Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Turo and Getaround Get Heat From the Rental Car Industry

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 44 posts

Re: Turo and Getaround Get Heat From the Rental Car Industry

#31

Post by NeutronStar »

bherms wrote: post #20
chii wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

benefits like clean air and good roads don't cost more when a tourist arrives. A tourist also pays taxes from VAT and other sources,but do not benefit from them. So it evens out I presume. But tourist tend to generate economic activity. A benefit that locals would want more of. The taxes a tourist pay is disencentivizing.

I would argue that they actually do... More people coming in and using roads and moving around contribute to the deterioration of the roads and more pollution.

And they pay the gas tax that pays for road maintenance.

Re: Turo and Getaround Get Heat From the Rental Car Industry

#32

Post by KingMachiavelli »

> 4 states pocket excise taxes on rental cars, in addition to standard sales taxes and airport surcharges.

Initially, I was going to argue that the existence of random taxes on car rentals and other mostly benign services is already an arbitrary unfair practice for state governments to raise more revenue.

Then I looked at my own state's, Colorado's, rental tax - it's $2 on top of sales tax which seems pretty reasonable. $2 seems pretty reasonable and small to the overall rental cost especially when tha artical says they can add up to an extra 30% on the car. Would I be happier if the extranalities of car rentals were collected some other way? Absolutely but I don't think the extra $2 is what car rentals are complaining about.

If the users of these apps are cheating and not paying the sales tax and rental tax, then the rental companies have a 100% valid point but I have a hard time thinking they just want these ride sharing/lending apps.

On the other hand, I would much rather have no random excise taxes on arbitrary services and more taxes on the actual externalites they produce such as taxes on fuel and conjestion pricing in dense areas.

Re: Turo and Getaround Get Heat From the Rental Car Industry

#33

Post by eropple »

maxkwallace wrote: post #28

The problem with this article is that it doesn't go into detail about what the "taxes and fees" pay for, aside from airport surcharges. Without knowing that it's impossible to determine who should be paying for what. Airport surcharges should just be a toll gate (E-ZPass) when you enter and exit the airport. Same for roads, ideally. A single fee schedule for everyone. Parking shouldn't be free. Someone with 3 cars on…

> I think we can all agree that regulations and taxes should be fairly and equally applied.

I get what you mean, so this is not a dunk on you, the words "fairly" and "equally" are at odds in this sentence. "Equally" implies a steady disinterest in marginal utility and situational value; it's where we get Anatole France's "the law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread." I would suggest "equitably" over "equally".

I agree with the general thrust of your point. But this is the door through which nasty shit sometimes sneaks.

Re: Turo and Getaround Get Heat From the Rental Car Industry

#34

Post by brogrammernot »

Rental car companies have refused to adapt or change their model for many years. They’re built upon antiquated systems with the thought that they could never be touched, and to be blunt I don’t feel much sympathy for them.

They’ve been approached numerous times with more innovative uses of their fleet and they’ve turned up their noses so many times at it because they felt they didn’t have to change.

Re: Turo and Getaround Get Heat From the Rental Car Industry

#35

Post by brogrammernot »

KingMachiavelli wrote: post #32

> 4 states pocket excise taxes on rental cars, in addition to standard sales taxes and airport surcharges. Initially, I was going to argue that the existence of random taxes on car rentals and other mostly benign services is already an arbitrary unfair practice for state governments to raise more revenue. Then I looked at my own state's, Colorado's, rental tax - it's $2 on top of sales tax which seems pretty reasonab…

$2 per day plus an additional 7.25% tax from Colorado, plus 2.9% sales tax.

This has nothing to do with protecting rental companies and everything to do with states being pissed they aren’t getting their cut.

Re: Turo and Getaround Get Heat From the Rental Car Industry

#36

Post by askafriend »

yeahitslikethat wrote: post #24
capsulecorp wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No lets not, the term makes perfect sense how its being used. It has absolutely nothing to do with how much of a cut the business takes, not sure where you picked up that impression but its not correct.

If you share something, you don't charge. If you charge, it's called renting. They are implying benevolence when there is none. Especially on the part of the hucksters.

You're arguing semantics. There's no point to it in this case. There's nothing of value to be gained by arguing semantics. It's just a word and it's allowed to take on multiple meanings depending on the context.

I don't think anyone is getting confused here at having to pay for use of the car. If people are getting confused and the meaning is being totally lost, then perhaps it's worth arguing semantics (e.g. in the case of "Autopilot").

Re: Turo and Getaround Get Heat From the Rental Car Industry

#37

Post by maxkwallace »

eropple wrote: post #33
maxkwallace wrote: post #28

The problem with this article is that it doesn't go into detail about what the "taxes and fees" pay for, aside from airport surcharges. Without knowing that it's impossible to determine who should be paying for what. Airport surcharges should just be a toll gate (E-ZPass) when you enter and exit the airport. Same for roads, ideally. A single fee schedule for everyone. Parking shouldn't be free. Someone with 3 cars on…

> I think we can all agree that regulations and taxes should be fairly and equally applied. I get what you mean, so this is not a dunk on you, the words "fairly" and "equally" are at odds in this sentence. "Equally" implies a steady disinterest in marginal utility and situational value; it's where we get Anatole France's "the law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in…

Thank you for that! I completely agree with your comment, and I appreciate the attention to detail. I'll edit my post to change "equally" to "equitably" in that sentence.

Re: Turo and Getaround Get Heat From the Rental Car Industry

#38

Post by capsulecorp »

yeahitslikethat wrote: post #24
capsulecorp wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No lets not, the term makes perfect sense how its being used. It has absolutely nothing to do with how much of a cut the business takes, not sure where you picked up that impression but its not correct.

If you share something, you don't charge. If you charge, it's called renting. They are implying benevolence when there is none. Especially on the part of the hucksters.

That is incorrect, it may be what your kindergarten teacher taught you was the nice thing to do, but it doesn't make it the definition of the word.

share /SHer/ verb 1.have a portion of (something) with another or others. "he shared the pie with her"

synonyms:split, divide, go halves in/with;

edit: seems like a lot of people have the same misconception that sharing implies free of charge, here is a link to the definition for those who are unfamiliar: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/share

Re: Turo and Getaround Get Heat From the Rental Car Industry

#39

Post by arcticbull »

AlexandrB wrote: post #26
freewilly1040 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a flaw caused by unlimited free on street parking, a zoning flaw that needs to be fixed

So instead of regulating a multi-million dollar “startup” we should regulate everyone else instead.

I guess so, yeah. Free parking is a tax on everyone, but especially the lower class. This happens because the extra space needed raises the cost of goods, of adjacent property, and so on. The poorest and those without their own cars have to pay for it too. Regardless of why we're looking into it now, it is a problem, and we should address it. [1]

[1] https://www.vox.com/2014/6/27/5849280/why-free-parking-is-ba...

Re: Turo and Getaround Get Heat From the Rental Car Industry

#40

Post by smt88 »

maxkwallace wrote: post #28

The problem with this article is that it doesn't go into detail about what the "taxes and fees" pay for, aside from airport surcharges. Without knowing that it's impossible to determine who should be paying for what. Airport surcharges should just be a toll gate (E-ZPass) when you enter and exit the airport. Same for roads, ideally. A single fee schedule for everyone. Parking shouldn't be free. Someone with 3 cars on…

Counterpoint/anecdote: I stopped using Turo because every single car owner was a shady "entrepreneur" with 5+ cars. The car was often dirty, and some of the pickup locations were weird and scary (like an empty underground parking garage).

I get roughly the same pricing from big car companies anyway.

Post reply on HN