Why
Dorothy Young
All suv's genaraly do is same thing any sedan would do. How many drivers
of suv's have put it in 4wheeldr and driven thru someone's property?
Sounds like a good way to buy yourself much trouble.
If you plow snow, 4wheel is mandatory. But how many awant to have to buy
a plow and equipment to plow? Not many I'd guess.
But I lived up in the Rockies. many years back. In a county that was
80% FS and BLM. FS roads were smoother than alo6t of streets here in MA.
They also went for miles but then they became no better than trails. At
the time i had a 1971 International Scout geared low. Could do what a
Hummer would do.
The Hummer is perhaps the most ridiculous. It was an military vehicle
designed for for slogging thru swamps to prerve the American Way.
Hummers started appearing in US cities. Aperson uses less sense buying
this as if he bought a semitractor.
PeterD
wrote:
THis post is exactly why you don't spike your egg-nog with rum, then
post on Usenet...
Another troll, another day.
Paul Hovnanian P.E.
Years ago, they decided to punish anyone who used cars and station wagons
for business purposes. But the rules for expenses associated with 'trucks'
were much more reasonable. So people switched to trucks.
When Congress increased the definition of a 'truck' for the purpose of
expense allowances from 6000 GVW to 8000 GVW, we saw the advent of Hummers,
Excursions, and even larger vehicles.
As long as the tax laws are going to punish businesses who use small cars,
we're going to be stuck with big trucks.
--
Paul Hovnanian pa...@hovnanian.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have gnu, will travel.
PeterD
<pa...@hovnanian.com> wrote:
>Thank the IRS.
>
>Years ago, they decided to punish anyone who used cars and station wagons
>for business purposes. But the rules for expenses associated with 'trucks'
>were much more reasonable. So people switched to trucks.
>
>When Congress increased the definition of a 'truck' for the purpose of
>expense allowances from 6000 GVW to 8000 GVW, we saw the advent of Hummers,
>Excursions, and even larger vehicles.
>
>As long as the tax laws are going to punish businesses who use small cars,
>we're going to be stuck with big trucks.
I think you have over simplified the situation some. What the IRS was
attempting to do was prevent a non-business from expensing the family
car. A formally organized business has less problems in this
situation, and there are methods to do what you want (have a smaller
car for your business...) I'd strongly recommend you contact your CPA,
or tax consultant and they will be glad to find a solution to your
problem.
As far as "Stuck with big trucks" that bit makes no sense. No business
drives a big truck unless they have to. The operating costs far exceed
any (perhaps non-existant) tax benefits. I know, we use big trucks
(over 8K GVW) and would gladly use smaller ones but it is not
feasible--ever loaded a couple of thousand pounds of stock in a Prius?
Paul Hovnanian P.E.
>
> On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 17:53:03 -0800, "Paul Hovnanian P.E."
> <pa...@hovnanian.com> wrote:
>
> >Thank the IRS.
> >
> >Years ago, they decided to punish anyone who used cars and station wagons
> >for business purposes. But the rules for expenses associated with 'trucks'
> >were much more reasonable. So people switched to trucks.
> >
> >When Congress increased the definition of a 'truck' for the purpose of
> >expense allowances from 6000 GVW to 8000 GVW, we saw the advent of Hummers,
> >Excursions, and even larger vehicles.
> >
> >As long as the tax laws are going to punish businesses who use small cars,
> >we're going to be stuck with big trucks.
>
> I think you have over simplified the situation some. What the IRS was
> attempting to do was prevent a non-business from expensing the family
> car.
But the family truck is perfectly OK.
> A formally organized business has less problems in this
> situation, and there are methods to do what you want (have a smaller
> car for your business...) I'd strongly recommend you contact your CPA,
> or tax consultant and they will be glad to find a solution to your
> problem.
>
> As far as "Stuck with big trucks" that bit makes no sense. No business
> drives a big truck unless they have to.
The tax break for a truck is now 8000 GVW. The rules applying to
anything smaller are so onerous, big trucks just make financial sense.
> The operating costs far exceed any (perhaps non-existant) tax benefits.
Work the numbers. Taxes on small vehicles are so high, gas mileage just
doesn't matter.
> I know, we use big trucks
> (over 8K GVW) and would gladly use smaller ones but it is not
> feasible--ever loaded a couple of thousand pounds of stock in a Prius?
--
Paul Hovnanian mailto:Pa...@Hovnanian.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
Relax, its only ones and zeros!