Please see article: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20070320.BUDGETGREEN20/TPStory/Business

In short, gov't is looking to add a $4,000 gas guzzler tax levy for the vehicle with the worst fuel economy in order to use this as a rebate to others buying hybrid vehicles. Look who is topping the list:

Guzzler's levy

A sampling of 2007 model vehicles that would be subject to a green surcharge. The rate increases as the number of litres per 100 km rises.

Fuel consumption* Litres/100km Surcharge
Nissan Pathfinder 13.1 $1,000
Dodge Durango 14.1 $2,000
Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT8 16.9 $4,000

*Based on 55 per cent city/45 per cent highway fuel-consumption rating.

does this just apply when buying new?

not sure - all new to me and article doesn't say. I was wondering the same because if it applies to used as well, it will hurt resale. Can't see how they can charge it twice though, but with the gov't, you can never be too sure.

Do you have any sort of gas guzzler tax on new vehicles?

Alex

Do you have any sort of gas guzzler tax on new vehicles?

Being Canadian, I can assure you, the Canadian government has a tax for everything, including dirt. ;)

$4,000 sounds kind of cheap for Canada. :eek:

Seems like the Canadian government is going to tax all new GC SRT-8 with a $4000 gas guzzler tax when sold. They have announced this when they announced the new budget. They are only taxing hummers $2k WTF, we get better mileage that those bricks!

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070320/SUV_report_070320/20070320/

Just to be sure, it's been mentioned here:

http://www.cherokeesrt8.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3277

The Canadian Governement... :rolleyes:

Thank G-d for the USA (for now...just make sure someone keeps Al Gore and his goons on a leash or we could be facing worse over here).

Gah! That sucks!

We got hit today.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6474987.stm

terrible news. i can see this being the beginning of the end for vehicles such as ours :mad:
most people will not pay $4000 more than a vehicle is worth.

Does this apply when buying used? or just new? couldnt hit the same vehicle twice could they?

Can't tax you twice?? Of course they can, and, if given the opportunity (meaning if the voters don't scream loudly enough and vote out their representatives that keep upping the taxes), they will double/triple/whatever they can get away with taxing. Estate/death taxes are double taxes, and commonplace at that.

Blame Canada!!!!;)

If the taxes get too high much less people will buy and the manufacturers will stop making vehicles like this, we are doomed

Those b@stards. :eek:

Well I have to admit that global warming is not a myth, even if just 1/2 of Al Gore's predictions come true it is pretty scary.

Well I have to admit that global warming is not a myth, even if just 1/2 of Al Gore's predictions come true it is pretty scary.
When one of our earthly volcanos goes off, it gives off more CO2 then all of mankind has made since being on earth. Maybe we can get Al to design volcano corks as well as he did for the internet.

When one of our earthly volcanos goes off, it gives off more CO2 then all of mankind has made since being on earth. Maybe we can get Al to design volcano corks as well as he did for the internet.

co2 isnt the only problem..

100 percent of Al's predictions are myth....worse, lies and deceptions aimed at seizing money and power.

Why do you "have to admit" that global warming is not a myth? Well, more to the point, global warming may, or may not be a myth..however, man made global warming is definately a myth, and who is to say that global warming is a bad thing? Don't fall for this political manipulation.

Read Chris Horners' book "Global Warming, a Politically Incorrect Guide To Global Warming".

man made global warming is definately a myth, and who is to say that global warming is a bad thing.

i couldnt DISagree more. Ive taken enough courses in university to know that man IS contributing and speeding the process. And mabey it isnt bad if you consider massive hurricanes, floods and millions of displaced people to be not a bad thing.
just my $.02

Oh my G-d! University? Which one? Undergraduate courses? Which discipline? What proof?..scientific, peer reviewed journal type I mean, not "consensus" articles as sighted by Al Gore....

