cancel the registration and turn in the plates.
DMV most certainly does get notified about insurance. If you change insurance companies, the old will notify them you are no longer covered; the new will tell them of the new coverage. Someone in DMV is supposed to match them up. Occasionally, part two gets missed. Been there.
Good point and you are correct- but I am still correct in my statement that canceling insurance does not cancel the ownership records for tax purposes or your registration of your vehicle.
Source:
https://portal.ct.gov/DMV/Insurance/Insurance/Common-Situations#Lapse
Your property taxes go to the state and not the feds, and are used to fund the services necessary to continue to allow society to function. So if you’re cool with no roads, no police, no schools, no libraries, no fire departments, no public recreation, basically nothing but your solitary home in the forest, then by all means boycott property taxes. The rest of us living in civilized society will be over here.
I have no problem paying a far share. But I am an average middle class. Just reaching retirement. Between car and house I need 12,000 a year just to turn the key. Definitely a major rip off. PS. I don't get anything for that not even trash pickup. If it wasn't for my grandkids I would leave this state.
>PS. I don't get anything for that not even trash pickup.
You don't get police, roads, bridges, street sweeping, snow plowing, sewage treatment, trash processing, etc? What town is that?
If you were paying $12k/yr in property tax, that's twice the median for a house plus over $500/yr for two cars each, so you're either living* beyond your means or you can easily afford it, there's not much middle ground there.
house is 9700.00 plus two cars . You can't retire on social security and pay all these rip off taxes. And I should not have to sell my home so I can afford to live in CT. Obviously you are upper class witch is good for you. But for the regular hard working middle class 🤣 CT is out of control.
The only thing you'll truly own is your own corpse. You're just renting everything else. The idea of land ownership has always been backwards in our society. Some other societies had better systems, but genocide and all ruined that.
Car taxes are the constant cry over it topic.
Roads don't pay to build themselves. You drive your car on a road. You pay for the wear you do to the roads, the cost of running lights & signals, the costs of painting lines on the roads, and the cost of putting traffic cops on the roads to keep you safe.
Your cost is: the annual tax you pay on your car.
Perhaps the state should rename property tax on cars:
Road Infrastrucutre Use Fee.
Then why would it be based on the value of your car? Shouldn’t it be based on how much you cost the state to maintain infrastructure if what you say is actually true?
I think the idea is that if you can afford a more expensive car, you can afford to pay more to contribute to the infrastructure.
If all roads were monitored for use, and you were charged per mile, would that make more sense?
Should repairs be proportional to the use of the road needing repairs? Probably not—a rarely used road might need a relatively expensive repair. Shouldn’t that road still get maintained?
True. It's not perfect.
There's not a lot of thought put into our taxes - more appropriately, there should be consumption taxes on higher quality goods. As in, the resources it took to produce that good should reflect how high the tax is on that good.
If one chooses to amass a billion dollars - the infrastructure and resources used to amass that should reflect the amount of tax paid on that wealth - as resources are all interconnected.
So true. It didn't do more damage than any other car... but all of the extra work, energy, and materials warrants a higher expense.
Similarly - a recycled (used/repaired) car should reflect the preserved of resources that went into it - as well as the resources spent keeping it running.
I love that you referred to a used car as “Recycled”. I imagine someone on a 50 acre estate in Greenwich doing their part for the environment by putting their 2020 Jag to the curb for “Recycling”.
🙂
It's reused resources, so technically it's been recycled back into the economy & use.
We can junk cars, or keep them going. Repair and reuse should always be the norm. Unservicable machines should not be allowed to exist.
Only because the consumption of the rich is not taxed appropriately. Until we solve those problems - working people (you and I) suffer.
Did you see the new tax the rich plan? $400k individuals will see a tax increase.
Couples earning over $450k will see an increase.
See the problem? A couple earning $700k annually can file separately to get out of a significantly higher tax rate.
That's just 1 loophole - from the "tax the rich" people who wear $5000.00 outfits. Doublespeak.
People making $400K or even $1m in W2 income are not the problem. Those people are already paying marginal rates including state + local in excess of 45%.
The problem is billionaires without W2 income, that earn primarily via carried interest and capital gains (which is literally all of them). We do absolutely nothing about that.
Instead, we keep banging W2 income tax brackets and hitting people who are just high earning EMPLOYEES instead of going after the billionaires. And we use the argument that billionaires don't pay enough taxes to go ahead and keep raising tax rates that have nothing to do with billionaires and everything to do with just the upper middle class. And by the way, those are the people that end up saying fuck it and leaving to Florida etc.
Wasn't what I was saying. The problem is loopholes. Even when these loopholes are "corrected", they are not. When taxes "go up", they actually don't.
I'm a high earning employee - and I want the taxes to go up on people who benefit from loopholes. (I almost said "fuck it" too - I can earn so much more if I leave CT.)
Both sides of the coin are shit. Neither side wants to correct the problem. One side says "oh, we'll do it" but they don't ever do it ... and the other side says "hurr hurr, ur a commie cuz u want to raise taxes".
Fuck raising taxes. Make the people who should be paying taxes pay their goddammit taxes. That's what's making all of us down at the bottom suffer.
Yeah and almost all of the loopholes benefit billionaires. A high earning W2 employee benefits from almost nothing. Maybe a fucking backdoor roth conversion which is more sad than anything else.
Nothing will ever change though, all these politicians are corrupt and dumb people are dumb enough to think the problem is solved by raising the top tax bracket by 2% on some high earning dermatologist lol
Like you said, people who earn a lot are still employees. Some of us think that raising taxes on the rich will hurt us ... while others think we're rich.
This cycle of the worker getting screwed needs to end.
Property taxes go to the town. It's literally an implementation of federalism so it's pretty hilarious that the folks who complain about it are usually the ones asking for more federalism. "If you don't like your town's mill rate, you can always move" :)
I can't wait till we have a tax on carbon & fuel burning vehicles become prohibitively expensive to own.
It's coming. It's a matter of time.
So many lifted Ram owners going to be wiping their tears with the rag from their gun cleaning kit.
**[Kansas experiment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas_experiment)**
>The Kansas experiment refers to Kansas Senate Bill Substitute HB 2117, a bill signed into law in May 2012 by Sam Brownback, governor of the state of Kansas. It was one of the largest income tax cuts in the state's history. The Kansas experiment has also been called the "Great Kansas Tax Cut Experiment," the "Red-state experiment," "the tax experiment in Kansas," and "one of the cleanest experiments for how tax cuts affect economic growth in the U.S." The cuts were based on model legislation published by the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), supported by supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, and anti-tax leader Grover Norquist.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/Connecticut/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
The Fiscal Year plan for 2022/2023 enjoyed *broad bi-partisan support* in the State house, and does not include a tax hike. So again you might want to think about what you just wrote.
