Connecticut CT Registration / Vehicle Property Tax - Be aware or Beware!

[ERA 626]

its all about taking our $$ its a money grab... whats next? taxing our retirement? oh wait, they are working on that now... if Biden gets elected we are screwed...

[Redfish]

All - an update to share. As mentioned prior, I examined the ability to get classic plates. I was unsuccessful here as well, with CT DMV stating that even when a replica is 20 years old, it does not quality for classic plates. In CT, when a car is 20 years old, it is eligible for classic plates, and the tax assessment is capped at $500, therefore you annual tax is ~$20.

I gained the attention of a state senator who has now proposed a bill that would amend the general statues to redefine "antique, rare or special interest motor vehicle" to include a replica vehicle: Proposed Bill No. 159

I'm learning the process real time, but would encourage all CT owners to call their reps and senators in support of this bill. Without the classic plate eligibility, we are all exposed to these abusive tax increases.

[Cashburn]

Who is the senator sponsoring the bill? What is the email address(es) to voice support?

[Redfish]

Senator Matt Lesser of the 9th, Middletown proposed the bill.

Here's the CT Representative, Senator and Congressperson by Town: https://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/content/townlist.asp

A fellow owner suggested a form letter, that we could send. I'm in the process of draft one for forum members to use as a template.

[Cashburn]

Originally Posted by Redfish

Senator Matt Lesser of the 9th, Middletown proposed the bill.

Here's the CT Representative, Senator and Congressperson by Town: https://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/content/townlist.asp

A fellow owner suggested a form letter, that we could send. I'm in the process of draft one for forum members to use as a template.

Yes that is the best way. We used the same approach when we got the bill passed to allow them to register as the year they replicate.

[Redfish]

Cool. I’ll get the draft letter posted as soon as possible. Any help, guidance, support is welcome!

[rads42]

Thanks for taking the lead on this. As a CT resident I will definitely do what I can to prevent this abuse from continuing.

[Redfish]

Here's what I've drafted for a form letter, edit as you feel needed. I've sent an email to SEMA, and plan to reach out to ERA as well.

Reviewing the bill and the statutes, there are certainly nuances on what possibly qualifies for classic plates, so suggest folks take the time to review each. I think at minimum, this bill should allow our cars to be eligible at 20 years, just like any other car.

-----------------------------------------
I am writing to request your support in Connecticut regarding recently proposed bill 159:

Proposed Bill No. 159
AN ACT REDEFINING "ANTIQUE, RARE OR SPECIAL INTEREST MOTOR VEHICLE" TO INCLUDE A REPLICA VEHICLE.

This bill proposes that subdivision (3) of section 14-1 of the general statutes be amended to redefine "antique, rare or special interest motor vehicle” to include a replica vehicle, as defined in the Low Volume Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Act of 2015, P. L. 114-94.

By amending the general statutes, this bill would allow replica vehicles to be eligible for classic license plate registration. This is important for replica owners in Connecticut, since today, replicas are NEVER eligible for classic plates, and therefore exposed to extremely high annual vehicle property taxes, well above a reasonable assessment. According to state law, "any antique, rare or special interest motor vehicle", shall be assessed at not more than $500. By amending the general statutes, this assessment cap then applies to replica vehicles.

By supporting this bill, you support the interest of automobile collectors and enthusiasts:

• Replica builders and owners would receive equal eligibility for classic plate registration, similar to any other vintage automobile in CT. Today, replicas are not eligible for classic plates, even when the chassis / frame is 20 years old.
• Classic plate eligibility provides automotive enthusiasts the ability to proudly display Connecticut classic plates on their vintage replica, reflecting a more ‘period correct’ appearance.
• By supporting this bill, you support small / manufacturing businesses. We have several replica companies and suppliers in Connecticut and bordering states. Consumers are more likely to purchase replicas and support these businesses knowing that classic plate registration eligibility exists in Connecticut.
• Since most replicas are categorized as ‘composite vehicle’, Connecticut towns struggle on how to properly assess their value, creating unneeded angst between the town and replica owner. A capped assessment of $500 eliminates this angst.
• The volume of replica automobiles in CT is very low compared to production cars, therefore any monetary impact to the state in extremely low. However, the benefit to replica owners is significant.