Thats' the first clue, the scientific process never includes opinion or consensus, NEVER! Any claim with this at its' core is a deception and myth. It also lessens the credibility of the argument to zero. Read the aforementioned book, it is loaded with references both pro and con, and real scientific data is cited (not doom and gloom conjecture based on myth and a political agenda).

I wasnt trying to sound big by saying university, thanks for mocking me though. and i refuse to get in Forum arguments. we can each believe what we want...

Very true, but read the book, you will not regret it.

Very true, but read the book, you will not regret it.
I agree, it is a great book. The problem with the media is they get paid to report bad news, or something that sells copies. Become truly educated and read both sides of the argument.

BTW, bad weather has been happening for 1000's of years, It goes in patterns.

... bad weather has been happening for 1000's of years, It goes in patterns.

this is true, however the highs are getting much higher and the lows,lower. what it would be like if there were no humans we will never know.

Well I have to admit that global warming is not a myth, even if just 1/2 of Al Gore's predictions come true it is pretty scary.

you hippie
:D

Highs are high and lows are lower? Nope, not unless you look at truncated data (ie geographic sample versus the entire world, or time windows). Honestly we can't accurately validate current global temperatures, let alone those of hundreds of years ago. Conclusions can not be made...and certainly unverifiable is to conjecture (guess) at a cause. They work backwords instead...start with their desired conclusion, and then make their data support it (and a very shaby job of doing it at that). To hide the weakness of their supposed data, they then turn to the biased media making a movie, awarding it an academy award, as if that makes it more credible. Finally, feigning confidence they speak loudly to really drive the point home.

"The earth is flat"...see these measurements of the angle of the ground...Look at this spiffy graph of the data that I made, isn't it professional looking?....Now listen to these expert scientists over here with the guns to their heads....2 out of 3 of them say the world is flat......I humbly accept this award for the most compelling presentation....NO I AM SERIOUS THE WORLD REALLY IS FLAT AND YOUR GOING TO DIE IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE ME!!...Now give me incrementally more of your money so that I can start to make the world less flat.

Pathetic isn't it?

Well I have to admit that global warming is not a myth, even if just 1/2 of Al Gore's predictions come true it is pretty scary.
Yeah, so please enlighten me on how this new vehicle tax is going to help prevent global warming?

I drive a Jeep SRT8 that gets 12 mpg. I drive 10,000 miles per year, combining trips whenever possible to conserve fuel. I use 833 gallons of fuel per year.

My neighbor drives a Toyota that gets 24 mpg. He drives 20,000 miles a year and never bothers to try and combine trips, conserve fuel etc. He uses 833 gallons of fuel per year.

We both use up the same amount of fuel per year. What the hell difference does it make what we each drive? Did the morons who came up with this tax in Canada even take into consideration the environmental impact of the thousands of tons of batteries that will end up in the landfills from these so-called "green" hybrid vehicles?

If they want to levy a more "fair" tax it should be based on total yearly fuel consumption, not on "miles per gallon". They should establish a reasonable amount of fuel a family would use, and then reward those who fall under it (by going out of their way to conserve) and those who go over it (by not going out of their way to conserve).

The tax also unfairly discriminates against large families who need larger "less fuel efficient" vehicles. In addition, many of the vehicles with the maximum tax are luxury vehicles costing upwards of $100,00. Does the goverment really think those people are going to be bothered paying a few more thousand for their new cars? Do they really think that Mercedes and BMW buyers are going to opt for a Prius instead because they will get a $1000-$2000 check in the mail?

It will not cause increased GHG emissions, not that it matters, because that is simply the emperors' new clothes...in other words, they don't exist as a problem. Don't listen to the alarmist radical environmentalists, they are simply after our money and more power. They could not care one wit about the environment....they couldn't even come up with a plausible theory, so they made one up.

Hippie??!! Definitely not a hippie nor a tree hugger but I do not think that it is something that is made up, nor made up radical environmentalists. I am sure we can all attest to that it is warmer now than what it was when we were in diapers.
Eitehr Way....
Less snow to drive the GC SRT-8 in, cause it sucks in snow.