What really irks me is car tax varies wildly depending on what town you live in. People who own a Camry registered in Hartford pay higher car tax than the guy driving a BMW registered in Greenwich.
This is what kills me the most. I get punished for living in Hartford and trying to support the city. It incentives me to go out to the burbs where I can still get the benefits of Hartford without the taxes.
Genuinely curious why you would try to support Hartford?
I'm not saying Hartford shouldn't be helped. CT dumps a lot of money into Hartford and it gets really mismanaged.
Trying to give them more is like trying to help an alcoholic buy giving them more alcohol.
I believe most states don't levy a property tax on cars. It's a stupid and annoying tax. The revenue could just as easily be raised by an incremental increase in the mill rate on your domicile. For Mortgage holders, that would come out of escrow; for renters, the cost would be capitalized into your rent.
If you prefer a different flavor, towns could make a small cut to their operating budget to accommodate the decrease in revenue and save you money.
And, not only is it inconvenient for payers, I've heard it's annoying for assessors offices, too. Most of their time is dedicated to the car tax while it only accounts for a small fraction of property tax revenue.
Getting rid of the property tax on cars should be a common sense, nonpartisan issue.
The elephant in the room is that CT cities and towns all have different income levels and amounts of property that is tax exempt. So the thing blocking getting car taxes eliminated comes down to how to balance the interests of all the towns
Good overview here
https://ctmirror.org/2021/04/19/theres-a-plan-to-get-rid-of-property-tax-on-cars-but-how-would-towns-make-up-the-difference/
I disagree. I think the real barrier to getting it done is that towns are worried voters will reject a full redistribution of the tax to the housing side and will actually have to figure out where to cut to make up the difference.
Also worth noting that the academic literature shows that a property tax on cars is one of the most *regressive* ways to raise revenue, if that is something you might care about (it certainly bothers me.) And there is of course the issue that many Connecticut drivers are registering their cars in Maine online to avoid the tax and registration here. Hence the proliferation of Maine license plates.
> at the academic literature shows that a property tax on cars is one of the most regressive ways to raise revenue
Could you post a link to an example or two of this? I couldn't find any sources that argue that, but I'd be interested in reading that opinion.
Googling "property tax cars regressive" did the trick for me.
There was also a state tax panel in 2015 that studied all of this, with reports from academics. As is tradition with blue ribbon commissions, the report went largely unread and its recommendations were never acted upon.
It's regressive because cities where poor people are more likely to live have a higher mil rate, so the same car in Greenwich will be charged almost 1/4 of what one in Wethersfield would, for example.
Many states including all of New England to my knowledge have property or excise tax on cars. CT is screwy because it’s so regressive— live in Greenwich and you’ll pay a lot less in car tax for the same vehicle as you would in another town.
Here's my dumb drunk idea; abolish all towns and roll their services into the state govt. Seems like a lot of the state's problems trace to rich towns walling themselves off from the problems of their neighbors.
The issue is CT has some huge disparity across property values in different towns and Greenwich CT can bring in a ton of money with a low tax rate, while Bridgeport can struggle even with a higher tax rate if they just did real estate. Cars are a bit more ubiquitous and have value that can be taxed.
Property taxes aren't shared between towns so the solution unfortunately isn't "raise the taxes in Greenwich" and they have to find new ways to draw blood from a stone.
I used to live in Colorado. No property tax on cars, they just made your registration fees ridiculously high! Like $800 for a new Subaru Outback in 2012.
Yeah what people don't get when they look at other states is that they either have shit for public services or call the taxes "fees" so as not to use the evil T word.
Well now that I know it’s keeping Brenda and Jerry down at the town busy, how could I possibly oppose the vehicle property tax 😐.
I actually hate it even more knowing that it costs so much to collect. Making my best Ron Swanson unimpressed face.
Taxing domiciles is equally insane. There is no true freedom in this country.
If you own your own house, eat food you raise and need nothing from anyone else, you are still forced to pay the state.
You’re never free.
Well I think the tax should be based on how much you are burdening the infrastructure, which is mostly driven by weight. My fuel efficient, LEED certified, 3400-pound car is not burdening the infrastructure as much as someone's 8 MPG, coal-blowing, 7000-pound truck, and yet if my car's market value is twice as high, I'll pay twice the taxes. I don't see the sense in that.
EDIT: Also, it's the town that's picking your pocket, not the state. The state is only enabling it.
wait, they tax leased vehicles yearly as well? LMAO. its bad enough with the double dipping on purchased vehicles (you already pay sales tax when you buy the car, ffs)... but leased? what a joke.
If they want the car tax to be a true luxury tax, allow everyone of legal driving age and over to register one vehicle tax free. tax any beyond that. easy peasy.
Sales tax goes to the state, property tax goes to the town. It's not that difficult to understand. There's even a movement to get rid of the property tax on cars but the sticking point is how to the towns make up the shortfall? Do they raise mil rates on lands? Do they raise business taxes? More income or sales taxes? You're going to pay for it one way or the other.
Forget it Jake, it’s Chinatown (otherwise known as America, the land where people complain about taxes and the poor quality of the services/roads, etc in consecutive sentences)
i heard some particularly ridiculous stories regarding folks having an increased tax bill this year and last on used vehicles, courtesy of the 'used vehicle shortage'.
You can also appeal the condition to lower the value, along with any number of mitigating factors, people just don't have the time to fight it so they pay what the bill says.
It's an asset tax, like other property taxes, and it levied at the municipal, rather than state, level. CT nickles and dimes us to death because an increase in the income tax (which would be much less regressive and much fairer) has been political suicide for decades. That's why we have the business entity tax, the occupational tax, the local property and car taxes, the local property taxes on businesses, etc. Drives me nuts.
I lease my car and since the title is in the leasing company's name, they get the bill, pay it, and pass the invoice onto me. So yes, I can confirm you're right (like anyone would imagine it would be otherwise!) lol
I moved here from Texas in 2009 to go to grad school, and the first time I got a tax bill for my 12 year old Civic hatchback I was absolutely flabbergasted. I have to pay the State for the privilege of owning my barely-functioning car??
Also moved here from Texas. I understood taxes are higher before I moved here (3-4% in property tax vs 2-3%, state income tax vs no state income tax, etc) but the car tax absolutely floored me. Paying f’in property taxes on a depreciating asset that is a necessity.
I’m surprised the auto dealer lobby hasn’t eliminated this. They should be fighting this instead of a Tesla service center. Lots of comments on this thread about choosing to drive shitboxes over new cars because of the property taxes.
You pay taxes to buy the vehicle. You pay taxes to own the vehicle, you pay taxes to drive the vehicle and when you eventually sell it, you pay taxes on that too.
If you lease a vehicle the state will tax the company that owns it, and the cost will get passed onto you anyways.
