Tax Breaks For Hummers

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (40 of them)

What the reporter fails to mention is that every model purchased under this deduction plan is actually rigged with high explosive substances in the undercarriage!

― Allyzay, Tuesday, 2 March 2004 03:45 (twenty years ago) link

you gotta stop them, k.

crosspost

― RJG (RJG), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 03:45 (twenty years ago) link

I have every intention of doing so, R.

― kirsten (kirsten), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 03:46 (twenty years ago) link

the hopes it would encourage businesses to invest in new equipment sooner

in other words it's not aimed at joe q rich buying a hummer, it's aimed at the contractor or pool guy who wants a new f150 or the shipping company that wants a new semi and so on and so forth.

― vahid (vahid), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 03:48 (twenty years ago) link

Crony Capitalists get along

The article doesn't note that troops in Iraq are driving around in non-armored civilian Hummers.

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 03:48 (twenty years ago) link

it will cost the country about $1.5 billion in tax revenue.

How is a tax break that encourages businesses to spend thousands of dollars they otherwise wouldn't have costing $1.5 billion in revenue. That's like the RIAA saying every album downloaded is costing them $15.

― Stuart (Stuart), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 03:50 (twenty years ago) link

Are there any european or asian manufacturers producing passenger vehicles over 6000 pounds?

Thank you

― TOMBOT, Tuesday, 2 March 2004 03:51 (twenty years ago) link

A new F-150 wouldn't qualify, as the weight isn't high enough (or at least mine sits at ~4500 pounds). A new F-150, unless you're getting one of those ridiculous and useless for work models, would have been covered by the old $25k anyway.

I understand what your local politician would claim is the reason, but that's bullshit. If it was, then they would have written the law to be slightly restrictive (ie "you ain't buying a Hummer to make your kids love you and/or your girlfriend fuck you because they're useless")

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 03:52 (twenty years ago) link

That is so wrong that I can't believe it's true. Also, is there really a vehicle called the Dodge Durango? And in what scenario would your business require one as a vital piece of new equipment?

We use a lot of 4 wheel drives and atvs, and we move a lot of stuff around, but have never been stymied for want of a hummer.

― isadora (isadora), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 03:52 (twenty years ago) link

well, stuart, the federal taxes those businesses are going to be paying on the equipment they purchase may not add up to be more than the tax rebate they are getting for purchasing that equipment!

― vahid (vahid), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 03:53 (twenty years ago) link

Those cars are bigger than most apartments in Tokyo!

(milo is otm)

― Allyzay, Tuesday, 2 March 2004 03:53 (twenty years ago) link

isadora do you know any contractors or plumbers or pool maintenance men??

― vahid (vahid), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 03:53 (twenty years ago) link

(milo i don't really know cars well enough but i'm assuming the hummer isn't the only car you can get this tax break on)

― vahid (vahid), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 03:54 (twenty years ago) link

I DO I DO I DO! (I'm one out of three myself)

None of them are using Hummers. None of them are rolling in Escalades with dubs. Most of them aren't driving anything that was made in the last decade.

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 03:55 (twenty years ago) link

Nor is the tax break going to make Joe Plumber able to afford a new vehicle. He has to have the, you know, purchase price first.

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 03:56 (twenty years ago) link

If you're going to pay 30% on $50,000 if you don't spend it, and 0% if you do spend it, then a $50,000 vehicle is only costing you $35,000.

― Stuart (Stuart), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 03:57 (twenty years ago) link

But the point is that this isn't really benefitting the people they're saying this is benefitting at all, in fact I will just start calling this the "Ludacris Tax Break" because who the hell buys an Escalade to do labor? POLITIK SPIN SHOCKER NEXT ON NY1.

― Allyzay, Tuesday, 2 March 2004 04:02 (twenty years ago) link

http://ox.eicat.ca/~scarruthers/ilx/bushfiddle.jpg

― Sean Carruthers (SeanC), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 04:04 (twenty years ago) link

Wow.

― Allyzay, Tuesday, 2 March 2004 04:04 (twenty years ago) link

And you can feel free to quote me on that.

