Biodieseler threatened with felony charges! - Page 5 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

aklim · #61 03-09-2007, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by justinperkins

Sure you can argue that their impact is low, but that's not a fair argument in my opinion. You are either paying taxes for using the road or you're not.

I can also argue that it is ok for me to steal $10 from Bill Gates. The impact will be low too. Of course, in this case, the principle will be inconvenient.

nerys · #62 03-09-2007, 09:43 PM

taxes on fuel do not pay for the roads my normal state taxes AND mostly my FEDERAL TAXES take care of the roads. thats a fact.

Gas tax is just a convenient revenue source since till now we ALL had to use it so it was guaranteed income.

There is NO LAW saying I have to use gasoline or any petroleum based fuel as the propellant for my vehicles. No law whatsoever.

There is NO LAW saying I have to pay a Gasoline tax to use the roadways it only says I have to pay a Gasoline tax is I BUY Gasoline for use on public roads (notice thats why they have off road disesel)

if your not buying gasoline (diesel) whatever then the gasoline diesel tax DOES NOT APPLY TO YOU. Period.

What THEY are trying to do is NOT like me taking $10 from gates. its like gates arranging to get $1 of every X I spend on Y product so I buy Z product instead to avoid paying Gates his X tax and now gates is upset by that.

Your analogy is false. again What tax do bicycle owners pay? they use the roads. ? Electric Car owners ? They use the roads ?

thats because its NOT a road tax (thats part of your state and mostly your federal taxes) its a GASOLINE tax.

This is NO different than GOING AFTER a family on tax evasion for growing there own vegetables to eat thereby avoiding the state taxes on the veggies they would have had to buy at the grocery store. its preposterous and utterly silly. OR if I cut up a log and make a chair I am guilty of tax evasion because I did not buy the lumber an day taxes on it or buy a chair and pay taxes on it?? Or those tax cheats for putting up a solar array or wind generator and evading those power company power taxes. Shame on them.

These are called EXCISE taxes for a reason. they are OPTIONAL you only pay them if you USE THEM if you can find an alternative or DO IT YOURSELF or simply abstain you do NOT have to pay them and are under NO legal obligation to pay them. Thats how the constitution of ours (whats left of it) is written.

If they want a ROAD tax for anyone that uses the road as a separate tax then we have a legislative process in place for them to enact such a tax as long as it passes constitutional muster. to try and take one tax and make it apply to someone for whom it does not apply is just crazy and they should be spanked for it.

Chris Taylor
http://www.nerys.com/

nerys · #63 03-09-2007, 09:52 PM

Aklim the point about impact is a cost evaluation. the money they do not pay (legally and legitimately) on diesel since they are NOT BUYING IT is small compared to the COST to try and hunt these people down (I guarantee you the state has ALREADY spent more taxpayer dollars going after them probably just paying those 2 agents than the tax they are likely to have spent in there lifetime on diesel fuel) PLUS the BENEFIT they produce to the state ALSO exceeds the value of that tax lost. (low fuel dependancy environmental impact both on burning veg instead of diesel (I am assuming its cleaner??) AND

Plus they simply do not owe the tax UNLESS they were buying offroad diesel. its a SALES TAX. if you do not BUY IT you do not owe the tax. Period.

Its NOT illegal to put vegetable oil in your car and they will NEVER pass a law making it illegal as there would be too big an environmental backlash. I also do not foresee them succeeding in TAXING it UNLESS your selling and distributing it.

Chris Taylor
http://www.nerys.com/

GREASY_BEAST · #64 03-09-2007, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

I am saying that if you are trying to say that the Octane Booster or Cetane Booster you put in is an additive and not to avoid road tax, you sound a lot more credible than if you call you WVO or homebrew Biodiesel an additive.

I would think that electing the correct officials would be one way. Another might be to challenge it in court.

Sorry you don't like it straight up but I can't help that. Like I said, you win some, you lose some. What's trollish about that? It didn't agree with you?

Well, if you are doing something you are unsure of, it is best to get a legal opinion, I would think.