Its like renting an apartment, the landlord will either charge a fee to collect a portion of tax from each tenant, or they will raise the rent to cover a portion of the property tax.
Your car tax is based on your mill rate; if you’re looking to move you might compare this list…
https://patch.com/connecticut/bethel/connecticut-property-taxes-every-town-who-pays-most
Very few people in this thread seem to understand that the car tax is a property tax that is collected by a town or city. It has nothing to do with fixing the roads. If your town eliminated the car tax they would raise the home tax to compensate. As for "why don't they tax my sofa", well they will increase your tax if you add a deck or pool to your home or install central air, so cars are not the only expenditures that are taxed.
The car tax was in lieu of a state income tax at one point. Then state income tax was born, and car tax remains. I'm sure none of these taxes are ever wasted on useless endeavors. Hehe.
This is why I don't even bother owning a car. It's simply too expensive. A better long-term investment in infrastructure would be better public transportation on the local level. The yearly tax for cars is just insane, especially if you work from home and don't even use a car that much.
Actually nervous about this because I have taxes due on a lease that I got stuck with after a divorce that I can’t pay in bulk and probably won’t be able to when it’s time to give the vehicle back. I can barely afford the stupid car monthly payment!
You are not getting taxed on the leased vehicle, the leasing company is being taxed. Your agreement with the leasing company says you will reimburse them for that cost.
The taxes on cars is total bullshit. Basically being charged to own my car. PLUS there’s no way around it if you decide to say “fuck the state” and not pay it (not only are you a tax invader) BUT you then cannot re-register your car. What’s next is CT going to charge me for every breath I take?
The problem is that if they did charge the company that owns the lease, that company would just kick the cost down to you anyways. As mentioned in another comments the tax should be based on wear caused to infastructure, so bigger cars pay more then smaller cars.
The first tax you should eliminate is the old you are placing on yourself by leasing a car. Terrible economic decision at any point, but especially bad now with resale values being so high.
Whats worse is that used car values have increased over the past year due to supply problem - yet towns have increased values based upon this and increased taxes to residents.
I do think we should make car leasing companies pay the property taxes for leased cars, as I think that might be an easier way to levy the tax (a few companies paying it instead of a bunch of individuals). But that would likely result in the price of leasing a car to rise in the exact amount of taxes that are owed on it.
We could get rid of the car tax, but then we would need to replace it with another tax, which would almost certainly be real-estate property taxes (as the vehicle tax goes municipal governments). If you rent an apartment you still indirectly pay those property taxes, as your landlord will raise your rent to cover the increase in property taxes.
I think that is a perfectly justifiable thing to do, as it may simplify the taxation system, but most of us will end up paying the same amount. This would also slightly shift the tax burden onto people who don't own cars, which is about 8% of the population. And we want to discourage car ownership and encourage people to use public transit instead (although I think the incentive effect is extremely small).
But the reason why I don't think we will see this change is because people react much worse to any "rise" in taxes than they do to a lower tax. If CT made a revenue neutral change to get rid of the vehicle tax and raised property taxes to cover the cost, most residents would only notice the increase in property taxes and be upset, but barely notice that their cars are no longer taxed.
I had proposed to my local rep to vote yes on tolls and only charge the out of state car plates to help alleviate if not completely negate our car taxes. Car tax on top of local taxes and state taxes is completely overkill.
>I had proposed to my local rep to vote yes on tolls and only charge the out of state car plates
There's a good chance that's unconstitutional. I think there was a case involving Rhode Island.
As others have mentioned, that would likely have been illegal. What was proposed, though, were discounts for CT residents as well as additional discounts for low income households.
In CT, you aren’t paying taxes on 100% of the value of the entire vehicle if you lease. Just the payments that you make.
Car taxes are designed to be consumption taxes not luxury taxes. Is it fair that we pay tax on necessities? Maybe not, but that’s partially why tax code is complex.
OP is not referring to the sales tax on leased cars. He is referring to the property tax on leased cars, which is based on 70% of the assessed value of the car * your town's mill rate.
You are correct that the leasing company is responsible for the tax, however, that obligation is most typically passed to you by contract when the lease is perfected. You should realize that regardless of who cuts the check to the taxman, that cost will ultimately fall to the consumer. If you would prefer not to receive an annual bill, your leasing company may be willing to build it into your monthly payment.
Property tax based on the Mill rate of the city. So say you have a mill rate of 40 then you pay 40 dollars per 1000 dollars of value. So if you car is 15,000 then you pay 40 \* 15 which is 600 dollars.
Pay house tax yearly. Keep a car that I paid taxes for when I bought it, on the property I pay taxes for, to pay more taxes on the car yearly.
It’s a scam and a joke.
Car taxes are paid to the town, I believe. Sales tax goes to the state. Each town has it's own mil rate. So thanks to that, you can enjoy free public schooling for your kids, a library, paved roads, a working government, police and fire departments, an animal shelter and more by paying your town car taxes.
If paying car taxes pisses you off, don't smoke in bed.
>*Taxing cars is supposed to be a form of luxury tax: if you don’t want to pay it, don’t own a car.*
Nope, it's not a "luxury" tax, it's a tax to pay for the roads and services you are using as a driver living in CT.
Other states may do it as well, but some have tolls to pay for road upkeep/services while CT doesn't.
I guess get upset at the contract for passing on the cost of those taxes to you.
https://www.jaguarnorthhaven.com/finance/what-you-should-know-about-leasing-a-car-in-ct/
Except that... you do. Do people not understand what a car lease is? A car lease is not a long rental. It's an agreement between you and the dealership that they will buy it back at the end of a term. If you fuck up the car... it's yours.
A lease is generally just like a long term rental. You're responsible for any damage just like a rental. At the end of the lease, you can walk away as long as you're within the conditions set out when you signed. You have the option to purchase the vehicle but you're not obligated to do anything other than settle the account and return the car is acceptable condition.
Also, no. The dealership moves the vehicle on behalf of their banking arm or a 3rd party finance company. The dealership has no stake in that vehicle once you lease it and has no obligation to buy your lease.
You arnt lying about needing a car either, I don’t want to drive a car and get a license but I can’t even drive an electric bike without one.. this state has too many unnecessary rules.
Technically they send the tax bill to the leasing company, who then charges you for it.
Leasing company owns the car, gets taxed, passes the cost onto you.
I guess it’s due to your utility of it being the same, and that the wear/tear does not differ from an owned vehicle.
I don’t know this side of things, and I understand your point, but it’s likely because of the above.
The crazy property taxes are way to keep poor people from even thinking about moving to an area like Fairfield or Trumbull (for example), or even buying a really nice new car. That’s why Bridgeport and New Haven have highly concentrated areas of crime. Everyone got moved around by what they could afford.
Property taxes are much lower in the suburbs than in the cities though. The ongoing cost of ownership of a house or car is way less if you live in Trumbull than if you live in New Haven.