This is of personal interest to me, as I hand-built a Factory Five roadster replica back in the early 2000s with my ‘to-be’ wife at the time. My family has shared many memories together with the car and generated long lasting friendships with fellow owners. After many years of enjoyment, in 2019 the town of Middletown inexplicably raised the annual property tax assessment by 1500%. Despite providing thorough documentation to the assessors and appeal board, the appeal was declined. In 2020, the assessment was raised another 20%. Again, despite providing documentation, the appeal was declined. I have since rid the car from Connecticut, however I remain involved in the hobby and passionately advocate for this bill. Without classic plate registration eligibility, our hobby is at risk to become smaller, and will continue to be exposed to inexplicable, unsustainable annual property taxes in Connecticut.

Please support this bill, and support your Connecticut automotive enthusiast. Please feel free to reach out to me directly to further discuss. Thank you in advance for your support!

[HUBBELL RACING]

I grew up in CT. I live in FL now. IDK why anyone would want to live in CT.

[Redfish]

I stumbled on this 2011 whitepaper, which lists the proponent’s arguments regarding assessment limits on antique vehicles. https://www.cga.ct.gov/2011/rpt/2011-R-0410.htm

I believe some of these are relevant items, and may to add into my letter.

The proponents made the following arguments for the bill:

1. An antique automobile is the only collector's item subject to the local property tax. Stamps, art, and other collectibles, which can be very valuable, are not subject to the tax.
2. There are no standards for assessing the value of antique automobiles.
3. The people who restore antique cars are primarily middle class, not rich.
4. The requirement that the cars be registered antiques and not used for general transportation provided a fair check and balance against abuse.

[rads42]

Those are great points. What's weird though is I have classic plates on my car. Registered as a '66. So maybe it's a town by town thing?

[Redfish]

Thanks. Yeah, that's the crazy thing. DMV willing to 'retitle' me as a 1965, but states composite vehicles are never eligible for classic plates. Without the plate, the Middletown tax assessor would continue to abuse me.

[Redfish]

I just emailed my two state senators and reps:

I am writing to request your support regarding recently Proposed Bill No. 159. This bill proposes that subdivision (3) of section 14-1 of the general statutes be amended to redefine "antique, rare or special interest motor vehicle” to include a replica vehicle, as defined in the Low Volume Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Act of 2015, P. L. 114-94.

By amending the general statutes to include replicas / kit / composite vehicles, this bill would allow these vehicles to be eligible for classic license plate registration. This is important for replicas / kit / composite vehicles owners in Connecticut, since today, these vehicles are NEVER eligible for classic plates, and therefore exposed to extremely high annual vehicle property taxes, well above a reasonable assessment. According to state law, "any antique, rare or special interest motor vehicle", shall be assessed at not more than $500. By amending the general statutes, this assessment cap then applies to these vehicles.

By supporting this bill, you support the interest of automobile collectors and enthusiasts:

• Replica, kit and composite builders and owners would receive equal eligibility for classic plate registration, similar to any other vintage automobile in CT. Today, these vehicles are not eligible for classic plates, even when the chassis / frame is 20 years old.
• There are no standards for assessing the value of replica / kit / composite automobiles. Connecticut towns struggle on how to properly assess their value, therefore creating unneeded angst between the town and vehicle owner. A capped assessment of $500 eliminates this angst.
• The people who build / restore replica, kit and composite cars are primarily middle class, not rich.
• The volume of replica automobiles in CT is very low compared to production cars, therefore any monetary impact to the state is extremely low. However, the benefit to these vehicle owners is significant.
• By supporting this bill, you support small / manufacturing businesses. We have several replica companies and suppliers in Connecticut and bordering states. Consumers are more likely to purchase replicas and support these businesses knowing that classic plate registration eligibility exists in Connecticut.
• Classic plate eligibility provides automotive enthusiasts the ability to proudly display Connecticut classic plates on their vintage vehicle, reflecting a more ‘period correct’ appearance.

