Connecticut to screw car enthusiasts

Is this the same as the registration fee assessed in other states OR is this on top of the registration fee?

 

Well mine will go up 500/year for 3 years. Yours will go up 500 for 10 years. But don't forget that I already paid taxes based on my 55% higher mill rate on the NADA value since 1985. Should I complain that I had to pay higher taxes all those years? Would you would be upset if they changed the law so that there was no tax on cars, or that cars 15 years old or more were considered antiques. You were expecting a tax break next year and you not going to get it. I can understand you not happy. Life is full of disappointments.

Yes, a guy with a million dollar car will have to pay a lot more if the car is between 20 and 30 years old. Let me shed a tear for him, and the guy who just bought a 458 too. I'll gladly take the cars off their hands for the property tax. We are lucky we get a tax break on antique cars at all. And still, if I replace my 1996 328is with a new Audi S5 the tax and insurance implications would be far more significant. And why should anyone get a tax break on a car in the first place? Perhaps I should get a break on my home because it’s over 30 years old.

I am not saying it is a good bill, or that I like tax increase. But no one complains about tax cuts, do they? I just put it in a different perspective. It’s all related to this growing feeling of entitlement. “We need a new soccer filed for little Johnny to play on.” “The high school needs a swimming pool.” “We need more police.” “We need a bigger library.” “We need free medical care for everyone.” “We need a bigger, better school.” “What ever it is, it needs to be bigger and better and shinier.” Everybody wants to play but nobody wants to pay. See, now you got me going.

The real deal here is that this is a modification of state law that allows towns to collect more tax from people who own [high valued?] antique cars for at most another 10 years. Why are they doing this? Because the state is cutting subsidies to the towns. This places an extra tax burden on the town, even if they hold their budgets constant (like that’s gon’a happen). So how will the town cover the deficit? They have to raise the tax base (grand list) or raise the mill rate. If the tax base stayed the same then the mill rate would go up and everyone will have higher property taxes, even those that truly can not afford it. This shift in the antique car evaluation places some of that increased tax burden on people who have higher valued antique cars, and who should be in a better position to absorb the increase. I don't necessarily like it, but if it helps take the tax burden off some poor bastard who has been out of work for the last year make ends meet, then WTF.

Now, if you want to talk about how the government at the town state, federal level waists the money they collect from you and me, well that's another issue.

 

I just want to make one other point. Again, it's this entitlement. I guess the feeling is that because we worked hard and were in a position that we could spend an extra $30k or $40k, or more, on an unneeded, old car that sits in a garage more than it is driven, we deserve a tax break on it while some guy who spends the half that amount on a necessary new car to drive to work every day, take his kids to the doctor, go to the grocery store, and what ever else it is need for in every day life, should pay tax on the real value? Yes, that makes a lot of sense. I bet if you ask that guy if he thinks I should have such a good deal he might have a different opinion.

 

What tax break are you talking about????

I bought the car with money that I earned and already paid taxes on. Now the state wants to impose an increased annual tax on me just because I own it.

You seem to believe that all money and property belongs to the state and that whatever you are allowed to keep for your own is because of the generosity of the state. I disagee with that view.

BTW, I oppose the property tax on cars owned by everyone as well. Since I first moved to CT in 1988 I have seen the imposition of an income tax, a more than doubling of the sales tax and huge increases in gasoline and other taxes in this state.

Connecticut always increases its spending to match the revenues from the boom years and, when the business cycle inevitably turns the other way and the state runs huge deficits, its reaction is to raise taxes instead of cutting spending.

Connecticut is not a good shepherd of the taxes that it collects from its residents.

 

I pay full value on my DDs just like everyone else. I don't see the discount on old cars as a tax break. There are practial reasons for its existence. Most these cars are not used as transportation but are collected like art or jewelry (which aren't assessed property tax). Also cars of this age are not listed in the blue book so appraising them is more difficult. A fixed amount makes things easy. I agree that the amount has been low and would be willing to pay more. But if my car is assessed at fair market value I'll be paying 33 cents a mile for property tax. The State took 5% when I earned the money, 6% when I spent the money, and now they want 3% annually on the asset. I don't find that acceptable and will drop my CT registration.

 

I'm sorry but I just have to comment..."entitlement"? In what way? This the same back-assward attempt at B.S. we have been fed for years. An entitlement means someone or entity gives you something because they have a right to it. Most here have worked for their property. It is the exact opposite of an entitlement.