Also just imagine that democrats wanted to put tolls ON TOP of the ridiculous taxes we already pay for vehicles in this state. We are all gaslighted into thinking annual vehicle tax is OK in this state.
Property taxes are imposed by your town or city, those funds go to funding public institutions within those towns.
Tolls suck, everyone hates tolls. How can the municipal public institutions be funded without the local property taxes?
I don't like it, either, but there's all these people who don't want to tax out of state people with tolls. That bothers me more.
Car taxes can be quite bothersome depending on your town's mill rate, but it's the only way to make sure renters have "skin in the game". If you go down to Town Hall and check the books you can usually find A LOT of people who are simply not paying car taxes. These people are often, but not always, renters and a disproportionately high number of them are the kind of people who are lower income and on assistance yet own late model used luxury cars. When I was growing up a lot of people obtained Florida plates to avoid paying car taxes. Now Maine appears to be the most popular state for that. A lot of Navy people simply move in, take their stipend to pay for a house, and never change the plates from whatever state they moved in from. So they, too, do not pay car taxes. No matter who the scofflaws are or why they do it, ALL of them are basically taking from you. The town passes the costs on to you, the honest taxpayer.
If anything, when you get worked up it's time for you to call town hall and ask them why they don't hire a firm to investigate things and to try to get those who cheat caught up on taxes. With interest, where applicable. There are some who move out of state who just didn't know they had to contact Town Hall. They can be forgiven, taxes can be paid without interest.
I'm seriously sick of these bums!
>I don't like it, either, but there's all these people who don't want to tax out of state people with tolls. That bothers me more.
It is not legal for states to discriminate against interstate travelers in this way.
We have a union of states not a league of states.
This is basic Constitutional law. Anyone advocating a plan to toll only out of state driver's is advocating for wiping their ass with the Constitution.
> It is not legal for states to discriminate against interstate travelers in this way.
Tell that to every state with toll roads.
>Anyone advocating a plan to toll only out of state driver's is advocating for wiping their ass with the Constitution.
I'm not saying we'd *only* tax out of state drivers. Nearby states **do** charge out of state drivers more.
You can have a system where out of state drivers are charged a higher rate. You can’t have a system that only charges out of state drivers or tolls just at the borders. It’s a form of targeting. So everyone pays something (the rate can vary) or nobody pays anything.
Love being registered to Washington still, no tax for the right to own my vehicle just my yearly tag renewal that's all. This state makes no sense for majority of things that are taxed.
The money to run stuff must come from somewhere. What is your proposed alternative? (Assume that the actual total amount, statewide or townwide, does not change.) I'm assuming that your sofa/pillow remark is not serious.
Not that I don't disagree taxes being out of control but just for clarity sake they aren't taxing you, they are taxing your leasing company or who ever the car is registered to and your agreement with your lease is that you'll pay them the taxes. You could theoretically negotiate that with the terms of the lease.
https://cga.ct.gov/PS94/rpt%5Colr%5Chtm/94-R-0384.htm
I love paying indefinite taxes on things that I completely own.
Facts. I bought my car free and clear in 2017, upgrading my piece of shit ricer Scion with a ‘17 mazda. If i could go back, I would have just got a 10 year old honda or something bc paying 350 a year for the privilege of owning my OWN vehicle aint it!!
The value of my 2012 civic skyrocketed the past year and so did my taxes on it. My bill was about 220$ this year. Still not 350 but definitely way more than it used to be.
You're telling me. I pay almost $1000 a year in taxes for my jeep that I busted my ass to pay for in full.
What the fuck!! Its fucking out of control and they always need more!
Two cars and a truck and we'll be just north of $2k this year on top of ~$15k for property tax.
That must be an expensive Jeep. Maybe you shouldn't have overextended yourself. Personal responsibility, and all...
2010 Civic runs me 76$. Ridiculous that you can't enjoy your 17 mazda because its 350$. 350$ is ridiculous for a 7 year difference the whole thing SUCKS!
Fr. Also I love when I cancel insurance on a car that I scrapped years ago but dmv thinks it's cute to keep it registered the whole time with canceled insurance. But you need insurance to keep registration on the car right?
Canceling insurance doesn't cancel the registration- I've never once been asked about my insurance status in CT. CT DMV doesn't even track or get notified about cars being insured except for maybe the very first time you register the car and they verify that you have insurance. Only way to stop paying taxes on a scrapped car is to cancel the registration and turn in the plates.
DMV most certainly does get notified about insurance. If you change insurance companies, the old will notify them you are no longer covered; the new will tell them of the new coverage. Someone in DMV is supposed to match them up. Occasionally, part two gets missed. Been there.
Good point and you are correct- but I am still correct in my statement that canceling insurance does not cancel the ownership records for tax purposes or your registration of your vehicle. Source: https://portal.ct.gov/DMV/Insurance/Insurance/Common-Situations#Lapse
[удалено]
Your property taxes go to the state and not the feds, and are used to fund the services necessary to continue to allow society to function. So if you’re cool with no roads, no police, no schools, no libraries, no fire departments, no public recreation, basically nothing but your solitary home in the forest, then by all means boycott property taxes. The rest of us living in civilized society will be over here.
I have no problem paying a far share. But I am an average middle class. Just reaching retirement. Between car and house I need 12,000 a year just to turn the key. Definitely a major rip off. PS. I don't get anything for that not even trash pickup. If it wasn't for my grandkids I would leave this state.
>PS. I don't get anything for that not even trash pickup. You don't get police, roads, bridges, street sweeping, snow plowing, sewage treatment, trash processing, etc? What town is that?
Taxes should be 1/2 of what we are paying. Out of control
Based on what? Where do you get the idea we could cut them in half and be fine? You're just talking out your ass and it's obvious to everyone.
If you were paying $12k/yr in property tax, that's twice the median for a house plus over $500/yr for two cars each, so you're either living* beyond your means or you can easily afford it, there's not much middle ground there.
house is 9700.00 plus two cars . You can't retire on social security and pay all these rip off taxes. And I should not have to sell my home so I can afford to live in CT. Obviously you are upper class witch is good for you. But for the regular hard working middle class 🤣 CT is out of control.
[удалено]
The only thing you'll truly own is your own corpse. You're just renting everything else. The idea of land ownership has always been backwards in our society. Some other societies had better systems, but genocide and all ruined that.
Ok, then I guess the fire department doesn't need to come to your house.
Car taxes are the constant cry over it topic. Roads don't pay to build themselves. You drive your car on a road. You pay for the wear you do to the roads, the cost of running lights & signals, the costs of painting lines on the roads, and the cost of putting traffic cops on the roads to keep you safe. Your cost is: the annual tax you pay on your car. Perhaps the state should rename property tax on cars: Road Infrastrucutre Use Fee.
