Results 1 to 55 of 55

Thread: Bike Tax

  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    2,081

    Bike Tax

    $15 bike tax...congratulations Oregon. One thing we definitely need to do is tax people exercising, recreating, and cutting down on our congested roads. Wonder if mountain bike frames will incur the tax?
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    40
    Only applies to bikes over $200 with wheels 26" and larger. Cue innovative new tax-avoiding 25" wheel design?

    I'm guessing $15 on a new bike is inconsequential for anyone on this message board (esp. when compared to the cost of a decent mountain bike), but really all this does is put LBS at a further disadvantage to the big internet retailers.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OldHouseMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    3,710
    Initially it was going to be $50, $15 doesn't seem bad.

    I do wonder how much it will cost to administer the new tax?

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: piersurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    48
    25.75" plus bike sounds pretty fun to me.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    2,081
    $15 is likely inconsequential to MTBR members but perhaps not the struggling family. That walmart bike may be the spark needed for the kid to create the next MTBR member & $15 could very well mean that now $215 bike is not purchased. Besides I'd rather keep that $15 for post ride beers not to mention future taxes are likely.
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  6. #6
    meatier showers
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    7,986
    At least "the proceeds are being set aside for bicycle and pedestrian transportation projects including bicycle trails, footpaths and multi-use trails" according to Bicycle Retailer And Industry News.

    Regardless, I don't like it.
    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

    We don't quit riding because we get old.
    We get old because we quit riding.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    210
    Coming soon to a liberal state near you.... Fitness and exercise taxes.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    3,305
    Quote Originally Posted by OldHouseMan View Post
    ....I do wonder how much it will cost to administer the new tax?
    Gov't program, I'd guess about 90% of it.
    GoPro adapters for bike lights http://www.pacifier.com/~kevinb/index.html

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by Vancbiker View Post
    Gov't program, I'd guess about 90% of it.
    136.3%

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    816
    If it gets more multi-use and commuter trails built, I am all for it. I like nice well maintained bike paths - and that costs $.
    I was gonna stop by and see you, but the Jehovas witnesses came by. When they left I started drinking. Voicemail from Paul

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: racebum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,221
    you actually get something for it. you see those green bike lanes. wide shoulders and awareness.

    we pay a tax on gas to keep up the roads.

    same idea. everyone pitches in. i work a couple hours per year on trails. if everyone did that we would be set

  12. #12
    On wuss patrol
    Reputation: Glide the Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    4,955
    Quote Originally Posted by OldHouseMan View Post
    Initially it was going to be $50, $15 doesn't seem bad.

    I do wonder how much it will cost to administer the new tax?
    Budget office forecasts about $100,000 per year on $1.2 mil revenue.
    Sometimes, you need to go fast enough that the trail is a blur to find clarity. -- Wild Bill

  13. #13
    On wuss patrol
    Reputation: Glide the Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    4,955
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    $15 is likely inconsequential to MTBR members but perhaps not the struggling family. That walmart bike may be the spark needed for the kid to create the next MTBR member & $15 could very well mean that now $215 bike is not purchased. Besides I'd rather keep that $15 for post ride beers not to mention future taxes are likely.
    No Walmart bike is $200 plus.
    Sometimes, you need to go fast enough that the trail is a blur to find clarity. -- Wild Bill

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    3,305
    Quote Originally Posted by Glide the Clyde View Post
    Budget office forecasts about $100,000 per year on $1.2 mil revenue.
    They're BS'ing you. That only covers the burdened cost of 1 FTE Gov't worker. There is no Gov't program run by just 1 person.
    GoPro adapters for bike lights http://www.pacifier.com/~kevinb/index.html

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    2,081
    Quote Originally Posted by Glide the Clyde View Post
    No Walmart bike is $200 plus.
    I admittedly don't know what a Wal-Mart bike costs. My point was $15 is not insignificant to a struggling family. Perhaps we can change that example to a low end bmx bike store bike. Maybe not Portland proper but my understanding is kids bikes and merchandise is infact the bread & butter of most bike shops.

