What's you registration renewal cost??
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
From: San Jose, CA
FYI - The new fees start October 1, 2003, that's when the 2% VLF starts.
The increase in California Vehicle License Fees that was announced on Friday, June 20, 2003, affects vehicle registrations that become due October 1, 2003, or later. Vehicle registrations that become due before that date will be unaffected by the increase.
Vehicle owners whose registrations become due on and after October 1, 2003, cannot pay early to avoid the increase. The department mails billing notices approximately 60 days in advance of your vehicle registration expiration date.
What is the VLF and how is the amount determined?
A The VLF is part of the fee due upon initial registration and annual registration renewal. The fee is calculated at a sum equal to two percent (2%) of the purchase price of the vehicle and depreciates over an 11-year period. (Revenue and Taxation Code Section 10751-10753.2)
Dispelling the Car Tax Myths
A new tax revolt is just beginning
One of Californians' most hated taxes -- the car tax -- has been spending a lot of time on the front pages of the state's newspapers. Most Californians are aware of the car tax, technically called the Vehicle License Fee, or "VLF." Certainly most drivers are also aware, by now, that the car tax is something that is paid both when you buy a car and also once a year when you reregister. Getting that familiar envelope from DMV once a year is usually the cause of much anguish. But lately, the taxes have been more reasonable because of significant reductions in the last two years.
Now, with California in a budgetary pickle, the tax-and-spend lobby is arguing to -- once again -- increase the car tax. Thus, the debate has been heated on both sides and, in the process, truth is the first casualty. So let's clear up some myths regarding the car tax.
Myth #1: Reducing the Car Tax Was Wrong in the First Place
Before it was lowered in a series of reductions starting a few years ago, the car tax was fully 2% annually of the value of your vehicle. This was one of the highest in America. But what most Californians don't know is that, even at its current reduced rate of .65% annually, it is still the highest tax of the 5 largest states.
And let's not forget that this is not a tax that just the rich or corporations pay. In California, no one disputes that our automobiles are essential for everyday living. In short, the car tax is an onerous levy on a necessity of life. Many states do not even have a car tax. Reducing it -- even to a still high .65% -- was clearly in the public interest and a solid step toward the best outcome of all: outright repeal.
Myth #2: The Car Tax is a "Local Tax" and We Need it to Fund Local Services Like Police and Fire Protection
Under statutes passed by the Legislature, the revenue from the car tax has gone to local governments. But that requirement is not in the constitution and the Legislature has always had the power to change it at any time. It is simply that local governments have come to expect the revenue from the car tax as "their" money. (Gee, we always thought it was the taxpayers' money.)
When the California Legislature lowered the car tax -- due to the stalwart efforts of Senator Tom McClintock -- the Legislature decided to keep funding local government out of the vastly expanding state's general fund at the level it would have been had the tax rate remained at 2%. This reimbursement is called the "backfill."
What the Governor originally threatened -- but has since backed off -- is to leave the car tax reduction in place (a good idea) but stop providing the backfill to local government (a bad idea). Thus the hue and cry from local governments. However, it is important to remember that the locals are complaining about the state shutting off the backfill, not keeping the tax cut. Under no circumstances should Californians accept the blackmail from our elected officials that threatens local essential services unless the car tax is raised. The fact is, the backfill can continue to be funded by cutting waste or otherwise reduce the accelerated level of spending that got us in this mess in the first place.
Myth #3: Since the State Has a Budget Crisis, the Car Tax Has to Increase Automatically
When the car tax was reduced, everyone properly called it a "tax cut." The notice from DMV that motorists received called it a car tax reduction. Even Gray Davis took credit for cutting the car tax. So, if the tax was cut, wouldn't an increase be called an increase?
You'd think so. But now, those who want to raise the car tax claim that all we have been receiving in the last couple of years was a "rebate" that could be withdrawn if the state ever ran out of money. Okay, but who is going to raise the tax? (Or, in government lingo, "pull the trigger?") That's the $64,000 question.
In the famous words of Bart Simpson "I didn't do it, nobody saw me and you can't prove a thing." The name of every elected official in control of California ought to be Bart Simpson. After passing a bill, ABX No. 4, which purports to raise the tax, Governor Davis said he'd veto it so it was never placed on his desk. After all, he is already the most unpopular politician in America, so raising the most unpopular tax on struggling Californians would make his recall a walk in the park.
Because no one on the liberal side of the fence has the guts to raise the tax directly, various lawyers in the Governor's Department of Finance and Controller Steve Westly's Office have prepared a memo which -- surprise, surprise -- says the car tax can be raised without any bill being passed by the Legislature or signed by the Governor. You heard right: a nearly $4 billion tax increase can be jammed downed the throats of citizens without anyone taking the blame.
But here is the fatal miscalculation. The People of California will know precisely who raised their car tax -- the Governor, the Controller and the majority party in the Legislature -- and no amount of legalistic mumbo jumbo will stop citizens from holding these individuals responsible.
Nor are the People without a remedy. Both litigation and a statewide initiative are real possibilities if the car tax is raised. The other miscalculation is the underestimation of voter anger. The new tax revolt is just beginning.
More info here
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/vlf/vlf_qa.htm
The increase in California Vehicle License Fees that was announced on Friday, June 20, 2003, affects vehicle registrations that become due October 1, 2003, or later. Vehicle registrations that become due before that date will be unaffected by the increase.