Does the word "principle" mean anything to you? Let me ask you this. If your son stole a dollar from a rich person, is that ok with you? The rich guy probably won't notice it and it would cost him more than it is worth to prosecute you, right?

This is petty. I disagree with what you said, but that is certainly not the reason I called you a troll. I did that because you were ranting about "you should leave the country, etc..." which hardly fits the description of

Quote:

...it straight up...

Furthermore, your example of the term "principle" hardly applies because companies like Exxon-Mobil, BP, Shell, and the U.S. Government hardly fit the description of "rich people". But that aside, how am I STEALING any dollars by burning FREE vegetable oil that I PROCESS???? Who am I stealing from???? My reduced consumption of diesel hardly constitutes stealing.... I figure if I burn WVO half the time, I'm getting 50 miles per gallon of diesel fuel burned, does this mean by driving a TDI jetta is stealing? Would an even more efficient auto like an Opel eco-speedster or a Loremo (not out yet) that get over 120mpg be even more criminal? What is it you are trying to say?

aklim · #65 03-09-2007, 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nerys

Aklim the point about impact is a cost evaluation. the money they do not pay (legally and legitimately) on diesel since they are NOT BUYING IT is small compared to the COST to try and hunt these people down (I guarantee you the state has ALREADY spent more taxpayer dollars going after them probably just paying those 2 agents than the tax they are likely to have spent in there lifetime on diesel fuel)

I would suspect you are probably correct. However, like having unmarked squad cars, it does make someone else who is trying to circumvent the tax think.

Now, I know you said that the tax was simply an excise tax. I haven't found any articles that directly talk about where the fuel tax goes. AFAIK, from my conversations with people in DOT, etc, etc, the fuel tax goes to highway stuff. Here is an article that somewhat mentions it.

http://www.landlinemag.com/todays_news/Daily/2005/Aug05/082905/090205-01.html

Yes, I don't like it that the governor raided the transportation fund for other projects and to balance the budget either.

aklim · #66 03-09-2007, 11:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GREASY_BEAST

This is petty. I disagree with what you said, but that is certainly not the reason I called you a troll. I did that because you were ranting about "you should leave the country, etc..." which hardly fits the description of

Furthermore, your example of the term "principle" hardly applies because companies like Exxon-Mobil, BP, Shell, and the U.S. Government hardly fit the description of "rich people". But that aside, how am I STEALING any dollars by burning FREE vegetable oil that I PROCESS???? Who am I stealing from???? My reduced consumption of diesel hardly constitutes stealing.... I figure if I burn WVO half the time, I'm getting 50 miles per gallon of diesel fuel burned, does this mean by driving a TDI jetta is stealing? Would an even more efficient auto like an Opel eco-speedster or a Loremo (not out yet) that get over 120mpg be even more criminal? What is it you are trying to say?

Well, if you don't like it here (where sometimes you lose and sometimes you win), go to Utopia (the perfect land), is what I said.

If my understanding is wrong, and it could be, and the fuel tax is simply an excise tax only, the answer is nobody. However, if the fuel tax goes into highway, road, street, fuel tank cleanup, etc, etc, then you are making others pay for your share of the road.

GREASY_BEAST · #67 03-09-2007, 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

Well, if you don't like it here (where sometimes you lose and sometimes you win), go to Utopia (the perfect land), is what I said.

If my understanding is wrong, and it could be, and the fuel tax is simply an excise tax only, the answer is nobody. However, if the fuel tax goes into highway, road, street, fuel tank cleanup, etc, etc, then you are making others pay for your share of the road.

Hold up, so you actually believe that by driving a more fuel-efficient vehicle you are stealing from your fellow motorists? And this "stealing" is punishable under U.S. law? This is lunacy, if it is in fact what you are implying...

aklim · #68 03-09-2007, 11:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GREASY_BEAST

Hold up, so you actually believe that by driving a more fuel-efficient vehicle you are stealing from your fellow motorists? And this "stealing" is punishable under U.S. law? This is lunacy, if it is in fact what you are implying...

