Join the discussion on the following article:
Appeals court rules Alabama discriminates against railroads in payment of state fuel tax
thats dumb to think truckers are slipping cash to anyone …dont u think that if the truckers had any pull in goverment fuel would be way cheaper and the roads and rules would be more trucker friendly …blame the suits …the nameless faceless people that make these laws …want to find the problem follow the money
Ahem. To the fellow who says that the court has overstepped it’s bounds. Yes, states can levy taxes to whomever they wish. But railroads are federally regulated (interstate commerce and all that) and have been since the late 1800s. Trucks are too, to some extent. What that means is that federal courts have every right to intervene in such situations, as they have done since the late 1800s. Socialism? I don’t think so. At least the black helicopters aren’t hovering over my home, anyway.
Sounds like the truckers slipped a little $$$$ to somebody.
Those with law degrees seem to relish job retention actions just as much as any government bureaucrat.
Looks more like a federal court has overstepped and bypassed the Constitution. States do have the power to tax. This is what 100 years of socialism has rendered.
“ED ROGERS from ALABAMA said:
Sounds like the truckers slipped a little $$$$ to somebody.”
Trucking companies have nothing to do with who Alabama chooses to tax and who not to tax.
It is common knowledge that trucking companies pay fuel and usage taxes in the 48 states plus the several Canadian provinces. This is known as IFTA, the International Fuel Tax Agreement. You can look it up as it has been in place for quite some time. Before IFTA, each state charged its own tax and each truck operating within several states had to carry the infamous “bingo plates.” IFTA was put in place to eliminate the problems with each state and several provinces charging trucking companies taxes on the fuel and quite often, double dipping.
Oddly, only the big trucks are taxed. The little trucks, those 26,000 lbs gross and under are not covered by IFTA.
Of course the average truck hating railfan who has 100% of what he purchases ultimately delivered by truck despite claims to the contrary will probably still claim trucking companies and independent truck drivers are not taxed. Guess what? He is correct. The railfan is taxed. I explain later.
Oddly, the railroads don’t have anything remotely close to IFTA. Why is that? Railroad owners or the states? Or is there a federal law in place which prevents railroads from having their own equivalent to IFTA to prevent this sort of thing from happening?
What strikes me as very odd is if Alabama is charging a fuel tax and the adjacent states are not, what is to stop CSX from purchasing fuel in an adjacent state in very large quantities and then transporting it into Alabama?
Finally, this last part is really going to warp the brains of many railfans. Especially those who hate truck drivers and those with a ver
Wow. How nice of a certain person from Illinois to explain everything to all of us stupid people who went to public school. Next time I forget to breathe, I know to whom I should place a call! I just hope I can wipe the drool from my chin and pull the finger from my nose long enough to dial the phone. Of course, it is pretty hard to breathe through my mouth and speak at the same time. It isn’t the whack-a-doodle right-wing point of view that drives me nuts, it’s the condescending tone with which it is delivered. It is as if those who don’t support a certain point of view must be stupid and deserve to be spoken to as if they are silly little children. How very, very petty and and angry that makes one seem! It makes one seem like a lonely, angry and socially inept little man. It is always sad to witness someone who probably has a pretty good brain in his head not know any social grace.
When coal was being delivered to Penn State in the late 1950s the Belfonte Central RR was strangled with restrictions the area truckers were not. To such an extent it was unbelievable. The trucks quickly and easily took the business away. All because of government involvement.
Good. And maybe this case will shine a little light on an industry that everyone is convinced relies on government subsidies when, actually, it’s taxed to death by essentially hostile governments.
US governments (-s because it’s Federal, State, and local) policy pretty much since the first half of the last century has been to strangle rail to death, the occasional subsidized service excepting, thanks to ideological obsessions with cars by everyone from politicians to city planners.
What’s needed is a better Staggers act, and perhaps a refusal to provide highway funds to states that charge railroads taxes on their infrastructure and fuels.