― Sean Carruthers (SeanC), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 04:06 (twenty years ago) link

I just love how the Hummer is going headfirst into the burning wilderness, I can actually see that on a car ad with the tiny disclaimer "PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS ON STUNT COURSE" underneath it and honestly it worries me that I don't think it's odd to think of an actual advertisement occuring in which someone drives straight into the pits of hell.

While, like, Andrew WK plays over it.

― Allyzay, Tuesday, 2 March 2004 04:07 (twenty years ago) link

how about a tow truck? would that count??

― vahid (vahid), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 04:07 (twenty years ago) link

I imagine so, but I also imagine that you can find one or two instances of ANYTHING EVER IN THE ENTIRE WORLD working in a way that is beneficial to someone if you want to be a pedant.

― Allyzay, Tuesday, 2 March 2004 04:13 (twenty years ago) link

That's the point, vahid - it's fine and well to write a tax break that lets a small business buy a new tow truck. Writing a tax break so broadly that Joe Yuppie can use business funds to buy a Hummer so he can look cool with his kids is severely fucked up.

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 04:13 (twenty years ago) link

If anyone knows a contractor using Escalades for work, please e-mail me their phone number, as I'm willing to switch companies.

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 04:14 (twenty years ago) link

Well, more broadly, this is how SUVs got by in the first place. They're allowed lower mpg ratings because (by virtue of their size) they're classified as trucks, and trucks were allowed lower mpgs because they were (allegedly, at the time) mostly used by farmers and other small businessmen upon whom the extra $500 or $1,000 per vehicle (or whatever it would cost to produce slightly less noxious modes of transportation) would have been an economic hardship. Nobody even bothers to pretend that SUVs are mostly driven by farmers or people actually hauling business-related materials (5-year-olds don't count as business-related unless you're involved in businesses of a dubious ethical and legal nature), but now that half the country drives them, it's not really in anyone's interest bump the standards back up. Which is why American automobiles now have the lowest average mpg since the Carter era.

On the other hand, I got to ride around Montreal and Vermont in an Escalade last summer, and I admit I loved watching people's faces (out the tinted windows) as we cruised by; the mixture of disgust, envy and bafflement was kind of intoxicating. And I could enjoy it guilt-free since I was just a guest. Or so I told myself, drinking beer in the back seat.

― spittle (spittle), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 09:07 (twenty years ago) link

When I am king, Hummer owners will be the first against the wall. And it will be slow. One hour for every gallon of gas they used.

― Speedy (Speedy Gonzalas), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 09:55 (twenty years ago) link

Crudders I kiss you many times.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 14:36 (twenty years ago) link

I do not know any pool maintenance men (and with this admission I exclude myself from ever making a valid point in any political/enviromental/economic debate)

― isadora (isadora), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 20:05 (twenty years ago) link

It would be cool if the tax break for hummers had nothing to do with automobiles.

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 20:14 (twenty years ago) link

Nickalicious OTM

― Donna Brown (Donna Brown), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 20:50 (twenty years ago) link

why hasn't anyone made the obvious joke yet?

― Ian Johnson (orion), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 21:16 (twenty years ago) link

ha ha

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 21:17 (twenty years ago) link

Because no joke is as funny as the cosmic one that keeps being played on people that care about the Earth.

― Speedy (Speedy Gonzalas), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 21:21 (twenty years ago) link

and this is why i come here

― Felonious Drunk (Felcher), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 21:22 (twenty years ago) link

I know a pool maintenance company owner, and his work truck is a Chevy Silverado -- far cry from a Hummer. The point is spot-on: who the shit buys a Hummer as their work vehicle??

― Clarke B. (Clarke B.), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 22:06 (twenty years ago) link

well, people who own business licenses can buy whatever they want. I don't see how this law could be written to exclude certain vehicles. It's a loophole and a stupid one, the law is well-intentioned, but I don't know that it's done anything to stimulate the economy as intended.

― anthony kyle monday (akmonday), Tuesday, 2 March 2004 22:11 (twenty years ago) link

seven months pass...

WOOHOO, my picture above made Congress reconsider this tax break!

Congress moves to close SUV tax loophole

― Sean Carruthers (SeanC), Thursday, 7 October 2004 20:29 (nineteen years ago) link

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.