I'd have to work it out on paper. No way I'm spending $1 to save .60 cents.

How would the write off compare to like a base Suburban, vs a loaded Escalade?

I hate that word, loophole. Congress wrote the law to allow for the deduction and that's not a loophole. When the legeslature writes a new law and doesn't include some provision, that's not a loophole.

I would like to see Congress write laws that apply equally to everyone as the 14th amendment says they should. The tax code could the reduced to a few pages. No more 'targeted tax cuts'.

The tax credit isn't just for Hummers, it's for any vehicle over 6000#. They have just nicknamed it the Hummer bill.

Unless you wanted to buy something anyway. Then it's saving .40 on the dollar if you make the "right" choice.

Bing! You win the economics prize. Most people don't know what a deduction/write-off is in the first place. As a business owner, I can tell you that only morons (whether business-owners or not) go out to buy a Hummer or the like just so they can get the deduction. It's stupid economics.

What you SUV haters want to limit is the mom who buys a Hummer to drive her kids around. And to you, I say - mind your own business. When it becomes uneconomical for her to drive it, she'll sell it at a major loss. Until then, no one tells you what you can drive, therefore...

X3

Maybe, maybe not. Maybe they will use it as their personal car and also get themselves into a lower bracket via a business loss. Anyways, stupid business owners don't stay in business long unless they wise up so it will be "survival of the fittest" again.

She'll sell it at a major loss and I will pick it up then for a song if I can do something with it. Why not? Works for me. Found out later that my Excursion was bought by someone who found out that they didn't like the 7.3 diesel and wanted something more economical like the 6.0 diesel. Well, we both know that upgrading will save you some fuel but it won't pay for you to switch since the cost of the new vehicle is more than what you will save. Since she wanted to sell and didn't know much about vehicles, good for me, bad for her.

The smart way to address this issue is to leave the credit in place, but to limit it to those who operate a business that falls under a specific listing of NAICS codes. I really don't have a problem with a farmer receiving a tax break on an F-350, but I don't really see a compelling reason for my insurance agent to receive a tax break on his Yukon XL Denali.

Smarter way is to have the govt leave it alone. The more they do, the worse things get. Therefore, I would rather vote for someone who has more modest aims than someone who says that they will do all these things once they get into office.

Who cares what break some other stoke gets if he springs for a highly depreciating vehicle? More power to them. The only ones who are going to get hurt by this is the long suffering small farmer.....

that's it I'm moving to Cuba.

Don't tell Ernesto..........:eek:

All of these tax breaks distort rational economic decisionmaking, since the government is stepping in and handing out candy to people it thinks are the "right" people doing the "right" things.

Why should the federal government be giving a tax break to ANYONE based on what vehicle they drive?

Besides, I think that it is fundamentally offensive to use the tax code as a cheap-and-dirty source of social engineering (and political payola to the Detroit automakers, in this case).

-- Bokonon

.........so that they can influence the move to smaller vehicles and reduce gasoline consumption..........:confused:

.........or not..........

Okay. But I am enough of a fiscal conservative and libertarian that I don't think the government ought to be boosting car choices with tax breaks. Particularly perverse tax breaks that favor (and subsidize) consumption.

To paraphrase Barry Goldwater, a government that hands out tax benefits based on the type of car you drive won't be shy about TELLING you what kind of car you can drive.