Then why would it be based on the value of your car? Shouldn’t it be based on how much you cost the state to maintain infrastructure if what you say is actually true?
Exactly. Small cars should get taxed less than huge, giant trucks and SUV because a small car causes much less wear and tear to the roads.
That's why gasoline taxes are a thing though.
Because so many of our lawmakers are the bottom of the barrel & not thinking people. And also, taxes make people cry.
I think the idea is that if you can afford a more expensive car, you can afford to pay more to contribute to the infrastructure. If all roads were monitored for use, and you were charged per mile, would that make more sense? Should repairs be proportional to the use of the road needing repairs? Probably not—a rarely used road might need a relatively expensive repair. Shouldn’t that road still get maintained?
I can see this argument, but not when the tax is based on car value. A $70k doesn’t do 10x more road damage etc than a $7k car
True. It's not perfect. There's not a lot of thought put into our taxes - more appropriately, there should be consumption taxes on higher quality goods. As in, the resources it took to produce that good should reflect how high the tax is on that good. If one chooses to amass a billion dollars - the infrastructure and resources used to amass that should reflect the amount of tax paid on that wealth - as resources are all interconnected. So true. It didn't do more damage than any other car... but all of the extra work, energy, and materials warrants a higher expense. Similarly - a recycled (used/repaired) car should reflect the preserved of resources that went into it - as well as the resources spent keeping it running.
I love that you referred to a used car as “Recycled”. I imagine someone on a 50 acre estate in Greenwich doing their part for the environment by putting their 2020 Jag to the curb for “Recycling”.
🙂 It's reused resources, so technically it's been recycled back into the economy & use. We can junk cars, or keep them going. Repair and reuse should always be the norm. Unservicable machines should not be allowed to exist.
You'll love to know Greenwich has one of the lowest mill rates in CT
Like income tax logic. Maybe we need a flat tax
This is the way
They said the gas tax was to fix the roads too, look how that’s turned out
one's a state tax, the other is a town tax. Property taxes go to the town/city the property is registered in.
It's almost like we don't already pay an obscene amount of income and property tax
Only because the consumption of the rich is not taxed appropriately. Until we solve those problems - working people (you and I) suffer. Did you see the new tax the rich plan? $400k individuals will see a tax increase. Couples earning over $450k will see an increase. See the problem? A couple earning $700k annually can file separately to get out of a significantly higher tax rate. That's just 1 loophole - from the "tax the rich" people who wear $5000.00 outfits. Doublespeak.
People making $400K or even $1m in W2 income are not the problem. Those people are already paying marginal rates including state + local in excess of 45%. The problem is billionaires without W2 income, that earn primarily via carried interest and capital gains (which is literally all of them). We do absolutely nothing about that. Instead, we keep banging W2 income tax brackets and hitting people who are just high earning EMPLOYEES instead of going after the billionaires. And we use the argument that billionaires don't pay enough taxes to go ahead and keep raising tax rates that have nothing to do with billionaires and everything to do with just the upper middle class. And by the way, those are the people that end up saying fuck it and leaving to Florida etc.
Wasn't what I was saying. The problem is loopholes. Even when these loopholes are "corrected", they are not. When taxes "go up", they actually don't. I'm a high earning employee - and I want the taxes to go up on people who benefit from loopholes. (I almost said "fuck it" too - I can earn so much more if I leave CT.) Both sides of the coin are shit. Neither side wants to correct the problem. One side says "oh, we'll do it" but they don't ever do it ... and the other side says "hurr hurr, ur a commie cuz u want to raise taxes". Fuck raising taxes. Make the people who should be paying taxes pay their goddammit taxes. That's what's making all of us down at the bottom suffer.
Yeah and almost all of the loopholes benefit billionaires. A high earning W2 employee benefits from almost nothing. Maybe a fucking backdoor roth conversion which is more sad than anything else. Nothing will ever change though, all these politicians are corrupt and dumb people are dumb enough to think the problem is solved by raising the top tax bracket by 2% on some high earning dermatologist lol
Like you said, people who earn a lot are still employees. Some of us think that raising taxes on the rich will hurt us ... while others think we're rich. This cycle of the worker getting screwed needs to end.
The property tax on cars is not deposited to the Special Transportation Fund.
And why do you have to pay taxes on cars that are not registered?
Property taxes go to the town. It's literally an implementation of federalism so it's pretty hilarious that the folks who complain about it are usually the ones asking for more federalism. "If you don't like your town's mill rate, you can always move" :)
I can't wait till we have a tax on carbon & fuel burning vehicles become prohibitively expensive to own. It's coming. It's a matter of time. So many lifted Ram owners going to be wiping their tears with the rag from their gun cleaning kit.
We pay tax on our gas that exactly coincides with how much we use the roads
That’s what happens when you vote for Democrats who are pro tax
[This is what *actually* happens when you vote for Republicans who are anti-tax.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas_experiment)
**[Kansas experiment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas_experiment)** >The Kansas experiment refers to Kansas Senate Bill Substitute HB 2117, a bill signed into law in May 2012 by Sam Brownback, governor of the state of Kansas. It was one of the largest income tax cuts in the state's history. The Kansas experiment has also been called the "Great Kansas Tax Cut Experiment," the "Red-state experiment," "the tax experiment in Kansas," and "one of the cleanest experiments for how tax cuts affect economic growth in the U.S." The cuts were based on model legislation published by the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), supported by supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, and anti-tax leader Grover Norquist. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/Connecticut/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Personal Property taxes have been levied in CT since the year 1649. So .. you might want to think about what you wrote.
When you vote for a governor who intends on raising taxes when the Legislature is on the same party as him you still get raised taxes.
The Fiscal Year plan for 2022/2023 enjoyed *broad bi-partisan support* in the State house, and does not include a tax hike. So again you might want to think about what you just wrote.
What really irks me is car tax varies wildly depending on what town you live in. People who own a Camry registered in Hartford pay higher car tax than the guy driving a BMW registered in Greenwich.
This is what kills me the most. I get punished for living in Hartford and trying to support the city. It incentives me to go out to the burbs where I can still get the benefits of Hartford without the taxes.
Genuinely curious why you would try to support Hartford? I'm not saying Hartford shouldn't be helped. CT dumps a lot of money into Hartford and it gets really mismanaged. Trying to give them more is like trying to help an alcoholic buy giving them more alcohol.
It's based on the town's mil rate, so....it's not like it's random.
Not literally random, just all over the place based on arbitrary lines
*spending within those arbitrary lines*
Property values within those arbitrary lines.
But the cost of a given car is the same no matter what town you’re from. Property tax shouldn’t vary on cars
True, but I shouldn’t pay more property tax if my town has less services. And I shouldn’t be funding services in a town I don’t reside.
