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

[eschaider]

The replica manufacturers are cautious about the additional regulatory oversight and obligations that act can bring to their door steps. They may have a cool reception for it.


Ed

[twobjshelbys]

Originally Posted by eschaider

The replica manufacturers are cautiois about the additional regulatory oversight and obligations that act can bring to their door steps. They may have a cool reception for it.


Ed

It's not cool, not even icy or dry ice, more like liquid nitrogen.

Warranties, regulations, all that stuff. Right now build a roller or a kit, put a stamp on it to send it to someone, and pretty much forget about it. Sell a car and it becomes a recordkeeping nightmare - you literally have to know the origin of every nut and bolt in every vehicle - but now have to keep warranty reserves and all the other stuff. (Warranty isn't required by the reg, but is by the consumer paying full price for an off-the-showroom-floor vehicle).

I wrote about it in another topic...

[eschaider]

You're spot on Tony! The overreach that regulatory oversight brings to the table is sad ...


Ed

[Redfish]

Received some initial feedback from one of the Middletown senators. Let's continue to get the word out there!

Thank you for reaching out to Senator Mary Daugherty Abrams office, we have received your message in regards to proposed bill no. 159. Currently, this bill has been referred to the transportation committee, which Senator Abrams sits on. However, this bill has not been debated or discussed for final language, therefore it is difficult for Senator Abrams to speak on it at this moment in time. Nonetheless, once this bill has been written for final language Senator Abrams will take your advocacy and thoughts into consideration when voting.

[eschaider]

The advocacy and thoughts need to be taken into consideration before the bill has been written for final language. Once written for final language it is not likely to get modified based on your advocacy.

If it is modified at all, it will be modified in some sort of unholy horse trading in a smoke filled back room deal that has nothing to do with your advocacy and everything to do with what the Senator is trying to get done somewhere else. The changes will also not be in your best interests — guaranteed!

The time for advocacy and dialog is prior to the bill having been written for final language. Your representative's response is just another example of the let them eat cake mentality of our elected representatives.

BTW did you ever think about who influences and writes the "final language". I think you would be chagrinned ...


Ed

[Redfish]

I jumped on https://www.semasan.com/legislation to see if the bill was officially picked up by SEMA Action Network, and now looks like there are 6 total active bills, including Bill 159, in CT. I would expect SEMA to be sending an alert shortly.

[Redfish]

Minor update to share regarding the Connecticut Council of Car Clubs. I reached out them in the past when my assessment issues first occurred, and also when this bill was proposed.

While grabbing their web address for this post, I noticed they've picked up on the bill and posted it on their website. I need to read their write up in detail, but suggest if CT (or any owners) have input, please contact John via the email address noted in the write up.

Maybe the CT owners should join their next council meeting.

https://www.ctccc.net

[Redfish]

Not much of an update or progress to share. The proposed bill still sits with the transportation committee, since January 15th.

I did reach out to CTCCC, who expressed some reluctancy in supporting the proposal, at least based on how it was initially drafted. Unclear if they are willing to engage to propose / modify to still meet the need of our community.

CT members are probably aware there's a separate proposal regarding the elimination of the vehicle property tax in CT. At the high level, this sounds good, but not sure if we're just gonna get screwed through our real estate tax or what. I haven't had a chance to review in detail.

Here's a link to their website, https://www.ctccc.net. On the homepage, there is a summary of both these proposals, and additional information in the newsletter links.

[twobjshelbys]

I noticed your signature update and came here to see resolution. You now say "taxed out of Connecticut". Does that mean you gave up???

[Redfish]

Hey Tony, thanks for the follow up. I haven't given up, but unfortunately, not much progress.

As it sits today, "composite vehicles are not, and are never eligible for classic plates, even after the chassis is 20 years old." In CT, 20 years is the threshold for vehicles to receive classic plates, and therefore the assessments are capped at $500.

My understanding is the proposed bill died with the transportation committee, despite my (and others) emails and reaching out. Not sure if it was even reviewed or discussed.

I did ping the senator who proposed the bill a few times last year, but didn't get any further responses. I recently engaged the Middletown state rep, and although he's been responsive, not sure where it will go. I think the state senators and reps may engage more this year, since it's an election year for many, so maybe we can get another bill or ruling change going.

I did meet with the CT car council several times, who have been helpful. As I mentioned above, they expressed concern on how the proposed bill was drafted by the senator, so they are taking the lead to engage DMV. They are planning to reach out to DMV to discuss how composite vehicles are registered, so hopefully that happens early this year.

Prior to sitting with the council, I did reach out to DMV directly again last year, received one response, but nothing since then.

I don't see there being any progress at the town assessor level, so likely hit or miss on the amount of financial abuse you will receive, depending on the CT town people live in. I did see in Middletown, CT another cobra owner being assessed at an astronomical amount. Looks like he got a 'reduction' on his 1998 cobra when he went to appeals. Looking at the meeting minutes, appears there has been a change in the board members, however the assessors remain the same. Therefore, you would continue to rely on the appeals process for any reduction. https://www.middletownct.gov/AgendaC..._09222021-6488

I think it's going to take some loud voices for a change at DMV. As mentioned, the CT car council is involved. I think we need the voice of the small businesses (ERA, Vintage, etc) in CT who could be harmed (loss of business) by DMV's current position.

