March_Latter t1_isq9vv6 wrote on October 17, 2022 at 10:07 PM

I agree completely. Its a sales tax on a price negotiated by two parties. What the RMV does is state that one or both parties committed fraud without a court hearing or proof. Or as the founding fathers decided "due process" I would love to see someone fight this into an actual court.

tapemeasure43 OP t1_isqzapw wrote on October 18, 2022 at 1:27 AM

Yea this just feels so shady. Their book values are more in line with dealer pricing and not private party prices. Not to mention it doesn’t take condition into account.

March_Latter t1_issg6e8 wrote on October 18, 2022 at 11:25 AM

It accuses you of being a liar without cause and takes a private companies word on it. This has no basis in law.

UniWheel t1_istrg3l wrote on October 18, 2022 at 5:17 PM

>no basis in law.

On the contrary, it's literally the text of the law imposing the tax which says that this is how the taxable value is to be determined.

Clearly you disagree with that law.

But its basis in law is the fact that it's exactly what the law says.

They could have written the law to establish a fixed tax to be paid no matter what the value of the car, too - and that would be every bit as much a valid law, if perhaps one unlikely to have passed.

March_Latter t1_isuhosa wrote on October 18, 2022 at 8:07 PM

Do you know it was only decided in 2019 that the people were fraudsters while the business engaged in car sales were clearly honest? That creates a system that lets a group claim a value while a citizen has no defense. Again. No basis in law and should be challenged. I don't care if we are in a blue state. People have rights.

UniWheel t1_isuvpvg wrote on October 18, 2022 at 9:37 PM

You have no idea what the term "basis in law" means.

Plonk.

UniWheel t1_istrbjl wrote on October 18, 2022 at 5:16 PM

> Its a sales tax on a price negotiated by two parties.

Except that it's not.

The tax is imposed by law, and the law says that the taxable value is NOT simply the purchase price, but rather the higher of the purchase price or the book value.

Clearly you disagree with the law, but it actually is the law.

March_Latter t1_isuiet8 wrote on October 18, 2022 at 8:11 PM

So the town stops by and decides your house is worth double what it truly is. They send you a bill but you get to contest it. Why is this? Because you are asking an outside group to set a price. This gives a bit of due process in case of error. In the case of the car the state wins no matter what, so no due process. It also tends to be a direct tax on the poor as its not the well off that buys these down market cars. So no only are we not allowing due process we are taxing the poor extra.

UniWheel t1_isuvd4k wrote on October 18, 2022 at 9:34 PM

You're still caught up in the idea that the tax is based on the sales price or the actual value of the car. But it's not.

According to the law, it's based on the greater of that or the book value.

You have due process, because you can inform yourself what the tax on the car is going to be before you decide to buy it. Apparently you assumed it would be based on the sales prices - that's an understandable mistake, but still a mistake of assumption contrary to the law on your part.

Now in terms of the distinct subject of excise taxes on already purchased vehicles, or property assessments, yes, the value of something you already own can go up, and long with it the taxes due. But the appropriate government process can also simply change the tax rate.

To win, you're basically going to have to show in court that you are being unfairly singled out, rather than being subjected to a policy that is the same for everyone.