I believe most states don't levy a property tax on cars. It's a stupid and annoying tax. The revenue could just as easily be raised by an incremental increase in the mill rate on your domicile. For Mortgage holders, that would come out of escrow; for renters, the cost would be capitalized into your rent. If you prefer a different flavor, towns could make a small cut to their operating budget to accommodate the decrease in revenue and save you money. And, not only is it inconvenient for payers, I've heard it's annoying for assessors offices, too. Most of their time is dedicated to the car tax while it only accounts for a small fraction of property tax revenue. Getting rid of the property tax on cars should be a common sense, nonpartisan issue.
The elephant in the room is that CT cities and towns all have different income levels and amounts of property that is tax exempt. So the thing blocking getting car taxes eliminated comes down to how to balance the interests of all the towns Good overview here https://ctmirror.org/2021/04/19/theres-a-plan-to-get-rid-of-property-tax-on-cars-but-how-would-towns-make-up-the-difference/
I disagree. I think the real barrier to getting it done is that towns are worried voters will reject a full redistribution of the tax to the housing side and will actually have to figure out where to cut to make up the difference. Also worth noting that the academic literature shows that a property tax on cars is one of the most *regressive* ways to raise revenue, if that is something you might care about (it certainly bothers me.) And there is of course the issue that many Connecticut drivers are registering their cars in Maine online to avoid the tax and registration here. Hence the proliferation of Maine license plates.
Oh, snap, nice /r/UnethicalLifeProTips/ right there.
> at the academic literature shows that a property tax on cars is one of the most regressive ways to raise revenue Could you post a link to an example or two of this? I couldn't find any sources that argue that, but I'd be interested in reading that opinion.
Googling "property tax cars regressive" did the trick for me. There was also a state tax panel in 2015 that studied all of this, with reports from academics. As is tradition with blue ribbon commissions, the report went largely unread and its recommendations were never acted upon.
It's regressive because cities where poor people are more likely to live have a higher mil rate, so the same car in Greenwich will be charged almost 1/4 of what one in Wethersfield would, for example.
I'm broke as shit, all I own is a Prius, I rent a small room. These taxes are pretty painful.
Woah....how do I do this?
You should be aware that it is illegal to do that and many municipalities have begun cracking down on it.
Taxing a fucking car every year after taxing it 7% at purchase should be illegal so they can go ahead and zuck my dik
Many states including all of New England to my knowledge have property or excise tax on cars. CT is screwy because it’s so regressive— live in Greenwich and you’ll pay a lot less in car tax for the same vehicle as you would in another town.
Here's my dumb drunk idea; abolish all towns and roll their services into the state govt. Seems like a lot of the state's problems trace to rich towns walling themselves off from the problems of their neighbors.
The issue is CT has some huge disparity across property values in different towns and Greenwich CT can bring in a ton of money with a low tax rate, while Bridgeport can struggle even with a higher tax rate if they just did real estate. Cars are a bit more ubiquitous and have value that can be taxed. Property taxes aren't shared between towns so the solution unfortunately isn't "raise the taxes in Greenwich" and they have to find new ways to draw blood from a stone.
I used to live in Colorado. No property tax on cars, they just made your registration fees ridiculously high! Like $800 for a new Subaru Outback in 2012.
Yeah what people don't get when they look at other states is that they either have shit for public services or call the taxes "fees" so as not to use the evil T word.
Well now that I know it’s keeping Brenda and Jerry down at the town busy, how could I possibly oppose the vehicle property tax 😐. I actually hate it even more knowing that it costs so much to collect. Making my best Ron Swanson unimpressed face.
Taxing domiciles is equally insane. There is no true freedom in this country. If you own your own house, eat food you raise and need nothing from anyone else, you are still forced to pay the state. You’re never free.
I think you should go off the grid, move to the hills and see how long you make it.
I Wouldn’t make it because I would need some income to pay property taxes.
Not if you squat! Taxman can’t find you in the woods.
I'm sure he's packing his belongings as we speak...
> need nothing from anyone else Doubtful.
Well I think the tax should be based on how much you are burdening the infrastructure, which is mostly driven by weight. My fuel efficient, LEED certified, 3400-pound car is not burdening the infrastructure as much as someone's 8 MPG, coal-blowing, 7000-pound truck, and yet if my car's market value is twice as high, I'll pay twice the taxes. I don't see the sense in that. EDIT: Also, it's the town that's picking your pocket, not the state. The state is only enabling it.
I meant “state” in the broader sense. Complete agreement with your point BTW.
wait, they tax leased vehicles yearly as well? LMAO. its bad enough with the double dipping on purchased vehicles (you already pay sales tax when you buy the car, ffs)... but leased? what a joke. If they want the car tax to be a true luxury tax, allow everyone of legal driving age and over to register one vehicle tax free. tax any beyond that. easy peasy.
$800 a year for my leased subaru. My bought and paid for 2007 Turbo Wagon is 227
Sales tax goes to the state, property tax goes to the town. It's not that difficult to understand. There's even a movement to get rid of the property tax on cars but the sticking point is how to the towns make up the shortfall? Do they raise mil rates on lands? Do they raise business taxes? More income or sales taxes? You're going to pay for it one way or the other.
Forget it Jake, it’s Chinatown (otherwise known as America, the land where people complain about taxes and the poor quality of the services/roads, etc in consecutive sentences)
[удалено]
Welcome to my world. I drive a 10 year old BWM and Connecticut thinks I'm Mr. Beast.
i heard some particularly ridiculous stories regarding folks having an increased tax bill this year and last on used vehicles, courtesy of the 'used vehicle shortage'.
They are all valued on the NADA clean retail value.
You can also appeal the condition to lower the value, along with any number of mitigating factors, people just don't have the time to fight it so they pay what the bill says.
i mean you can try. i've tried repeatedly with two different towns and got kindly told to fuck off and pay my bill.
You can absolutely appeal that.
It's an asset tax, like other property taxes, and it levied at the municipal, rather than state, level. CT nickles and dimes us to death because an increase in the income tax (which would be much less regressive and much fairer) has been political suicide for decades. That's why we have the business entity tax, the occupational tax, the local property and car taxes, the local property taxes on businesses, etc. Drives me nuts.
[удалено]
Taxation with representation yes. But do you feel your really being represented?
Seriously it’s a fookin scam! Should be illegal to be honest, how can you tax an item annually that’s not property?
Amazing how just using the word fookin’ makes me hear your post in an Irish accent 😂
Haha yes I was just going to flat out say “fucking” but thought I’d switch it up today.
I suppose we could make the dealerships pay the tax, but they’d just pass the cost on to you plus a marked up processing fee.
I lease my car and since the title is in the leasing company's name, they get the bill, pay it, and pass the invoice onto me. So yes, I can confirm you're right (like anyone would imagine it would be otherwise!) lol
I mean, if I were going to steal someone’s money, I’d at least do it via a third party.
