As a car guy, who reads car magazines (although fewer and fewer "new car" rags over the years, so much so that I don't have a subscription of my own, but instead get stacks of those my father...
As a car guy, who reads car magazines (although fewer and fewer "new car" rags over the years, so much so that I don't have a subscription of my own, but instead get stacks of those my father subscribes to when I visit him to read when he's done) and car blogs regularly, I can say that leading an article with something completely irrelevant is pervasive in the industry and, as is the case here, is often wrong. It's so bad I typically skip the initial paragraph(s) of any article if the first sentence or two isn't immediately automobile related as I know that the author is just on some journey to make a tenuous connection, share their unrelated opinion/experience (recipe websites are notorious for this), or something else I have zero interest in that was inserted to make up for their ineloquence and hit the minimum word count to fill the requisite column inches.
It happens occasionally in sports media as well and, much to my displeasure, is a favorite style of one of the more prominent English-language sumo reporters...
Maybe it's so that vans and buses go in a separate category? If so, the point is that it's not a car, rather than that it doesn't carry passengers. (I'm not actually curious enough to look it up,...
Maybe it's so that vans and buses go in a separate category? If so, the point is that it's not a car, rather than that it doesn't carry passengers.
(I'm not actually curious enough to look it up, but you'd think people would try to understand regulations before making fun of them.)
Correct. The emissions and fuel economy regulations have always been at odds with attempts not to stifle businesses. An example is the Gas Guzzler Tax which does not apply to SUVs, pickups, or...
Maybe it's so that vans and buses go in a separate category? If so, the point is that it's not a car, rather than that it doesn't carry passengers.
Correct. The emissions and fuel economy regulations have always been at odds with attempts not to stifle businesses.
An example is the Gas Guzzler Tax which does not apply to SUVs, pickups, or vans, as when the tax act was implemented in 1978 these vehicles were rarely used for non-commercial means and the act was never amended. The act adds a tax, up to $7,700, onto the price of the vehicle if it doesn't meet certain combined MPG thresholds. Which is also outdated at this point as the MPG thresholds haven't been updated since 1991.
Congress will do anything they can to act like they're protecting some small business, farmer, or domestic manufacturing. The reality being that the tax, discussed below, would be charged to the manufacturer directly, not the consumer, and so the price of the vehicle would increase by the same amount (or more) to preserve profits and the new price would be wholly deductible as a business expense by any of the groups it's meant to protect. Instead you get every Tom, Dick, and Harriet buying SUVs and pickups they don't need, that will never be used within an iota of their potential, and always consume more resources than the vehicles they should be using, at prices that are not tenable.
These off-road/on-road/non-commercial rules sorely need to be updated, taxes need to be at the manufacturer/importer level (so it skips any chance at becoming a tax loophole for consumers), and also need to be based on weight as well as MPG.
Another example
Not related to the subject of categories of vehicles, but another tax avoidance for off-road/farms is dyed diesel fuel. This is diesel that is not taxed as it is meant for off-road use only and has been dyed red for law enforcement to easily identify if someone is using it on public roads. You'll generally only find it in rural areas unless you're in the heavy construction business.
According to what I have read, it is more about agriculture as well as about goods transport. However, the real point is that BIG vehicles are subject to less regulation in the US.
According to what I have read, it is more about agriculture as well as about goods transport. However, the real point is that BIG vehicles are subject to less regulation in the US.
Off to a bad start with a completely irrelevant and incorrect statement about hair whorl directions...
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19331448/
As a car guy, who reads car magazines (although fewer and fewer "new car" rags over the years, so much so that I don't have a subscription of my own, but instead get stacks of those my father subscribes to when I visit him to read when he's done) and car blogs regularly, I can say that leading an article with something completely irrelevant is pervasive in the industry and, as is the case here, is often wrong. It's so bad I typically skip the initial paragraph(s) of any article if the first sentence or two isn't immediately automobile related as I know that the author is just on some journey to make a tenuous connection, share their unrelated opinion/experience (recipe websites are notorious for this), or something else I have zero interest in that was inserted to make up for their ineloquence and hit the minimum word count to fill the requisite column inches.
It happens occasionally in sports media as well and, much to my displeasure, is a favorite style of one of the more prominent English-language sumo reporters...
Here is the gem:
According to the current US laws,
(So that it is subject to much looser emission standards.)
Maybe it's so that vans and buses go in a separate category? If so, the point is that it's not a car, rather than that it doesn't carry passengers.
(I'm not actually curious enough to look it up, but you'd think people would try to understand regulations before making fun of them.)
Correct. The emissions and fuel economy regulations have always been at odds with attempts not to stifle businesses.
An example is the Gas Guzzler Tax which does not apply to SUVs, pickups, or vans, as when the tax act was implemented in 1978 these vehicles were rarely used for non-commercial means and the act was never amended. The act adds a tax, up to $7,700, onto the price of the vehicle if it doesn't meet certain combined MPG thresholds. Which is also outdated at this point as the MPG thresholds haven't been updated since 1991.
Congress will do anything they can to act like they're protecting some small business, farmer, or domestic manufacturing. The reality being that the tax, discussed below, would be charged to the manufacturer directly, not the consumer, and so the price of the vehicle would increase by the same amount (or more) to preserve profits and the new price would be wholly deductible as a business expense by any of the groups it's meant to protect. Instead you get every Tom, Dick, and Harriet buying SUVs and pickups they don't need, that will never be used within an iota of their potential, and always consume more resources than the vehicles they should be using, at prices that are not tenable.
These off-road/on-road/non-commercial rules sorely need to be updated, taxes need to be at the manufacturer/importer level (so it skips any chance at becoming a tax loophole for consumers), and also need to be based on weight as well as MPG.
Another example
Not related to the subject of categories of vehicles, but another tax avoidance for off-road/farms is dyed diesel fuel. This is diesel that is not taxed as it is meant for off-road use only and has been dyed red for law enforcement to easily identify if someone is using it on public roads. You'll generally only find it in rural areas unless you're in the heavy construction business.
According to what I have read, it is more about agriculture as well as about goods transport. However, the real point is that BIG vehicles are subject to less regulation in the US.