    According to interviews I've listened to on NPR at least some of the impetus for the bike tax was to make those pesky bike commuters pay their fair share. I also understand that our already high gas tax that is allocated for road projects is robbed for other pocket lining projects that have zero to do with roads.

    Bike tax is a bad pressidant. If history shows us anything there will be more taxes and they will be misspent.

    (Not singling you out fellow Clyde)
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: racebum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,221
    Quote Originally Posted by Vancbiker View Post
    They're BS'ing you. That only covers the burdened cost of 1 FTE Gov't worker. There is no Gov't program run by just 1 person.
    this is such a simple thing....why not? like i would have no problem managing it. it's not a very complex job

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: racebum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,221
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    I admittedly don't know what a Wal-Mart bike costs. My point was $15 is not insignificant to a struggling family. Perhaps we can change that example to a low end bmx bike store bike. Maybe not Portland proper but my understanding is kids bikes and merchandise is infact the bread & butter of most bike shops.

    According to interviews I've listened to on NPR at least some of the impetus for the bike tax was to make those pesky bike commuters pay their fair share. I also understand that our already high gas tax that is allocated for road projects is robbed for other pocket lining projects that have zero to do with roads.

    Bike tax is a bad pressidant. If history shows us anything there will be more taxes and they will be misspent.

    (Not singling you out fellow Clyde)
    possibly. i'm no fan of taxes anymore than the rest of you but i don't mind it as long as we actually get something for it. if this money goes to various bike trails and helps improve roadways that's a major win. when you go to bend the roads are pristine. people can easily bike commute. many portland suburbs are downright dangerous with about 6 inches of shoulder. with hillsboro being the major growth zone now biking will hopefully become part of daily life for those who can

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    816
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    (snip_

    Bike tax is a bad pressidant. If history shows us anything there will be more taxes and they will be misspent.

    (Not singling you out fellow Clyde)
    This is just my opinion - feel free to flame if you want...
    But ask yourself three questions:
    Did I vote?
    Am I involved in you local political scene?
    Did I make my voice heard when it could have made a difference in the process?

    If not, you are just bitchin' about the "gubment".
    Again, my opinion - and now I don my asbestos suit.
    I was gonna stop by and see you, but the Jehovas witnesses came by. When they left I started drinking. Voicemail from Paul

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    2,081
    Quote Originally Posted by debaucherous View Post
    This is just my opinion - feel free to flame if you want...
    But ask yourself three questions:
    Did I vote?
    Am I involved in you local political scene?
    Did I make my voice heard when it could have made a difference in the process?

    If not, you are just bitchin' about the "gubment".
    Again, my opinion - and now I don my asbestos suit.
    Yes to all the above especially the bitchin part.
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,117
    That paint is bs. The tax is a bigger joke. On US.
    Master of Laundry...Lord of Cleaning!

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    12
    I kept up with this and the $15 tax is a big improvement. The initial drafts were 5% on any bike over $500, later reduced to 3% before going to the flat $15. For me 5% or 3% on a nice mountain bike isn't chump change and it definitely would have sent me online/out of state for my next bike.

    I wrote my state rep who is on the committee that worked on this. I both complained about the initial proposals and also to put in an idea for a studded tire tax. Per https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/201...Document/55054 they do about $4mil per year in damage. Seems like a way to nudge people towards studless which have been good enough for me for years.

    In any case, I think a flat $15 is a decent compromise to assuage the "not paying their fair share" crowd and also get some money directed towards biking improvements.

    Also most state reps do some sort of email letter, some more than others. Look yours up and sign up. I even got a response to my email.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    816
    Quote Originally Posted by Tecla View Post
    I kept up with this and the $15 tax is a big improvement. The initial drafts were 5% on any bike over $500, later reduced to 3% before going to the flat $15. For me 5% or 3% on a nice mountain bike isn't chump change and it definitely would have sent me online/out of state for my next bike.
    I just moved to OR, and don't know the history of this bill.
    But, a $15 tax on a $500 bike would have sent you elsewhere?
    3% of 500 = 15
    heck 5% of 500 is only 25.
    Seems that the original tax idea of taxing those spending more than $500 was less regressive. The new version appears to punish those with less $, not those who can absorb a $15 hit with no ill effect.
    I was gonna stop by and see you, but the Jehovas witnesses came by. When they left I started drinking. Voicemail from Paul

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LargeMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    131
    Next thing you know, they will tax your, gas, cable, water, electric, car, house, property, food, clothes, phone, paycheck, insurance, and boat. At least they have not taxed the air yet or have they?

