Ken

People in my town who lived near the golf course have long kept their golf cart in their garage and drove it to the golf course. Now the police are cracking down on them and requiring them to register it and get liability insurance on it. They are also giving tickets to unlicensed kids who are driving them. They should have been doing this all along, but it is nice to seem them doing it.

In return, I am seeing more and more Golf Carts and UTVs in the parking lot at the grocery store. Our local fire department is evaluating the cost effectiveness of using a UTV type vehicle for grass fire response and rescue situations. They weren’t interested two years ago because it would have to be trailered to a scene, but now that it is approved for street use, much more interest.

Nick

This post was mentioned on Twitter by GlockednLoaded: Your government at work. And we need more taxes? http://bit.ly/1FrVi4. WTF?…

So much for that red herring.

I’m confused about your distinction between rebate and credit. Your linked article only refers to a credit; maybe you mean a refundable credit. Economically, they’re indistinguishable.

On the merits: Really, so what? The law says it has to be a street-legal vehicle. If a state says it’s street-legal, that’s it. (Federalism, you know.) One of the peculiarities of law is that when the language of a statute sets out certain criteria, then those criteria need to be applied in an even-handed manner, even if the result is aesthetically unpleasing to you.

Sandy MacHoots:
I had to blink a couple of times.We’re subsidizing the transportation of people who live in golf course condos so they can get to their tees?And borrowing money to do it?It staggers the imagination.

The carts that qualify don’t have the mounts to carry golf clubs.The are more car like. So this money won’t get used in that way.

Cardinal: For instance, my parents own a golf cart at their condo in Palm Springs — a condo in a golf community, but a mile or so from the first tee of the course.

I had to blink a couple of times. We’re subsidizing the transportation of people who live in golf course condos so they can get to their tees?

And borrowing money to do it? It staggers the imagination.

troll_dc2: If the HAPPY bill gets enacted, this country, given its budget problems, will go to the dogs.

APPLAUSE!

troll_dc2: Ilya, have you see this proposed legislation? If cash for golf carts is bad, how about an INTENTIONAL deduction for pet owners? And the sponsor is an allegedly conservative Republican!

He is referencing the “Humanity and Pets Partnered Through the Years (HAPPY) Act“, H. R. 3501, “To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a deduction for pet care expenses.”

I have to assume that Rep Thaddeus G. McCotter is serious here. And he has two sponsors, Reps. Steve Cohen (10/1) and Jared Polis (10/15), though I seem to remember Rep. Polis coming from Boulder. It seems to be gathering momentum with its two cosponsors signing on just this month.

The problem is that more detailed tax regulation often create more potential loopholes and unintended consequences.

But Congress doesn’t even try!

The problem is structural — Congress is geared towards passing new laws, not carefully monitoring and tweaking the ones they have passed. Fixing this is a one or two-liner, no more.

Some tweaking of the tax law might be helpful.

The problem is that more detailed tax regulation often create more potential loopholes and unintended consequences.

Maybe not 60 mph, but why not 40 or 50?

The SC island we usually visit in the summer is increasingly a place where folks do all their driving in the carts. The fact that they cannot go as fast as regular cars is a safety bonus.

I mean, it’s impossible to write a statute perfectly targeting the thing you wanted, but it’s not impossible to pay attention so as to iteratively fix each abuse as it comes along.

(And man, where were you when the USA PATRIOT Act was introduced? We could have use your freedom-lovingness then.)

I mean really Ilya where were you when the Alien and Sedition Acts were passed???

Don’t you realize that your failure to comment on every stupid government action in the past means you can’t comment on any current stupid government action???

As a matter of fact, yes. I oppose narrowly targeted tax cuts as well as similar rebates and tax credits. They are economically identical. This case, however, is a tax rebate, which is even worse than a credit.

(And man, where were you when the USA PATRIOT Act was introduced? We could have use your freedom-lovingness then.)

I wasn’t a blogger back in 2001, though I did oppose some aspects of that act. I also criticized the Bush Administration’s assertions of untrammeled executive power quite a few times right here on this blog, after I did start writing for it in 2006, e.g. here:

http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2007_08_19-2007_08_25.shtml#1187914017

If you had actually looked at my record rather than made baseless assumptions about what I think, perhaps you would have written a better comment.

Bruce Hayden: This must be popular in Sun City, Arizona, where driving a car is sometimes problematic with all the golf carts.

My mother lives there and it isn’t a problem. I prefer the gas powered golf carts over electric for street driving, especially at night.

Golf Cart Man is referring to his offer in which you can buy the cart for $8,000, get a $5,300 tax credit off your 2009 income tax, lease it back for $100 a month for 27 months, at which point Golf Cart Man will buy back the cart for $2,000. “This means you own a free Golf Cart or made $2,000 cash doing absolutely nothing!!!” You can’t blame a guy for exploiting loopholes that Congress offers.

Actually, you can blame a guy.

I’m pretty sure this is tax evasion, since there is no economic substance to the transaction. This type of lease-back scam has been identified as such by the IRS for years now.

I expect they’ll be knocking on his door any day now.

(And man, where were you when the USA PATRIOT Act was introduced? We could have use your freedom-lovingness then.)