Not at all. You are not driving a more fuel efficient vehicle in this case. You are not switching from a 10 mpg vehicle to a 50 mpg vehicle. You are just using untaxed fuel. As I said, if it is ONLY an excise tax, that is one story. If that tax goes to fund road projects, that is another.

nerys · #69 03-10-2007, 02:37 AM

aklim you misunderstand again. its not an if its an excise tax. it by definition is. there is no wiggle room here otherwise ANYONE who did not buy fuel would be evading the tax. Since you are not breaking the law simply by not using the fuel (ride a bike or walk etc.. or take the bus or train) its an excise tax. its NOT ILLEGALY to evade this tax!!! its an OPTIONAL tax just like the EXTRA taxes on alcohol or cigarettes or luxury cars.

There is no legal or mathmatically difference between adding veg oil to your car and getting an effective 50mpg and buying a car that gets 50mpg without the veg oil. Now you are talking semantics. the result is the same they both use the SAME amount of diesel and therfore FAIRLY pay the SAME amount of diesel tax.

You can not bidirect your argument like this and retain any sense of reason. ie either works both ways or not at all.

If you can be criminalized for using veg oil to reduce your need of diesel THEN you are claiming that if you drive you MUST buy fuel to pay the tax AND that if you buy LESS than a certain mpg of fuel you are evading the tax. There is no other way around this. you can not pick half of one argument and mix it with half or another argument and then justify the results.

Veg oil is not taxed (extra tax there is sales tax off course) this is NOT the veg oil users problem - not one little tiny bit. the ONLY legal solution is for the state to add a fuel tax to veg oil (lets see how well that goes over :-) hehe

so it is NOT an untaxed fuel it is simple veg oil that your using as fuel. Calling it an untaxed fuel (as in the illegal kind of fuel) is like calling someone a tax evader for burning wood in there fireplace to heat there home instead of buying the tax heating oil. its silly. Just think about it for a moment.

"it does make someone else who is trying to circumvent the tax think."

that is your problem you think is is criminal to circumvent this tax. ITS NOT. its not an apportioned tax. its a excise or ITEM TAX if you do not purchase that item you are not evading anything. You are simply not purchasing that item. Show me the law that says my car MUST run only on taxed gasoline or diesel ? there IS a law that says you can not use the offered offroad diesel on the road. But where does it say if its not gasoline or diesel your not allowed to use it (that would outlaw all electrically driven cars BTW :-)

"If that tax goes to fund road projects, that is another"

It does not matter what the tax goes toward. Our government already consumes 100+ times more money than it needs. in a properly run government the people would come first and whatever it left would go to pay. in THIS government the money goes to pay and then the little that is left is griped about as not being enough to fix things.

This is am OPTIONAL tax. it ONLY applies to you if you BUY the fuel. period. Does not matter if you USE the roads or not does not matter where the taxes go.

Its no more illegal to put veg oil in your car to Reduce the amount of diesel you use (and also avoiding the tax as a unimportant consequence) as it is to MAKE your own toys and furniture so you can avoid paying the in store prices (and the again irrelevant in the larger picture sales tax from that lost sale)

its only tax evasion if you BUY the item in the store and then do not pay tax for it (actually the store would be the tax evader not the customer)

There are only 2 tax brackets that are mandatory in this country. Federal Taxes and State Taxes (I love how the feds have SEPARATED the federal taxes into individual federal taxes so when you calculate a refund or deductions it only effects one and not the other cute ehh most companies pull this kind of crap anymore just look at a phone or power bill)

and MOST of the time EVEN THOSE taxes are not mandatory. IE if you do not work you do not have to pay them.

The only "taxes" we have to pay for using roads that are mandatory and they also have nothing to do with the fuel used is "tolls" THOSE are use this road tax.