  24. #24
    Your Best Friend
    Reputation: Silentfoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,677
    Quote Originally Posted by debaucherous View Post
    I just moved to OR, and don't know the history of this bill.
    But, a $15 tax on a $500 bike would have sent you elsewhere?
    3% of 500 = 15
    heck 5% of 500 is only 25.
    Seems that the original tax idea of taxing those spending more than $500 was less regressive. The new version appears to punish those with less $, not those who can absorb a $15 hit with no ill effect.
    Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit is it?

    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
    I'm a mountain bike guide in southwest Utah

  25. #25
    meatier showers
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    7,986
    Let's hope they tax running shoes, climbing harnesses, swimsuits, parachutes, tents, sailboards, scuba tanks, hiking boots and skateboards next. Think about it. It's only fair.
    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

    We don't quit riding because we get old.
    We get old because we quit riding.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    816
    Quote Originally Posted by Silentfoe View Post
    Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit is it?

    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
    Apparently so, I have no idea what your comment is supposed to be about. You win.
    I was gonna stop by and see you, but the Jehovas witnesses came by. When they left I started drinking. Voicemail from Paul

  27. #27
    On wuss patrol
    Reputation: Glide the Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    4,955
    Quote Originally Posted by debaucherous View Post
    Apparently so, I have no idea what your comment is supposed to be about. You win.
    Do the math. Tecla said the ealier proposals of this tax were originally 5%, then 3% on bikes over $500. Take a decent $2000 mountain bike or any bike. 5% means an additional $100 in price and 3% means $60 extra, both considerably more than the settled flat $15 and that such amounts were enough to send him elsewhere.

    You asked him the question of $15 sending him elsewhere when he wasn't referring to the flat fee in that part of his argument and you assumed anyone would spend only $500 on a bike.

    Interpreted as reading comp issues.
    Sometimes, you need to go fast enough that the trail is a blur to find clarity. -- Wild Bill

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: k2rider1964's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    2,377
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparticus View Post
    At least "the proceeds are being set aside for bicycle and pedestrian transportation projects including bicycle trails, footpaths and multi-use trails" according to Bicycle Retailer And Industry News.

    Regardless, I don't like it.
    =sParty
    Yeah.....you wish. California has been collecting "green/red sticker fees" for off road motorcycles for as long as I can remember and I'm over 50 so a LONNGG time. That money was **supposed** to be used for the acquisition of new riding areas and the maintenance of other areas already in the system. Instead, it has been used a slush fund for other programs that have nothing today with off road riding. They have used more money to CLOSE areas that they have to Aquire new areas. It's a total scam.
    2017 Intense Primer
    2016 Santa Cruz 5010

  29. #29
    On wuss patrol
    Reputation: Glide the Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    4,955
    Quote Originally Posted by k2rider1964 View Post
    Yeah.....you wish. It's a total scam.
    Ahhh, come on! Oregon is going to be totally different this time, heading on a new trajectory with this so the public trust can finally be re-established.

    Skeptical much? 😜
    Sometimes, you need to go fast enough that the trail is a blur to find clarity. -- Wild Bill

  30. #30
    Your Best Friend
    Reputation: Silentfoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,677
    Quote Originally Posted by Glide the Clyde View Post
    Do the math. Tecla said the ealier proposals of this tax were originally 5%, then 3% on bikes over $500. Take a decent $2000 mountain bike or any bike. 5% means an additional $100 in price and 3% means $60 extra, both considerably more than the settled flat $15 and that such amounts were enough to send him elsewhere.

    You asked him the question of $15 sending him elsewhere when he wasn't referring to the flat fee in that part of his argument and you assumed anyone would spend only $500 on a bike.

