So I've dealt with the Automotive Personal Property tax for a while, ever since it became standard in VA and every year it's irritated me as it's based on KBB auto value and not actual value or sale/purchase value.
For example, I recently purchased a used car for $28K and it's assessed at $34k by KBB, but these cars don't sell for that price. When registering with the DMV I paid sales tax on the purchase price of the car ($28k), not the KBB value, why aren't the tax assessments done the same way? I'm not a fan of paying ~$6k more in taxes and I know others have this problem.
Anyone want to attempt to take this to the next level and petition the system or other ideas on how we can accurately be taxed on personal property?
Problem: I purchased a used car for $1. KBB is something like $900.
(Your proposed system would be stupidly easy to cheat.)
Mine's way lower than the value, because my car has very low mileage.
One could argue that the Va PPT on cars hurts the local auto industry. I know I've hesitated upgrading to a newer car partly on that basis.
Swag said:
Problem: I purchased a used car for $1. KBB is something like $900.
(Your proposed system would be stupidly easy to cheat.)
I've thought of that, but that's how the state does Sales Tax on a vehicle, they base it on faith (and a Bill of Sale), so why not just use the Bill of Sale that is used to determine how much you're taxed for Sales Tax for Personal Property Tax as well?
They're both taxes, they should have a common system to ensure you're taxed for what you payed, not what market value is (which usually isn't what market value is).
Tabby_TwoTone said:
Mine's way lower than the value, because my car has very low mileage.
One could argue that the Va PPT on cars hurts the local auto industry. I know I've hesitated upgrading to a newer car partly on that basis.
Pretty sure Personal Property Tax doesn't factor in the mileage of your vehicle, it's just based on the year and model.
I have a better idea:
Do away with the PPT and replace it with NOTHING.
Gov. Gilmore (1999-2003, I think) was elected by promising to eliminate this tax. (Some of his supporters were so dumb that they thought the tax was abolished on election day and called to complain about their tax bills).
Then reality set it. The localities didn't want to lose the revenue and didn't want to raise other taxes to replace it. So the state promised to reimburse them, with state tax revenue. The net tax burden would drop by zero.
The tax was to be dropped in phases, but the economy tanked in the early 2000s and revenue dropped, so they canceled the last cut.
LP said:
Swag said:
Problem: I purchased a used car for $1. KBB is something like $900.
(Your proposed system would be stupidly easy to cheat.)
I've thought of that, but that's how the state does Sales Tax on a vehicle, they base it on faith (and a Bill of Sale), so why not just use the Bill of Sale that is used to determine how much you're taxed for Sales Tax for Personal Property Tax as well?
They're both taxes, they should have a common system to ensure you're taxed for what you payed, not what market value is (which usually isn't what market value is).
Because you pay the personal property tax every year, not just when you buy the car.
That's a valid point.
However, I still think the initial PPT should be based on sales price and then a standard depreciation is used based on that figure for each year. While this may not be an exact science, I think it's better than being taxed on a value that wasn't accurate from day 1.
LP said:
That's a valid point.
However, I still think the initial PPT should be based on sales price and then a standard depreciation is used based on that figure for each year. While this may not be an exact science, I think it's better than being taxed on a value that wasn't accurate from day 1.
It's much easier to use bluebook than to get you to send in and verify your bill of sale and do the calculations each year. Fewer disputes too.
LP, of course. That was my point.
And on Gilmore's fake promise to end the tax: I knew a lot of people who voted for him based on that lie.
My beef is that a large SUV, such as a Toyota Highlander, has a lower PPT liability in Arlington than a mid-size sedan, which gets better FE in the city and highway.
BreakPause02 said:
My beef is that a large SUV, such as a Toyota Highlander, has a lower PPT liability in Arlington than a mid-size sedan, which gets better FE in the city and highway.
Never thought of that, but you're absolutely right. If ARL is so green-minded, they should skew PPT for efficiency. Base it on city mpg (b/c that's what we all drive), and maybe use 20 as the base. Get 20 mpg = pay normal tax. Get 30+, pay half. Get 10? Pay double. I like it.
But KBB's fine. Who really cares if yours is actually worth a bit more or less. Administering prices for every individual owner rather than every make/model/year (which somebody ELSE does, BTW) would be a huge burden on the County and money wasted IMHO.
Wanna pay less PPT? Buy a cheaper car. I personally love this system because where I lived before we had a local income tax. The only way to pay less was to make less. Here they essentially let you choose your own tax rate, and I think that's awesome.
71°
Partly Cloudy
