Slashdot Mirror


NC Man Fined For Using Vegetable Oil As Fuel

mdsolar writes "The News and Observer reports on an Charlotte, NC driver who has been fined $1000 for not paying a fuel tax when he fills his tank with vegetable oil. Perhaps the funniest quote is this one: '"With the high cost of fuel right now, the department does recognize that a lot of people are looking for relief," said Reggie Little, assistant director of the motor fuel taxes division. "We're not here to hurt the small guy, we're just trying to make sure that the playing field is level."' Sure, since the field is so plainly tilted against Arab oil interests."

11 of 909 comments (clear)

  1. Hell hath NO fury by WCMI92 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Like a woman scorned?

    HARDLY.

    That pales in comparison with the fury of a government that isn't getting it's "cut".

    We truly lost our freedoms when it became accepted that the government has an inalienable right to a "cut" of ALL transactions!

    --
    Corporatism != Free Market
    1. Re:Hell hath NO fury by WCMI92 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Normally, I'm against libertarian notions like this, but this is the danger of governments. I mean, the concept is square and solid for businesses dealing in fuels, but what about average joes trying to get by with biodiesel or other forms of power?"

      Presumably taxes were paid on the stuff that made the bio fuel oil in every phase of transaction. The farmer paid taxes, the producer paid taxes, the McDonalds paid taxes, those who bought the fries fried in the oil paid taxes, etc.

      How many times should the government be able to tax one product?

      --
      Corporatism != Free Market
    2. Re:Hell hath NO fury by I_Love_Pocky! · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think you are missing the point here. All of the taxes you mentioned are different kinds of taxes for different purposes. Fuel taxes in many states are used for transportation costs like road maintenance and public transportation (which in theory reduces traffic). It's like a use tax for the road system. Why should those who choose to pursue alternative fuel sources automatically get an out on paying for the roads they are going to be driving on with that alternative fuel? I could understand a state making the choice to promote alternative fuels by giving them tax breaks, but it seems like a decision that should be made rather than assumed. At the end of the day, there are costs that those taxes are paying, and we should all pay our fair share of it. If you feel like taxes are too high, pressure your legislators to cut taxes, and programs.

  2. Re:Fair enough by timmarhy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    no, road use is what vehicle rego is for. This is just petty to the fucking extreme. i wonder how in the world he got done for it in the first place, surely not enough people are doing this for the government to have crack down on it to protect their precious taxes.

    this is all besides the fact that why is it anyones business what i use to run my car? am i dodging fuel taxes by using an electic car?

    --
    If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
  3. bad press for the state itself. by drgonzo59 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    bad press for the state itself.


    So what? The people will move out of the state because of it? Someone who has a good job, children in school and family members will decide to move because the state fined someone $2k for using unauthorized fuel? What else would happen, the state will be ranked last on 'environment friendly states' list? In other words, the state is not the same as a company, a state's bad image is harder to link to immediate loss of profits.

    1. Re:bad press for the state itself. by palewook · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A disapproving letter to a state government in 2007 will only increase the chance you end up on somebody's watch list..

  4. No mistake about it. by Rocketship+Underpant · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're absolutely right. I wish I had mod points, and I wish my friends list weren't limited to 200 names -- you deserve a spot.

    Americans have become so used to their loss of freedoms in day-to-day life, they forget how absolutely invasive and totalitarian their government has become. Want to be innovative with your fuel or save a little money? Big Brother didn't get his cut, so here's a fine for $2000, and if you do it again, we'll toss you in jail as a threat to "society". It's just like the mafia telling the new business owner on the block that he needs to pay a hefty protection fee like his neighbours do, and it would be a shame if someone burnt down his shop otherwise.

    The sad thing is, I fully expect to see many misguided Slashdotters stand up for the state here and defend this ridiculous fine.

    --
    He who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
  5. Re:Ask a long-haul Trucker about NC taxes! by polar+red · · Score: 5, Insightful

    for doing nothing. Yeah, cuz the state doesn't build roads, right ?
    --
    Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
  6. Re:Ask a long-haul Trucker about NC taxes! by ukyoCE · · Score: 5, Insightful

    IPAFTTS (I programmed a fuel tax tracking system) and this is how it works. The trucking industry is *heavily* regulated. Truckers are required to keep log books recording much of their travels. In the end, it really doesn't matter too much what state you buy gas in - it's just delaying the inevitable. You track how many miles you drive in each state, and pay fuel taxes to each state based on miles. So you can fill up 2 miles over the border in Virginia, but if you drove 1,000 miles in North Carolina this quarter, you're still required to pay North Carolina taxes on those 1,000 miles as if you bought gas there.

    The penalties for not filing your fuel taxes on time every quarter as pretty hefty too.

    Yep, it's a royal pain in the ass.

  7. Re:Many states fine you for driving with heating o by GundamFan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If a state or city institutes a tax on carbon with the expressed purpose of spending the money neutralizing the taxed emissions it won't take long before the governing body is spending those taxes on other budget items or subsidies for large businesses that have no real benefit for the people paying the "carbon tax".

    --
    I don't give a damn for a man that can only spell a word one way.
    Mark Twain
  8. Re:Many states fine you for driving with heating o by orlanz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So because I am better or more efficient at deriving value out of a service/good, I should be punished more than someone who is less efficient or worse at deriving value from the same service/good? Ok....

    As long as I am not purposely hurting others, at the end of the day, how I derive that value is really irrelavent.

    It isn't a matter of benefit, but rather a personal act of deriving. The former implies the state provides/gives unfairly more value to the rich rather than to the poor (in which case I would agree with you). Which is BS, the state doesn't provide jack. It reallocates while taking its own transaction cost cut and then some. Here, all customers are allocated the same service/good. The later (derives) implies personal action and drive to generate productive value for society from the service/good.

    If the poor guy wanted to derive more value from the infrastructure, then he should strive and struggle to do so (getting a higher paying job being just one of many options).