    Interpreted as reading comp issues.
    Exactly. He sees $500 and assumes that's what the poster would spend on a bike, when that's not what he said at all. Reading comprehension. He said " For me 5% or 3% on a nice mountain bike isn't chump change". There are no numbers here saying how much. For my last bike I spent $8500. At 3% that would have been $255. That's a lot and enough to send me to an online retailer.
    Quote Originally Posted by Glide the Clyde View Post
    Do the math. Tecla said the ealier proposals of this tax were originally 5%, then 3% on bikes over $500. Take a decent $2000 mountain bike or any bike. 5% means an additional $100 in price and 3% means $60 extra, both considerably more than the settled flat $15 and that such amounts were enough to send him elsewhere.

    You asked him the question of $15 sending him elsewhere when he wasn't referring to the flat fee in that part of his argument and you assumed anyone would spend only $500 on a bike.

    Interpreted as reading comp issues.

    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
    I'm a mountain bike guide in southwest Utah

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,117
    Don't misuse a great word like the rest of the idiots. Maybe target "elite" next.
    Master of Laundry...Lord of Cleaning!

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    816
    Quote Originally Posted by Silentfoe View Post
    Exactly. He sees $500 and assumes that's what the poster would spend on a bike, when that's not what he said at all. Reading comprehension. He said " For me 5% or 3% on a nice mountain bike isn't chump change". There are no numbers here saying how much. For my last bike I spent $8500. At 3% that would have been $255. That's a lot and enough to send me to an online retailer.

    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
    I clearly did not make my regressive tax point very elegantly.
    I was gonna stop by and see you, but the Jehovas witnesses came by. When they left I started drinking. Voicemail from Paul

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    3,305
    Quote Originally Posted by debaucherous View Post
    ......Seems that the original tax idea of taxing those spending more than $500 was less regressive. The new version appears to punish those with less $, not those who can absorb a $15 hit with no ill effect.
    I hate this type mindset. The tax is supposed to pay for some kind of "improvements" for cyclists. So because I have money, should I pay more for those improvements than someone with less money? Will I get to use them more? Will my improvements be better than those that did not pay as much? We're not buying seats at a Blazers game here. If there has to be a tax, the flat fee is the most equitable for the user group.
    GoPro adapters for bike lights http://www.pacifier.com/~kevinb/index.html

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: twd953's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    545
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparticus View Post
    At least "the proceeds are being set aside for bicycle and pedestrian transportation projects including bicycle trails, footpaths and multi-use trails"
    So, since this tax was passed because "bicyclists don't pay their fare share" to use the roads, why should the tax money from bicycle sales be used to fund pedestrian and footpath projects?

    Does that mean cyclists can know scream at hikers and equestrians to "get the F#&^ off the trail, you don't pay your fair share!" ?

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    2,081
    Does anybody know of a specific project the new bike tax will fund?
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: twd953's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    545
    Quote Originally Posted by Glide the Clyde View Post
    Ahhh, come on! Oregon is going to be totally different this time, heading on a new trajectory with this so the public trust can finally be re-established.

    Skeptical much? 😜
    I'm sure the state bureaucrats that so skillfully managed to piss away more than $300 million on a failed healthcare exchange website that never worked, will come up nothing but aces when they administer this program.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    2,081
    Quote Originally Posted by twd953 View Post
    I'm sure the state bureaucrats that so skillfully managed to piss away more than $300 million on a failed healthcare exchange website that never worked, will come up nothing but aces when they administer this program.
    Let us not forget the $175 million spent on the Columbia River Crossing that got exactly nothing.

    That is the main jist of the thread, will this tax amount to anything good for us cyclists?
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  38. #38
    meatier showers
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    7,986
    Quote Originally Posted by twd953 View Post
    So, since this tax was passed because "bicyclists don't pay their fare share" to use the roads, why should the tax money from bicycle sales be used to fund pedestrian and footpath projects?