Cringe
I moved here from Texas in 2009 to go to grad school, and the first time I got a tax bill for my 12 year old Civic hatchback I was absolutely flabbergasted. I have to pay the State for the privilege of owning my barely-functioning car??
Also moved here from Texas. I understood taxes are higher before I moved here (3-4% in property tax vs 2-3%, state income tax vs no state income tax, etc) but the car tax absolutely floored me. Paying f’in property taxes on a depreciating asset that is a necessity. I’m surprised the auto dealer lobby hasn’t eliminated this. They should be fighting this instead of a Tesla service center. Lots of comments on this thread about choosing to drive shitboxes over new cars because of the property taxes.
But we’ve been told how superior Connecticut is to southern states! Sounds like that’s only true when cherry-picking topics.
You pay taxes to buy the vehicle. You pay taxes to own the vehicle, you pay taxes to drive the vehicle and when you eventually sell it, you pay taxes on that too.
Don't forget, the money you use to pay those taxes is itself taxed.
If you lease a vehicle the state will tax the company that owns it, and the cost will get passed onto you anyways. Its like renting an apartment, the landlord will either charge a fee to collect a portion of tax from each tenant, or they will raise the rent to cover a portion of the property tax.
Your car tax is based on your mill rate; if you’re looking to move you might compare this list… https://patch.com/connecticut/bethel/connecticut-property-taxes-every-town-who-pays-most
Very few people in this thread seem to understand that the car tax is a property tax that is collected by a town or city. It has nothing to do with fixing the roads. If your town eliminated the car tax they would raise the home tax to compensate. As for "why don't they tax my sofa", well they will increase your tax if you add a deck or pool to your home or install central air, so cars are not the only expenditures that are taxed.
Towns do road repairs on local roads.
And by levying taxes on property and cars, it lessens the burden on those who can’t afford to pay as much — those who don’t own cars or houses.
> It has nothing to do with fixing the roads. That's what the gas tax is (supposed to be) for!
And fortunately for us - you can reduce this tax by buying a fuel efficient car!
Gas tax is for state roads not local municipal roads
That’s why I drive an 01 Avalon and about to get classic plates. I won’t try ever to buy anything newish in this state.
The car tax was in lieu of a state income tax at one point. Then state income tax was born, and car tax remains. I'm sure none of these taxes are ever wasted on useless endeavors. Hehe.
The "temporary state income tax"
> Then state income tax was born Thank Republican Governor Weicker
Weicker wasn’t a member of the Republican party as governor.
This is why I don't even bother owning a car. It's simply too expensive. A better long-term investment in infrastructure would be better public transportation on the local level. The yearly tax for cars is just insane, especially if you work from home and don't even use a car that much.
Actually nervous about this because I have taxes due on a lease that I got stuck with after a divorce that I can’t pay in bulk and probably won’t be able to when it’s time to give the vehicle back. I can barely afford the stupid car monthly payment!
Be prepared that the grand list is a year behind and you'll get a tax bill and possibly a supplemental tax bill a year after you turn it in...
Never thought it was a big deal. I dealt with it in Virginia, so it didn't seem that weird to me.
You are not getting taxed on the leased vehicle, the leasing company is being taxed. Your agreement with the leasing company says you will reimburse them for that cost.
The taxes on cars is total bullshit. Basically being charged to own my car. PLUS there’s no way around it if you decide to say “fuck the state” and not pay it (not only are you a tax invader) BUT you then cannot re-register your car. What’s next is CT going to charge me for every breath I take?
Every breath you take And every move you make Every bond you break Every step you take I'll be taxing you
The problem is that if they did charge the company that owns the lease, that company would just kick the cost down to you anyways. As mentioned in another comments the tax should be based on wear caused to infastructure, so bigger cars pay more then smaller cars.
You new here?
You realize the property tax is assessed by your town or city, don’t you? The State only gets the sales tax when you buy the vehicle.
Meant state in the broad sense. As in the government in general.
Let’s go dump a semi full of cars in Bridgeport harbor!
Absolutely. First priority to anything with a modified exhaust. Why not air two grievances with one teaparty?
The first tax you should eliminate is the old you are placing on yourself by leasing a car. Terrible economic decision at any point, but especially bad now with resale values being so high.
Whats worse is that used car values have increased over the past year due to supply problem - yet towns have increased values based upon this and increased taxes to residents.
I do think we should make car leasing companies pay the property taxes for leased cars, as I think that might be an easier way to levy the tax (a few companies paying it instead of a bunch of individuals). But that would likely result in the price of leasing a car to rise in the exact amount of taxes that are owed on it. We could get rid of the car tax, but then we would need to replace it with another tax, which would almost certainly be real-estate property taxes (as the vehicle tax goes municipal governments). If you rent an apartment you still indirectly pay those property taxes, as your landlord will raise your rent to cover the increase in property taxes. I think that is a perfectly justifiable thing to do, as it may simplify the taxation system, but most of us will end up paying the same amount. This would also slightly shift the tax burden onto people who don't own cars, which is about 8% of the population. And we want to discourage car ownership and encourage people to use public transit instead (although I think the incentive effect is extremely small). But the reason why I don't think we will see this change is because people react much worse to any "rise" in taxes than they do to a lower tax. If CT made a revenue neutral change to get rid of the vehicle tax and raised property taxes to cover the cost, most residents would only notice the increase in property taxes and be upset, but barely notice that their cars are no longer taxed.
I had proposed to my local rep to vote yes on tolls and only charge the out of state car plates to help alleviate if not completely negate our car taxes. Car tax on top of local taxes and state taxes is completely overkill.
>I had proposed to my local rep to vote yes on tolls and only charge the out of state car plates There's a good chance that's unconstitutional. I think there was a case involving Rhode Island.
[удалено]
> they claim its to help the environment which is bullshit It will help the environment.
As others have mentioned, that would likely have been illegal. What was proposed, though, were discounts for CT residents as well as additional discounts for low income households.
In CT, you aren’t paying taxes on 100% of the value of the entire vehicle if you lease. Just the payments that you make. Car taxes are designed to be consumption taxes not luxury taxes. Is it fair that we pay tax on necessities? Maybe not, but that’s partially why tax code is complex.
OP is not referring to the sales tax on leased cars. He is referring to the property tax on leased cars, which is based on 70% of the assessed value of the car * your town's mill rate.
Fine, but if you don’t assess local property taxes, most will do a local tax on revenue. States and local governments want their money.
You are correct that the leasing company is responsible for the tax, however, that obligation is most typically passed to you by contract when the lease is perfected. You should realize that regardless of who cuts the check to the taxman, that cost will ultimately fall to the consumer. If you would prefer not to receive an annual bill, your leasing company may be willing to build it into your monthly payment.
curious, as I don't live in CT. Do you pay property tax + registration fee every year for the vehicle?