Oil prices are not determined by government but by the world market, so, slipping a few bucks to some politician will not do the job but for to enrich yet another politician. Perhaps a small donation, however, will get you a tax break.
Interesting the same ‘banner repeaters’ continue, as is their function, slavishly reiterating the message of someone else’s home signal. It surely is amazing how true the saying is ’ when you have a hammer everything is a nail.’ All arguments via tunnel vision come down to the exact same conclusion.
JEFFREY D JAMES from MICHIGAN, I could not have said it better myself.
Mr Guise I will point out that I am a railfan and a holder of a CDL with hazmat endorsement. I also hold a TWIC card to deliver cargo into ports. As well as a passport for Canada. No I do not hats trucks it has been a very good livelyhood for 16 years. And it has been my pleasure to meet many drivers who are railfans as well.
Mr Guse: 48 states? Last time I counted, we have 50 of them. If nothing else, you keep things interesting. Have a great day.
@GUSE - no.
-
This is an interstate commerce issue. You are aware it involves CSX, right?
-
States have every right to want to claw revenue back from truckers, given they build and maintain the roads their trucks run on. Blaming “socialism” or saying there’s no interstate fuel taxation infrastructure for railroads is disingenuous at best.
-
Saying that end customers pay the taxes, not railroads or truckers, is also disingenuous and has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Yes, a reasonable case can be made for abolishing corporate taxes - one I’d agree with in some cases, though resource usage tariffs seem fairly reasonable with some exceptions. However, this doesn’t pertain to the issue here. Truck customers are not having to pay CSX’s fuel duties. CSX customers are not benefiting from trucking subsidies. What you’re justifying, after years of pretending otherwise, is the government picking winners and losers, forcing CSX to subsidize your industry despite there being no social, political, or economic rationale for doing so.
The only bright spot here is that CSX is so good at what they do (what is it? One gallon to move one ton 200 miles?) they were able to pay the tax and still be ahead of the game. Such is the superiority of rail transport. Remove the shackles - abolish planning laws that force car ownership, end property taxes on railroads, end property and income taxes being used to fund roads, remove the bureaucracy needed to start new services (or modify or end existing services) and make rights of way easily obtained at no cost to both public and private operators alike, and we’d see an entirely different infrastructure to the one we have today.
Oops. Caught ya with your hand in the cookie jar. So, I wonder who was getting paid off all these years for this biased behavior. And, yes, there are only 48 states. MS and AL are marginal.
Jeff Guse from IL…are you under the impression that members of legislators are not paid by lobbyists for favors? We are a PLUTOCRACY. In Alabama its down to the state level.
Mr FREADHOFF,
IFTA only covers 49 states and all Canadian Provinces. You may ask why, try to drive your car to Hawaii, ALL trucking in Hawaii is intrastate, there is no interstate trucking in that state. Most trucks are only roistered for 48 states and Canada, few go into Alaska, cheaper to ship by sea.
It sure looks like we have a game of courtroom ping-pong going on in Alabama.
Why should railroad property taxes, railroad fuel taxes, and railroad employment taxes be used for highway construction and repairs? If provider class railroads were relieved of this tax, or if that tax money was redirected into railroad infrastructure, our already crumbling highways will have to find another source of revenue just to keep the roads in a good state of repair.
That new source of revenue may very well come in the form of tolls, and there may be no getting around it. If railroads continue to be taxed to finance highways and roads, even with the tolls instituted, that will be the day when our freeways become greedways, especially when they will be a conduit for private enterprise to overseas companies based in Australia or India. Un-Amercian!
So by the same logic, it seems safe to say it’s also illegal for the federal gov’t to exempt certain unions and politicians from the Affordable Care Act’s insurance and individual mandate requirements, when the rest of us are force to comply. To exempt only select groups and individuals simply because they’re Obama supporters is quite clearly discrimination against those of us who don’t have the political clout to get an exemption?
Thank you 11th Court of Appeals for setting a precedent to get rid of the un-Affordable Care Act.