This is of personal interest to me, as I hand-built a Factory Five roadster replica kit back in the early 2000s with my ‘to-be’ wife at the time. My family has shared many memories together with the car and generated long lasting friendships with fellow owners. After many years of enjoyment, in 2019 the town of Middletown inexplicably raised the annual property tax assessment by 1500%. Despite providing thorough documentation to the assessors and appeal board, the appeal was declined. In 2020, the assessment was raised another 20%. Again, despite providing documentation, the appeal was declined. I have since rid the car from Connecticut, however I remain involved in the hobby and passionately advocate for this bill. Without classic plate registration eligibility, our hobby is at risk to become smaller, and will continue to be exposed to inexplicable, unsustainable annual property taxes in Connecticut.

Please support this bill, and support your Connecticut automotive enthusiast.

[eschaider]

Nicely done and well presented, Redfish. I feel for you, let's see what happens next ...


Ed

[Redfish]

Just a quick update. Sounds like next step is the Transportation Committee. They will decide whether to draft the bill or schedule for public hearing. As I mentioned above, we should strive for the bill to be inclusive of not only 'replicas', but 'kit' and 'composite' cars in the definitions / amendment.

I did hear back from the SEMA Action Network, who was already aware of the proposed bill, who advised 'they will be sending an alert message to contacts in the state, encouraging outreach to the committee of jurisdiction'. They suggested enlisting in the SEMA Action Network (SAN). I did, others may want to as well: semaSAN.com/Join

No responses yet from my other Middletown senators or reps.

I would encourage folks to share this information on other social media websites as well. Not sure who's on Facebook and Twitter, but can only help!

[twobjshelbys]

Originally Posted by Redfish

Just a quick update. Sounds like next step is the Transportation Committee. They will decide whether to draft the bill or schedule for public hearing. As I mentioned above, we should strive for the bill to be inclusive of not only 'replicas', but 'kit' and 'composite' cars in the definitions / amendment.

I did hear back from the SEMA Action Network, who was already aware of the proposed bill, who advised 'they will be sending an alert message to contacts in the state, encouraging outreach to the committee of jurisdiction'. They suggested enlisting in the SEMA Action Network (SAN). I did, others may want to as well: semaSAN.com/Join

No responses yet from my other Middletown senators or reps.

I would encourage folks to share this information on other social media websites as well. Not sure who's on Facebook and Twitter, but can only help!

You definitely want SEMA spearheading this. They have the right wording in the legislation. Get them involved.

[rads42]

I emailed your letter to all of my reps as well but haven't heard anything. Not even an acknowledgement that they received my email. To be fair though its only been a few days.

[Redfish]

Cool, hopefully on the right track now that they are engaged.

Originally Posted by twobjshelbys

You definitely want SEAM spearheading this. They have the right wording in the legislation. Get them involved.

[Redfish]

Thanks. Similar experience with mine so far. I figure I’ll give them a week, if no response, I’ll send another email.

Had no luck or responses from the mayor or common council when I reached out regarding the tax assessment increases, hopefully the senators and reps are more engaged and responsive.

Originally Posted by rads42

I emailed your letter to all of my reps as well but haven't heard anything. Not even an acknowledgement that they received my email. To be fair though its only been a few days.

[Redfish]

A fellow forum member suggested we reach out to the Transportation Committee, so I wanted to provide the link to the committee, click on the ‘Committee Membership’ for the list:
https://www.cga.ct.gov/tra/

With the recent passing of the Act for turn key replicas, I would think Factory Five & other replica companies would have interest in shaping the replica / kit definitions in Connecticut, even possibly gain nomenclature in the CTDMV system.

https://www.hemmings.com/stories/202...ign=2021-01-25

Low Volume Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Act
https://www.hemmings.com/stories/202...tsa-rulemaking