I love it when the PA Turnpike announce the rate hike and said its just a few cents a mile till you do the math and its an exactly 66% increase in the tolls :-) cute

Chris Taylor
http://www.nerys.com/

sophie2 · #70 03-13-2007, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nerys

Again it does not come from the gasoline - sure some of it does but most of it comes from regen. http://www.nerys.com/

Did you ever pass a high school physics class? The physics of science fiction do not work here. The regen just makes the car's use of gasoline more efficient. Electricity is only an energy carrier in this case.
Try this, fill up a non-plugin hybrid with gasoline, drive it until it runs out of gasoline. How much further will the batteries take the car on flat pavement? The batteries will soon die because regen is LESS THAN 100% efficient. Regen would need to be greater than 100% efficient (science fiction) to keep going without gasoline.
You will need to put gasoline in to go any further.

probear · #71 03-13-2007, 03:03 PM

So why haven't the guberment coin counters gone after the hybrid and electric cars? Electricity is a fuel, and just in a different form. Seems hypocritical to go after someone using WASTE V.O. when power off the grid for electric cars merely transplants the pollution. (also note that electric cars have a massive disposal problem so far)

Another argument might be the relationship of fuel to mileage. If you are going to consider this a road tax, shouldn't the tax be based on used mileage instead of an arbitrary figure based on MPG?

Things to go 'DUH' by....

nerys · #72 03-13-2007, 04:19 PM

Seriously HAVE YOU ever taken a high school physics class ?

The last time I checked to make your argument valid 0% of the distance traveled would need to be attributed to regen.

It does not have to be 100% please educate yourself before making a fool of yourself publicly.

Here is some math for you. If you turn off the IC and run on the battery lets say you can go 30 miles before depleting the battery.

Add in REGEN and you will go (out of my butt now) but lets say 40 miles.

Where did those extra 10 miles come from ? Never Never Land ?

it does NOT come from gasoline it comes from regeneration whenyou come to a stop.

it extends you range to SOME amount above and beyond what the gasoline alone could have taken you. Period.

your the one who claimed this crap about 100% no one else but you.

and anyone with half a brain knows overunity is impossible so why would you even bring that up?

the conditions are identical. he "AVOIDED" you claim a tax that is legally avoidable (just don't buy gas) by "ADDING" a certain percentage of WVO to his car.

A prius owner AVOIDS a tax buy adding a CERTAIN PERCENTAGE of electricity from regenerative braking to his car.

The conditions are IDENTICAL you just changing the means of getting the extra power one from inertia one from vegetable oil. The means is irrelevant the end result is identical.

So lets take it one step further. I RIP OUT my engine and install a battery pack and electric motor. I plug in at night.

What percentage of THAT comes from gasoline ?

oh my oh my I must be getting over 100% I am MOVING a car with NO GASOLINE

A HYBRID is just that a MIX of two types of propulsion. part gasoline propulsion part electricity propulsion.

You seem to have this screwed perception that because it HAS a gasoline portion that no matter what 100% of the motive force is one way or another attributed to that gasoline engine.

Now that your in a corner you do not want to admit your wrong so you keep stretching your story to try and make it accommodate.

the ONLY way you would have a point is if it did not have regen system AND it could not plug in. THEN all power inevitable would come from the IC engine but Toyota knows that if they did that it could not get any better economy than any other car. Physics is physics can not avoid the rules.

Regen IS like "plugging in" its the SAME thing mathematically. THE WHOLE POINT is you are now acquiring POWER from a source OTHER than the gasoline in your tank. that WHY it works at all !!!!

EVERYTIME you CONVERT POWER you LOSE some of that power. you can never have a 100% to a 100% conversion or transfer there is always a loss. so if ALL power was converted from the IC you would gain NOTHING in efficiency in fact you would more than likely LOSE some because again you can not get 100% to 100% conversion.

Double the size of the battery and enable a plug in mode and many commuters would NEVER have to use the IC in a prius. (which is exactly why they do not build them like that btw)

The point comes down to this. SOME of his power (and NOT an insignificant amount of it) is coming from sources OTHER than gasoline.

In the IL guys case the SAME situation is occuring. SOME of his power is coming from something OTHER than Gasoline (diesel) and not an insignificant amount.

so if 25% (the regen easily gives that much back in city driving probably a lot more) of your power comes from non IC your ok but if 50% comes from non IC your suddenly breaking the law ?

