Electrical Golf Cart -- Tax credit ??????

TenOC wrote:

pitch wrote:
Why should I or anyone one else subsidize your pleasure? Never heard of a TAX subsidy for a golf cart or any other pleasure item.

The tax code does not have any logic. For example no tax brake for the renter who pays the landlord who get the deduction for the mortgage interest.

Perfectly logical...the landlord puts capital at risk to provide housing for renters, whose only capital investment is their monthly rent check. The landlord has to finance the housing, pay property taxes on the housing, maintain the housing. All that requires putting capital at risk. Therefore the landlord, and not the renter, should get the tax credit.

John & Angela wrote:
Funny story. When we bought our club car in 2003 that was one of the selling points of the cart. It has signals, seat belts, highway tires, 4 wheel brakes, goes 24 MPH. Had to brake it to him that we were Canadian and it didn't do us any good. Bought it anyway, brand new 4900 bucks. Still runs great. Funny thing was he had just bought a Hummer that gave him a 100,000 dollar tax credit. That one surprised me but apparently was quite common during the Bush era tax credits. Who would have thought that someone that can afford a hummer getting 14 mpg needed a 100,000 dollar tax credit. I'm looking at this through the eyes of a foreigner. I am sure there was more to it. I just never looked into it.

Have you looked into the small portable carts that can be carried on the back of the hitch?

Good luck with your search.

That was the opposite end of the golf cart type incentive. The incentive at the time was for trucks over a certain GVWR. The thought and intent was to get businesses to buy more capital equipment, and big trucks are certainly capital equipment. The capital equipment purchases fuel business expansion and since almost all large trucks are domestically produced, the credit benefited the US automakers and their employees and unions. The Hummer and some other large personal vehicles fell into the tax credit. Again, if favorable tax treatment is offered, why not take advantage? Also, it was never a tax credit, it was an allowable depreciable expense. (Note that the current tax law limits the value of business automobiles to an artificially low amount around $28K for a car and $31K for a van or pickup. As anyone who has bought either lately, that doesn't cover the cost of a whole lot of makes and models.) Favorable tax treatments very often have ancillary benefits beyond the person who actually gets that treatment.

W4RLR wrote:

TenOC wrote:

pitch wrote:
Why should I or anyone one else subsidize your pleasure? Never heard of a TAX subsidy for a golf cart or any other pleasure item.

The tax code does not have any logic. For example no tax brake for the renter who pays the landlord who get the deduction for the mortgage interest.

Perfectly logical...the landlord puts capital at risk to provide housing for renters, whose only capital investment is their monthly rent check. The landlord has to finance the housing, pay property taxes on the housing, maintain the housing. All that requires putting capital at risk. Therefore the landlord, and not the renter, should get the tax credit.

and the property owner pays those taxes and interest on the mortgage whether he has tenants or not. his risk/his reward.

John & Angela wrote:
Funny story. When we bought our club car in 2003 that was one of the selling points of the cart. It has signals, seat belts, highway tires, 4 wheel brakes, goes 24 MPH. Had to brake it to him that we were Canadian and it didn't do us any good. Bought it anyway, brand new 4900 bucks. Still runs great. Funny thing was he had just bought a Hummer that gave him a 100,000 dollar tax credit. That one surprised me but apparently was quite common during the Bush era tax credits. Who would have thought that someone that can afford a hummer getting 14 mpg needed a 100,000 dollar tax credit. I'm looking at this through the eyes of a foreigner. I am sure there was more to it. I just never looked into it.

you're referring to Section 179 of the tax code which has existed for some time. basically, it encourages businesses to invest in themselves by creating tax credits for certain types of equipment used to operate the business. the stimulus act of 2008 (when democrats controlled both chambers) increased the tax credit limits for a year with the idea that the credits would roll back to previous levels. in order to qualify for a tax credit on the hummer the fellow you're referring to either was able to qualify that purchase for his business or he committed fraud. if you care to learn more just google 'section 179'.

rk911 wrote:

John & Angela wrote:
Funny story. When we bought our club car in 2003 that was one of the selling points of the cart. It has signals, seat belts, highway tires, 4 wheel brakes, goes 24 MPH. Had to brake it to him that we were Canadian and it didn't do us any good. Bought it anyway, brand new 4900 bucks. Still runs great. Funny thing was he had just bought a Hummer that gave him a 100,000 dollar tax credit. That one surprised me but apparently was quite common during the Bush era tax credits. Who would have thought that someone that can afford a hummer getting 14 mpg needed a 100,000 dollar tax credit. I'm looking at this through the eyes of a foreigner. I am sure there was more to it. I just never looked into it.

you're referring to Section 179 of the tax code which has existed for some time. basically, it encourages businesses to invest in themselves by creating tax credits for certain types of equipment used to operate the business. the stimulus act of 2008 (when democrats controlled both chambers) increased the tax credit limits for a year with the idea that the credits would roll back to previous levels. in order to qualify for a tax credit on the hummer the fellow you're referring to either was able to qualify that purchase for his business or he committed fraud. if you care to learn more just google 'section 179'.