Secondly, "we deserve a tax break" nice try. We are not asking for a break, we are asking not to have yet another increase. The current taxes on property are way to high as it is. When someone works harder and gains more income from either there labor or smarts does not mean they should be taxed even higher because they decide they want something nice. Maybe the guy who spends the half that amount on a necessary new car to drive to work every day, take his kids to the doctor, go to the grocery store, and what ever else it is need for in every day life, should find a new profession or start looking at his choices in life. He has no right to judge me or compare to me and feel I owe more. We use to look up to people who worked hard and did well, now we demonize them. Lets say he does work hard but has fallen on hard times..Fine, life is hard, get a helmet. It could happen to any of us, its happened to me. I picked my self up and got back to work.

Your rhetoric is the current B.S. being spread through this country and it will continue to degrade what is left of this society. Lane is right, lets just tax everything and see if you still love the idea. Eventually no one will have the incentive to work hard.


--Mike

 

Sorry I don't see it so simply. Yes, if the tax break is there I will take advantage of it. I'm not that generous. And I ain't no screaming librial. I don't want to pay the additional tax any more than the next guy. I am just being realistic. A bunch of Ferrari owners aren't going to stop it. So I am not going to waste my time trying. Can you imagine if we all got together with our cars and showed up in front of the state capital to protest? Think of the field day the liberal press would have with that. "Oh the poor Ferrari owners can't afford the tax on their cars. Boohoo."


I stand by what I have said. The fact that I currently pay less tax on a car valued at $40k than someone else with a car of equal value just because my car is old IS a tax break. No getting around that. It's not about being a daily driver or not. It is a personal property tax. It doesn't even matter if it is registered. If you own such a motor vehicle you are supposed to pay tax on it. If you drop the registration you are supposed to provide your assessor with proof that you no longer own the car or you are still subject to taxes.

 

This problem is much larger than the Connecticut Ferrari owners that are here in this thread. It effects everyone that owns a car older than 20 years who may not be able to handle the additional burden. Maybe if you took the blinders off so you could see the larger picture you may get that. As for being a liberal...walks like a duck, talks like a duck..what is it?

--Mike

 

John - you are correct in that I will have to provide proof that the car is no longer in my possession or in town. I plan to move it out of state. This won't be a problem because it only needs to be here during the summer months. The rest of the time it can be elsewhere.

 

I will be moving mine to my New York address as well and register it there. They have no "car" tax as it should be.

--Mike

 

It seems to me the bill would be fine *if* they grandfathered in existing vehicles. In that case there would not be the additional burden on DMV and the towns to resource the effort necessary to change vehicles already on the town grand lists. There also wouldn't be the burden on taxpayers who may not be able to take on the significant increase in taxes. Of course, that wouldn't provide any tax revenue immediately, and is why it won't happen.

PS - anybody got a draft copy of the letter they sent? I suck at writing things like this.

 

How does it affect everyone who owns a car over 20 years old? Not ervery car 20 years old or older carries AE plates or qualifies for the tax break.

 

You know what I meant and you just want to keep spewing your agreement with the bill. You do not need a Ferrari, just any car of "Antique, rare or special interest motor vehicle". You know exactly what we are saying here, but you want to make sure someone hears your guilty feelings about getting a so called "tax break". I am sorry you feel guilty, I don't and its nothing but a money grab as its always been.

Only a handful of states have this tax and most are getting rid of it. We gain nothing from it but less value. Why do you think so many cars in CT are already registered in other states? I would also watch an see just how many old still hot rods and "antiques" start hitting the roads, that will be great for emissions, lol. The fact is its a bad law. Period. I can guess your responses from here and have decided that since myself and others cannot get you to see reason that future replies are useless....much like this law.

--Mike

 

Tell you what. Someone type up a letter with address and and post it here. I'll cut/past it into Word, print it, sign it, and post it to my representative.

 

This bill will be generating revenue by changing the assessed value from $500 to $2,500. The towns will be receiving 5 times the tax revenue for all cars over 30 years old with antique plates. It's a big problem if your vehicle is between 20 and 30years old. Now your assessed at fair market value?! Uncle!

 

My grandfathering comment was specific to the change to 30 years. Computers can handle the blanket change from $500 to $2500 without resulting in an additional FTE resource burn. The change from 20 to 30 years, however, will result in a significant one as towns will expend a lot of resources figuring out the value for these older vehicles that you just can't look up in NADA and getting the new values into the system.

 

NADA values: 1947 Ferrari 166 2 Door Spider Corsa

Low Retail $573,100

Average Retail $849,700

High Retail $1,144,800

Don't under estimate NADA.

 

Every one of these will initially be set at high retail and in most cases the owner will dispute. Now the FTE burn jumped up even higher...

 

What is the value of an 86 328GTS?