Show me this law please ? Would not such a law literally outlaw electric cars all together ?

Chris Taylor
http://www.nerys.com/

Rashakor · #73 03-13-2007, 04:44 PM

Another case for all of you about the taxes and internal combustion engine.
Well don't look much further than CNG cars. You can actually buy for your Civic GX a compressor at home to get the natural gas (no road tax) into the tank of your car... And that is a certified IC car yet no road tax, yet totally legal... the felony charges will be utterly dismissed in this case.

sophie2 · #74 03-13-2007, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nerys

Seriously HAVE YOU ever taken a high school physics class ?

Chris Taylor
http://www.nerys.com/

My question to you was have you ever passed a high school physics class? Answer?
I have and I passed.
A non-plugin hybrid will not work without gasoline.

I give up.

Old300D · #75 03-13-2007, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nerys

Seriously HAVE YOU ever taken a high school physics class ?

The last time I checked to make your argument valid 0% of the distance traveled would need to be attributed to regen.

It does not have to be 100% please educate yourself before making a fool of yourself publicly.

Here is some math for you. If you turn off the IC and run on the battery lets say you can go 30 miles before depleting the battery.

Add in REGEN and you will go (out of my butt now) but lets say 40 miles.

Where did those extra 10 miles come from ? Never Never Land ?

it does NOT come from gasoline it comes from regeneration whenyou come to a stop.

it extends you range to SOME amount above and beyond what the gasoline alone could have taken you. Period.

your the one who claimed this crap about 100% no one else but you.

and anyone with half a brain knows overunity is impossible so why would you even bring that up?

the conditions are identical. he "AVOIDED" you claim a tax that is legally avoidable (just don't buy gas) by "ADDING" a certain percentage of WVO to his car.

A prius owner AVOIDS a tax buy adding a CERTAIN PERCENTAGE of electricity from regenerative braking to his car.

The conditions are IDENTICAL you just changing the means of getting the extra power one from inertia one from vegetable oil. The means is irrelevant the end result is identical.

So lets take it one step further. I RIP OUT my engine and install a battery pack and electric motor. I plug in at night.

What percentage of THAT comes from gasoline ?

oh my oh my I must be getting over 100% I am MOVING a car with NO GASOLINE

A HYBRID is just that a MIX of two types of propulsion. part gasoline propulsion part electricity propulsion.

You seem to have this screwed perception that because it HAS a gasoline portion that no matter what 100% of the motive force is one way or another attributed to that gasoline engine.

Now that your in a corner you do not want to admit your wrong so you keep stretching your story to try and make it accommodate.

the ONLY way you would have a point is if it did not have regen system AND it could not plug in. THEN all power inevitable would come from the IC engine but Toyota knows that if they did that it could not get any better economy than any other car. Physics is physics can not avoid the rules.

Regen IS like "plugging in" its the SAME thing mathematically. THE WHOLE POINT is you are now acquiring POWER from a source OTHER than the gasoline in your tank. that WHY it works at all !!!!

EVERYTIME you CONVERT POWER you LOSE some of that power. you can never have a 100% to a 100% conversion or transfer there is always a loss. so if ALL power was converted from the IC you would gain NOTHING in efficiency in fact you would more than likely LOSE some because again you can not get 100% to 100% conversion.

Double the size of the battery and enable a plug in mode and many commuters would NEVER have to use the IC in a prius. (which is exactly why they do not build them like that btw)

The point comes down to this. SOME of his power (and NOT an insignificant amount of it) is coming from sources OTHER than gasoline.

In the IL guys case the SAME situation is occuring. SOME of his power is coming from something OTHER than Gasoline (diesel) and not an insignificant amount.

so if 25% (the regen easily gives that much back in city driving probably a lot more) of your power comes from non IC your ok but if 50% comes from non IC your suddenly breaking the law ?

Show me this law please ? Would not such a law literally outlaw electric cars all together ?

Chris Taylor
http://www.nerys.com/

You have made an excellent point regarding excise taxes, but please don't insult our intelligence by pretending the energy that propels a (non plug-in) hybrid doesn't come from its fuel.