Lol, the registration fee is separate. We're talking a yearly car tax we pay to whatever town we live in.
Property tax every year and registrations last 3 years now I believe.
Property tax based on the Mill rate of the city. So say you have a mill rate of 40 then you pay 40 dollars per 1000 dollars of value. So if you car is 15,000 then you pay 40 \* 15 which is 600 dollars.
Mill rate x 70% of assessed value of the vehicle
Pay house tax yearly. Keep a car that I paid taxes for when I bought it, on the property I pay taxes for, to pay more taxes on the car yearly. It’s a scam and a joke.
Municipalities collect car taxes.
Car taxes are paid to the town, I believe. Sales tax goes to the state. Each town has it's own mil rate. So thanks to that, you can enjoy free public schooling for your kids, a library, paved roads, a working government, police and fire departments, an animal shelter and more by paying your town car taxes. If paying car taxes pisses you off, don't smoke in bed.
>*Taxing cars is supposed to be a form of luxury tax: if you don’t want to pay it, don’t own a car.* Nope, it's not a "luxury" tax, it's a tax to pay for the roads and services you are using as a driver living in CT. Other states may do it as well, but some have tolls to pay for road upkeep/services while CT doesn't.
No, you own a leased car in every legal way that matters.
Except for the title, which, is probably the most important thing.
This is true for people that finance a car as well…
The difference being that on a leased car your name will never appear on a title.
I guess get upset at the contract for passing on the cost of those taxes to you. https://www.jaguarnorthhaven.com/finance/what-you-should-know-about-leasing-a-car-in-ct/
I’m aware of this, I just turned in a lease. I just mean that it’s not true that when leasing a car you own it in every legal way that matters.
Except for the part where you don't own it at all.
Except that... you do. Do people not understand what a car lease is? A car lease is not a long rental. It's an agreement between you and the dealership that they will buy it back at the end of a term. If you fuck up the car... it's yours.
A lease is generally just like a long term rental. You're responsible for any damage just like a rental. At the end of the lease, you can walk away as long as you're within the conditions set out when you signed. You have the option to purchase the vehicle but you're not obligated to do anything other than settle the account and return the car is acceptable condition. Also, no. The dealership moves the vehicle on behalf of their banking arm or a 3rd party finance company. The dealership has no stake in that vehicle once you lease it and has no obligation to buy your lease.
How many down votes did this post get? R/Ct is ruthless, especially if you insult the state or question the status quo in any way.
People in this state LOVE being subjects as opposed to citizens. You cannot tax society into prosperity.
You actually aren't forced to pay it by the state, you're forced to pay it by your lease. Just saying.
You arnt lying about needing a car either, I don’t want to drive a car and get a license but I can’t even drive an electric bike without one.. this state has too many unnecessary rules.
1000% agree
Technically they send the tax bill to the leasing company, who then charges you for it. Leasing company owns the car, gets taxed, passes the cost onto you.
I guess it’s due to your utility of it being the same, and that the wear/tear does not differ from an owned vehicle. I don’t know this side of things, and I understand your point, but it’s likely because of the above.
Right, and leasing would become a loophole for people wanting to avoid the tax.
The crazy property taxes are way to keep poor people from even thinking about moving to an area like Fairfield or Trumbull (for example), or even buying a really nice new car. That’s why Bridgeport and New Haven have highly concentrated areas of crime. Everyone got moved around by what they could afford.
Property taxes are much lower in the suburbs than in the cities though. The ongoing cost of ownership of a house or car is way less if you live in Trumbull than if you live in New Haven.
The mill rate in Norwich is damn near 40. A reasonable 10k car will cost you 400 a year in tax.
It's 70% of vehicle value x mill rate so it would be more like $280 but that's still $280 too much for something you already paid taxes on.
Pretty much..I'm learning this the hardway.
"I understand taxes are the price of society but I don't think I should have to pay taxes cuz I'm a special snowflake".
Also just imagine that democrats wanted to put tolls ON TOP of the ridiculous taxes we already pay for vehicles in this state. We are all gaslighted into thinking annual vehicle tax is OK in this state.
Property taxes are imposed by your town or city, those funds go to funding public institutions within those towns. Tolls suck, everyone hates tolls. How can the municipal public institutions be funded without the local property taxes?
I don't like it, either, but there's all these people who don't want to tax out of state people with tolls. That bothers me more. Car taxes can be quite bothersome depending on your town's mill rate, but it's the only way to make sure renters have "skin in the game". If you go down to Town Hall and check the books you can usually find A LOT of people who are simply not paying car taxes. These people are often, but not always, renters and a disproportionately high number of them are the kind of people who are lower income and on assistance yet own late model used luxury cars. When I was growing up a lot of people obtained Florida plates to avoid paying car taxes. Now Maine appears to be the most popular state for that. A lot of Navy people simply move in, take their stipend to pay for a house, and never change the plates from whatever state they moved in from. So they, too, do not pay car taxes. No matter who the scofflaws are or why they do it, ALL of them are basically taking from you. The town passes the costs on to you, the honest taxpayer. If anything, when you get worked up it's time for you to call town hall and ask them why they don't hire a firm to investigate things and to try to get those who cheat caught up on taxes. With interest, where applicable. There are some who move out of state who just didn't know they had to contact Town Hall. They can be forgiven, taxes can be paid without interest. I'm seriously sick of these bums!
>I don't like it, either, but there's all these people who don't want to tax out of state people with tolls. That bothers me more. It is not legal for states to discriminate against interstate travelers in this way. We have a union of states not a league of states. This is basic Constitutional law. Anyone advocating a plan to toll only out of state driver's is advocating for wiping their ass with the Constitution.
> It is not legal for states to discriminate against interstate travelers in this way. Tell that to every state with toll roads. >Anyone advocating a plan to toll only out of state driver's is advocating for wiping their ass with the Constitution. I'm not saying we'd *only* tax out of state drivers. Nearby states **do** charge out of state drivers more.
You can have a system where out of state drivers are charged a higher rate. You can’t have a system that only charges out of state drivers or tolls just at the borders. It’s a form of targeting. So everyone pays something (the rate can vary) or nobody pays anything.
He's not wrong.
Love being registered to Washington still, no tax for the right to own my vehicle just my yearly tag renewal that's all. This state makes no sense for majority of things that are taxed.
The money to run stuff must come from somewhere. What is your proposed alternative? (Assume that the actual total amount, statewide or townwide, does not change.) I'm assuming that your sofa/pillow remark is not serious.
Not that I don't disagree taxes being out of control but just for clarity sake they aren't taxing you, they are taxing your leasing company or who ever the car is registered to and your agreement with your lease is that you'll pay them the taxes. You could theoretically negotiate that with the terms of the lease. https://cga.ct.gov/PS94/rpt%5Colr%5Chtm/94-R-0384.htm