    Does that mean cyclists can know scream at hikers and equestrians to "get the F#&^ off the trail, you don't pay your fair share!" ?
    Tax horseshoes.
    =s

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    3,305
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    .......That is the main jist of the thread, will this tax amount to anything good for us cyclists?
    IMO, not much chance of that. It'll just fund a couple new positions in the dept. of revenue.
    Last edited by Vancbiker; 07-10-2017 at 02:14 PM. Reason: clean up wording
    GoPro adapters for bike lights http://www.pacifier.com/~kevinb/index.html

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: iRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,729
    Quote Originally Posted by Vancbiker View Post
    I hate this type mindset. The tax is supposed to pay for some kind of "improvements" for cyclists. So because I have money, should I pay more for those improvements than someone with less money? Will I get to use them more? Will my improvements be better than those that did not pay as much? We're not buying seats at a Blazers game here. If there has to be a tax, the flat fee is the most equitable for the user group.
    It should be a tax, not a user fee. The strong take more of a share than the weak. Pretty simple concept, isn't it?
    Not living in OR anymore I can only tell you how cheap bikes are around your parts, especially considering that there is no sales tax (here 25%).

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    931
    Quote Originally Posted by k2rider1964 View Post
    Yeah.....you wish. California has been collecting "green/red sticker fees" for off road motorcycles for as long as I can remember and I'm over 50 so a LONNGG time. That money was **supposed** to be used for the acquisition of new riding areas and the maintenance of other areas already in the system. Instead, it has been used a slush fund for other programs that have nothing today with off road riding. They have used more money to CLOSE areas that they have to Aquire new areas. It's a total scam.
    If you only use your dirt bike or quad on private property, you can file PNO and avoid the annual fee. (Talking about California)

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    3,305
    Quote Originally Posted by iRider View Post
    It should be a tax, not a user fee. The strong take more of a share than the weak. Pretty simple concept, isn't it?
    Of course it's a simple concept, it just is not fair.

    Any service that is the same for all users should have an equal cost. Pretty simple concept isn't it?

    The "strong" already shoulder the larger share than the "weak". Income tax takes care of that already for Oregon. States with sales taxes also benefit as those with more money also usually spend more than those with less.

    Work to become a highly compensated worker. Pay in big money. See how it feels. You'll change your tune.
    GoPro adapters for bike lights http://www.pacifier.com/~kevinb/index.html

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    816
    Quote Originally Posted by Vancbiker View Post
    <snip>

    Work to become a highly compensated worker. Pay in big money. See how it feels. You'll change your tune.
    Been there, done that. Retired by 50. Still the same tune for me. IMHO, there are things that the community should do together - and those with resources should help more. Helping make better, safer non-car commuting options is something worthwhile. I believe in that and will continue to support.

    We disagree on regressive taxation issues. That is OK - at least we're having reasonable discussions.
    I was gonna stop by and see you, but the Jehovas witnesses came by. When they left I started drinking. Voicemail from Paul

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Rated R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    90
    Oregon's government has it head in its ass. We get the government we deserve...

  45. #45
    meatier showers
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    7,986
    Quote Originally Posted by debaucherous View Post
    Been there, done that. Retired by 50. Still the same tune for me. IMHO, there are things that the community should do together - and those with resources should help more. Helping make better, safer non-car commuting options is something worthwhile. I believe in that and will continue to support.

    We disagree on regressive taxation issues. That is OK - at least we're having reasonable discussions.
    I disagree with the "have more, pay more" philosophy as respects this subject as well. Got more money and believe you should pay more? Great! Then donate. But I'm not at all in favor of paying a tax on bicycles, period. Or running shoes. Or horseshoes. Or javelins. Or soccer balls. Or any sporting equipment. No tax on that! Taxing human powered machines... think about it. It makes no sense whatsoever. Instead of resisting this awful tax, we're arguing among ourselves about how much is the right amount. I imagine the bureaucrats are reading this and chuckling over their drinks at $1000/plate fundraiser dinners. Are we fools? A tax on bicycles... I'm gagging on that bitter pill. Seriously, think about it. It is utterly stupid in all respects. I cannot believe I'm reading some of the comments in this thread.
    Tax people who camp in the passing lane in their Hummers. Tax idiots. Tax the cardboard sign holders on streetcorners. Tax aftermarket high performance pickup exhaust systems. ANYthing but bicycles. And yoga pants. Don't tax yoga pants.
    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

    We don't quit riding because we get old.
    We get old because we quit riding.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    107
    Unless this is going to fund trails or advocacy for the usage the bike will see I am again this tax. Mountain bikes pay for off road trails. Road bikes pay for bikes lanes.