I was thinking even further in the past, back in the days of the "Investment Tax Credit". It was another example of questionable tax policies. Back then people literally bought stuff they really didn't want or need because buying a somewhat similar item they did want or need did not qualify for the credits and the item they were incentivized into did. A good example at the time was a 1/2 ton Suburban did not meet the ITC requirements, but a 3/4 ton with the bigger 454 did. The tax savings were more than the additional fuel costs so many Suburban buyers got more vehicle than they wanted or needed.
It also reminds me of another failed tax policy, the luxury tax. Remember that gem? Going to stick it to the wealthy by taxing their expensive purchases. On cars the tax was 10% on the amount over $30,000. I think boats and airplanes were the same. The effect was the civil aviation business in the US was virtually destroyed. Airplane builders either closed or downsized. Thousands lost their jobs. The US Yacht industry almost ceased to exist, and thousands more lost their jobs. The US auto industry was put into a tailspin, and development of luxury lines almost ended. The European manufacturers still had their markets, so BMW, Mercedes and some others suffered less and continued to make and improve their luxury lines. It took decades for the US market to catch back up and opened the door for the Japanese to launch their luxury lines with much superior autos. The rich still got their Yachts and jets, they just bought and flagged them outside the US. Taxing the rich seldom works. The rich themselves have the resources to avoid taxation and the unintended consequences can be devastating. Like it or not, we need rich people. Even discounting their businesses, their consumption keeps a large percentage of our economy going. The rich hire architects, they employ construction workers to build their mansions. They are the ones that buy those King crabs the "Deadliest Catch" crews catch, they are the ones who stay at the Four Seasons and buy the Prevosts and Newells. Everybody knows someone who would be unemployed if not for the items the wealthy consume.

westernrvparkowner wrote:

rk911 wrote:

John & Angela wrote:
Funny story. When we bought our club car in 2003 that was one of the selling points of the cart. It has signals, seat belts, highway tires, 4 wheel brakes, goes 24 MPH. Had to brake it to him that we were Canadian and it didn't do us any good. Bought it anyway, brand new 4900 bucks. Still runs great. Funny thing was he had just bought a Hummer that gave him a 100,000 dollar tax credit. That one surprised me but apparently was quite common during the Bush era tax credits. Who would have thought that someone that can afford a hummer getting 14 mpg needed a 100,000 dollar tax credit. I'm looking at this through the eyes of a foreigner. I am sure there was more to it. I just never looked into it.

you're referring to Section 179 of the tax code which has existed for some time. basically, it encourages businesses to invest in themselves by creating tax credits for certain types of equipment used to operate the business. the stimulus act of 2008 (when democrats controlled both chambers) increased the tax credit limits for a year with the idea that the credits would roll back to previous levels. in order to qualify for a tax credit on the hummer the fellow you're referring to either was able to qualify that purchase for his business or he committed fraud. if you care to learn more just google 'section 179'.

I was thinking even further in the past, back in the days of the "Investment Tax Credit". It was another example of questionable tax policies. Back then people literally bought stuff they really didn't want or need because buying a somewhat similar item they did want or need did not qualify for the credits and the item they were incentivized into did. A good example at the time was a 1/2 ton Suburban did not meet the ITC requirements, but a 3/4 ton with the bigger 454 did. The tax savings were more than the additional fuel costs so many Suburban buyers got more vehicle than they wanted or needed.
It also reminds me of another failed tax policy, the luxury tax. Remember that gem? Going to stick it to the wealthy by taxing their expensive purchases. On cars the tax was 10% on the amount over $30,000. I think boats and airplanes were the same. The effect was the civil aviation business in the US was virtually destroyed. Airplane builders either closed or downsized. Thousands lost their jobs. The US Yacht industry almost ceased to exist, and thousands more lost their jobs. The US auto industry was put into a tailspin, and development of luxury lines almost ended. The European manufacturers still had their markets, so BMW, Mercedes and some others suffered less and continued to make and improve their luxury lines. It took decades for the US market to catch back up and opened the door for the Japanese to launch their luxury lines with much superior autos. The rich still got their Yachts and jets, they just bought and flagged them outside the US. Taxing the rich seldom works. The rich themselves have the resources to avoid taxation and the unintended consequences can be devastating. Like it or not, we need rich people. Even discounting their businesses, their consumption keeps a large percentage of our economy going. The rich hire architects, they employ construction workers to build their mansions. They are the ones that buy those King crabs the "Deadliest Catch" crews catch, they are the ones who stay at the Four Seasons and buy the Prevosts and Newells. Everybody knows someone who would be unemployed if not for the items the wealthy consume.

100% correct.

shakyjay wrote:

FunnyCamper wrote:
most campgrounds do not allow gas carts.

electric is your safest bet to be able to use it.

I wouldn't say most. Maybe a regional thing. Some do some don't. Likewise some don't allow any. Some will only allow if street legal, licensed and insured.

yes could be my location in the southeast. almost impossible to find any cg in my area that allows gas. best for one to check their locations to know the best way to purchase.

x2
I think the old tax credit was for street legal ones. You could hear the whooping and hollering from all the people in the Villages in Florida at the time! Where every retired resident had 2 per family.

Where the parking spaces everywhere are for golf carts only and the Walmart has 4 rows upfront just for golf cart parking.:R





I full time and in my travels most CG's do not allow golf carts. The long term RV resorts usually do allow them. So research where you are going to be traveling and staying before investing in one.

The tax credit is only on automobiles and is based on battery size.
http://www.irs.gov/Businesses/Plug-In-Electric-Vehicle-Credit-%28IRC-30-and-IRC-30D%29

If your camping along the gulf coast gas is prefered over electric because the salt air will destroy an electric one.