Vehicle owners whose registrations become due on and after October 1, 2003, cannot pay early to avoid the increase. The department mails billing notices approximately 60 days in advance of your vehicle registration expiration date.
What is the VLF and how is the amount determined?
A The VLF is part of the fee due upon initial registration and annual registration renewal. The fee is calculated at a sum equal to two percent (2%) of the purchase price of the vehicle and depreciates over an 11-year period. (Revenue and Taxation Code Section 10751-10753.2)
Dispelling the Car Tax Myths
A new tax revolt is just beginning
One of Californians' most hated taxes -- the car tax -- has been spending a lot of time on the front pages of the state's newspapers. Most Californians are aware of the car tax, technically called the Vehicle License Fee, or "VLF." Certainly most drivers are also aware, by now, that the car tax is something that is paid both when you buy a car and also once a year when you reregister. Getting that familiar envelope from DMV once a year is usually the cause of much anguish. But lately, the taxes have been more reasonable because of significant reductions in the last two years.
Now, with California in a budgetary pickle, the tax-and-spend lobby is arguing to -- once again -- increase the car tax. Thus, the debate has been heated on both sides and, in the process, truth is the first casualty. So let's clear up some myths regarding the car tax.
Myth #1: Reducing the Car Tax Was Wrong in the First Place
Before it was lowered in a series of reductions starting a few years ago, the car tax was fully 2% annually of the value of your vehicle. This was one of the highest in America. But what most Californians don't know is that, even at its current reduced rate of .65% annually, it is still the highest tax of the 5 largest states.
And let's not forget that this is not a tax that just the rich or corporations pay. In California, no one disputes that our automobiles are essential for everyday living. In short, the car tax is an onerous levy on a necessity of life. Many states do not even have a car tax. Reducing it -- even to a still high .65% -- was clearly in the public interest and a solid step toward the best outcome of all: outright repeal.
Myth #2: The Car Tax is a "Local Tax" and We Need it to Fund Local Services Like Police and Fire Protection
Under statutes passed by the Legislature, the revenue from the car tax has gone to local governments. But that requirement is not in the constitution and the Legislature has always had the power to change it at any time. It is simply that local governments have come to expect the revenue from the car tax as "their" money. (Gee, we always thought it was the taxpayers' money.)
When the California Legislature lowered the car tax -- due to the stalwart efforts of Senator Tom McClintock -- the Legislature decided to keep funding local government out of the vastly expanding state's general fund at the level it would have been had the tax rate remained at 2%. This reimbursement is called the "backfill."
What the Governor originally threatened -- but has since backed off -- is to leave the car tax reduction in place (a good idea) but stop providing the backfill to local government (a bad idea). Thus the hue and cry from local governments. However, it is important to remember that the locals are complaining about the state shutting off the backfill, not keeping the tax cut. Under no circumstances should Californians accept the blackmail from our elected officials that threatens local essential services unless the car tax is raised. The fact is, the backfill can continue to be funded by cutting waste or otherwise reduce the accelerated level of spending that got us in this mess in the first place.
Myth #3: Since the State Has a Budget Crisis, the Car Tax Has to Increase Automatically
When the car tax was reduced, everyone properly called it a "tax cut." The notice from DMV that motorists received called it a car tax reduction. Even Gray Davis took credit for cutting the car tax. So, if the tax was cut, wouldn't an increase be called an increase?
You'd think so. But now, those who want to raise the car tax claim that all we have been receiving in the last couple of years was a "rebate" that could be withdrawn if the state ever ran out of money. Okay, but who is going to raise the tax? (Or, in government lingo, "pull the trigger?") That's the $64,000 question.
In the famous words of Bart Simpson "I didn't do it, nobody saw me and you can't prove a thing." The name of every elected official in control of California ought to be Bart Simpson. After passing a bill, ABX No. 4, which purports to raise the tax, Governor Davis said he'd veto it so it was never placed on his desk. After all, he is already the most unpopular politician in America, so raising the most unpopular tax on struggling Californians would make his recall a walk in the park.
Because no one on the liberal side of the fence has the guts to raise the tax directly, various lawyers in the Governor's Department of Finance and Controller Steve Westly's Office have prepared a memo which -- surprise, surprise -- says the car tax can be raised without any bill being passed by the Legislature or signed by the Governor. You heard right: a nearly $4 billion tax increase can be jammed downed the throats of citizens without anyone taking the blame.
But here is the fatal miscalculation. The People of California will know precisely who raised their car tax -- the Governor, the Controller and the majority party in the Legislature -- and no amount of legalistic mumbo jumbo will stop citizens from holding these individuals responsible.
Nor are the People without a remedy. Both litigation and a statewide initiative are real possibilities if the car tax is raised. The other miscalculation is the underestimation of voter anger. The new tax revolt is just beginning.
More info here
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/vlf/vlf_qa.htm
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
From: Mississippi
I bought a touring, auto, aero, mats, cargo net, alumn. kick plates 15 days ago. Paid $31,104.00 Traded in a 95 Maxima for $4400. Mississippi tax was 5% on $26,704. or $1335.21. The fees for the license plate was $313.30 (This included an offset of a few bucks for fees collected on the Maxima) I am 60, married, no accidents or tickets - paying $513.00 every six months to Progressive. $100,000 ea person - $300,00 ea acccident with $500 deductible on comprehensive & collision. Also includes a 2001 Honda accord, LX on policy.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