    You guys should look up the Pittman-Robertson tax. It's a pretty good example of a tax similar to this being put to good use.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    816
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparticus View Post
    I disagree with the "have more, pay more" philosophy as respects this subject as well. Got more money and believe you should pay more? Great! Then donate. But I'm not at all in favor of paying a tax on bicycles, period. Or running shoes. Or horseshoes. Or javelins. Or soccer balls. Or any sporting equipment. No tax on that! Taxing human powered machines... think about it. It makes no sense whatsoever. Instead of resisting this awful tax, we're arguing among ourselves about how much is the right amount. I imagine the bureaucrats are reading this and chuckling over their drinks at $1000/plate fundraiser dinners. Are we fools? A tax on bicycles... I'm gagging on that bitter pill. Seriously, think about it. It is utterly stupid in all respects. I cannot believe I'm reading some of the comments in this thread.
    Tax people who camp in the passing lane in their Hummers. Tax idiots. Tax the cardboard sign holders on streetcorners. Tax aftermarket high performance pickup exhaust systems. ANYthing but bicycles. And yoga pants. Don't tax yoga pants.
    =sParty
    I can't follow the logic of "don't tax human powered machines machines" - that premise is absurdly flawed. A tire pump wouldn't be taxed, but a compressor would? That would be an administrative nightmare that WOULD cost more than the tax collected.

    If you hate the tax so much offer up a logical and responsible method to help pay for non-motorized paths. Convince me, and others that this sort of infrastructure is a waste. If we want safe, well maintained infrastructure, we have to pay for it.

    Or, if you just don't want to pay any tax, consider convincing people that multi-use paths are a waste...

    Ultimately, expensive bikes are a luxury item, I'd rather tax luxury items than things people need to survive. (please see the word expensive in that sentence.)

    Again, just my opinion.
    I was gonna stop by and see you, but the Jehovas witnesses came by. When they left I started drinking. Voicemail from Paul

  48. #48
    meatier showers
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    7,986
    Quote Originally Posted by debaucherous View Post
    I can't follow the logic of "don't tax human powered machines machines" - that premise is absurdly flawed. A tire pump wouldn't be taxed, but a compressor would? That would be an administrative nightmare that WOULD cost more than the tax collected.

    If you hate the tax so much offer up a logical and responsible method to help pay for non-motorized paths. Convince me, and others that this sort of infrastructure is a waste. If we want safe, well maintained infrastructure, we have to pay for it.

    Or, if you just don't want to pay any tax, consider convincing people that multi-use paths are a waste...

    Ultimately, expensive bikes are a luxury item, I'd rather tax luxury items than things people need to survive. (please see the word expensive in that sentence.)

    Again, just my opinion.
    Can't blame you for questioning my logic after reading my comments. I admit I'd thrown a couple drinks back before knee jerk emotions took over. Regardless, I feel the same about taxing bikes after waking up this morning. But hopefully slightly less likely to spout off recklessly.

    Yeah, it makes sense to tax expensive things (as opposed to necessities) and sadly, quality bicycle are expensive. However I'm not in favor of any new tax that is not absolutely necessary. And I'm not convinced this one is.

    Even if it is necessary, I'd still oppose taxing bikes before a zillion other things that pollute or don't contribute to peoples' good health or aren't a beneficial alternative mode of transportation, etc. I mean, taxing bikes is like taxing public transportation. Isn't the state supposed to encourage its residents to employ alternative forms of transportation? This new tax is simply another disincentive to utilize bikes, although I admit a minor one.

    Seriously if Oregon really needs the money, I'd prefer to see the state increase gas tax by .00001% as doing so would probably generate 100 times what the new $15/bike tax will produce.