I certainly would not be purchasing a kit today knowing that it will be assessed at $45K+, and therefore I would be paying $1500+ in annual property tax (with no end in sight) for a hobby car that I drive a few days a month, a few months a year. Not sure how others feel, but not worth the annual premium for a 'composite vehicle' that I built in my garage.

Originally Posted by twobjshelbys

I noticed your signature update and came here to see resolution. You now say "taxed out of Connecticut". Does that mean you gave up???

[Redfish]

Hey guys, I wanted to share a potentially positive glimmer of hope, and request your support, especially if you live in CT. I recently connected with my Middletown state rep, who shared this response regarding CT composite vehicles and classic plates:

“I spoke with the chair of the finance committee which is responsible for the tax code. I am going to introduce the bill, and hopefully get it raised for a public hearing. There is no guarantee it will get raised as we are only in session for a little less than three months this year and the agenda is pretty full, but I will do my best.

If there is a public hearing would you be willing to testify or submit written testimony? Do you know of others who would do the same ?“

I've shared this with the CT car council as well, since they were planning to reach out to DMV directly even prior to this information.

If this gains any traction, I suggest we rally to support, possibly engage the local replica companies and businesses that support our hobby. It's an election year for a lot of towns, which may get us more support than other years.

[Redfish]

Well, it’s been almost a year since my last post on this topic. I’ve done a lot of leg work, but not much progress.

I’ll start with the most promising item first. My state rep is willing to put forth a bill this year for composite cars to be eligible for classic plates. Due to the short session last year, he was unable to do so then.

He suggests that if the bill gains traction, our group of likeminded enthusiasts should testify in support of the bill. More to come once the bill is proposed, but once a bill number is assigned, it would be helpful to reach out to your reps and senators.

I’ve participated in the CTCC meetings almost monthly. Good bunch of people. They sent a letter to DMV, trying to engage them, however have not received a response.

I personally reached out to DMV and held a session with their legal team. Although they were courteous and heard me out, they didn’t feel there is a path for classic plates for composite vehicles under the exists regs.

I know a few other CT guys who went through inspection and registration this past year. NONE received classic plates.

So, unless there’s a change in the statutes, I would continue to be exposed, and others are as well. Keep in mind, from 2004 to 2018, this was not an issue for me either.

One possible glimmer of hope is that for 2024, CT is moving from a ‘market based’ assessment to an ‘MSRP-based’ with a depreciation schedule. This should provide a more predictable assessment, and MSRP should be based off our kit purchase price, but who knows what Middletown will try to use as the base.

Finally, here’s something…come July, I’ll have ‘saved’ over $4500 in taxes over the past 3 years…roughly half the cost of my kit, 20 years ago.

[PDUB]

Good work! Here's hoping you can win the race with the scumbag in the tax office, Red!

[twobjshelbys]

The msrp/depreciation really helps. Corrado did it. My Cobra plates were about 50 bucks for 5 years. Vanity plates added 5 per year. The food gt cost about 300 per year as it bottoms out after 5 years. Same in Nevada

[Redfish]

That’s good to know, and makes sense. For me, as long as they use the proper MSRP for the kit, and not some insane unjustified value, should put my value and payment at a proper level, and eliminate their abusive loophole.

Sadly, reviewing the proposed bills for 2023, there’s already someone who wants to defer the implementation of the MSRP change:

https://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/cgabillst...hich_year=2023

[twobjshelbys]

Originally Posted by Redfish

That’s good to know, and makes sense. For me, as long as they use the proper MSRP for the kit, and not some insane unjustified value, should put my value and payment at a proper level, and eliminate their abusive loophole.

Sadly, reviewing the proposed bills for 2023, there’s already someone who wants to defer the implementation of the MSRP change:

https://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/cgabillst...hich_year=2023

So the change to MSRP has been approved and they just want to delay it? At least it's approved, but the one year delay will give them a chance to retrench and reverse it since there's been no benefit the "something once given can never be taken away" rule cannot be applied.

[Redfish]

My understanding is that the legislative change is approved, and would be effective Oct 1, 2023. So when you get your annual assessment / vehicle property tax in mid-2024 (for Oct 2023 - Sept 2024), it would then be MRSP-based and depreciated, rather than market-based.

If I read the proposed bill correctly, she wants to defer the start to Oct 1, 2024.

Not to make this political, but curious how she voted on this piece of legislation last year, and if 2022 was an election year for her…

Unfortunately, your foreshadowing could be correct. I could see a scenario where it’s defer, then once the “pot of gold” CT says they’re currently sitting on diminishes, they’ll say we can no longer afford to change to MSRP-based!