    I just don't think it's right to tax health-centric, alternative forms of transportation, particularly human powered ones. Honestly I'd prefer the state find a way to incentivize bicycling, not disincentivize it through a user fee or tax.

    Tax power boats or studded tires or gasoline (I know gas tax is already high) or apply some other form of sin tax (liquor, gambling, pot, whatever).

    I've done over 90 hours of trailwork in the past ten months and I'm not saying this as a brag. It's really not that much. I'm just saying that I do give back, just in a different way. A way I much prefer over giving more of my hard earned money to the state. $15 won't even buy dinner out these days so it's not like it's a ton of money. In fact it ain't about the money. It's about taxing bicycles. It sends the wrong message. It's the wrong thing for the State of Oregon to do.

    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

    We don't quit riding because we get old.
    We get old because we quit riding.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: racebum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,221
    i agree with that. it was my objection too. i don't like the idea of taxing health conscious things. a tax on bikes over 5k like a luxury tax. maybe.

    they are in a tough place especially since we have republicans in office that want to do nothing besides grow the military & play empire america along with tax cuts for the wealthy. a lot of middle class programs are under attack and i would not be surprised to see more federal funding dry up in other areas we enjoy day to day

  50. #50
    Metalheadbikerider
    Reputation: free-agent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,753
    Wanna get the Oregon MTBR board back from the ashes? Start a thread about taxes! Nothing gets Oregonians more fired up than those pesky taxes.
    Support mtb'ing in the Portland area, join NWTA with your dollars, hands, and/or voice. nw-trail.org

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OldHouseMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    3,710
    I think I'm going to start purchasing bikes from the chop shops on the streets.

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    219
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparticus View Post
    I disagree with the "have more, pay more" philosophy as respects this subject as well. Got more money and believe you should pay more? Great! Then donate. But I'm not at all in favor of paying a tax on bicycles, period. Or running shoes. Or horseshoes. Or javelins. Or soccer balls. Or any sporting equipment. No tax on that! Taxing human powered machines... think about it. It makes no sense whatsoever. Instead of resisting this awful tax, we're arguing among ourselves about how much is the right amount. I imagine the bureaucrats are reading this and chuckling over their drinks at $1000/plate fundraiser dinners. Are we fools? A tax on bicycles... I'm gagging on that bitter pill. Seriously, think about it. It is utterly stupid in all respects. I cannot believe I'm reading some of the comments in this thread.
    Tax people who camp in the passing lane in their Hummers. Tax idiots. Tax the cardboard sign holders on streetcorners. Tax aftermarket high performance pickup exhaust systems. ANYthing but bicycles. And yoga pants. Don't tax yoga pants.
    =sParty
    I like your thinking. Checkout Pinkbike for more stupid comments on this subject

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    219
    Quote Originally Posted by k2rider1964 View Post
    Yeah.....you wish. California has been collecting "green/red sticker fees" for off road motorcycles for as long as I can remember and I'm over 50 so a LONNGG time. That money was **supposed** to be used for the acquisition of new riding areas and the maintenance of other areas already in the system. Instead, it has been used a slush fund for other programs that have nothing today with off road riding. They have used more money to CLOSE areas that they have to Aquire new areas. It's a total scam.
    Exactly!

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    219
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    Does anybody know of a specific project the new bike tax will fund?
    I heard the Governors Mansion needed bicycle parking

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,117
    Just pick up a pile of the garbage that always seems to "collect" wherever this type of street business occurs.
    Master of Laundry...Lord of Cleaning!

Similar Threads

  1. Tax Refund bike
    By trucha in forum Bike and Frame discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-21-2013, 07:00 PM
  2. Replies: 22
    Last Post: 03-04-2013, 02:21 PM
  3. Tax Return = New Bike for Me!
    By Les Bill in forum Bike and Frame discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-16-2012, 07:31 PM
  4. Bike Parts from EU - Tax or not to Canada?
    By phlegm in forum Eastern Canada
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 08-04-2011, 02:07 PM
  5. Avoiding import tax when bringing a bike from the USA
    By Steve71 in forum Australia, New Zealand
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-31-2011, 09:10 AM

Members who have read this thread: 119

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •