NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is
intended only for use by the standing finance committees of the
legislature. The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume
responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used for
other purposes.
The most recent FIR
version (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) is available on the Legislative
Website. The Adobe PDF version includes
all attachments, whereas the HTML version does not. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be
obtained from the LFC in
SPONSOR: |
HTRC |
DATE
TYPED: |
|
HB |
70/HTRCS |
||
SHORT
TITLE: |
Alternative
Fuel Vehicles |
SB |
|
||||
|
ANALYST: |
Smith |
|||||
REVENUE
Estimated Revenue |
Subsequent Years Impact |
Recurring or
Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
|
FY03 |
FY04 |
|
|
|
|
(458.0) |
(500.0) |
Recurring |
General Fund |
|
(104.0) |
(117.0) |
Recurring |
State Road Fund |
|
(52.0) |
(53.0) |
Recurring |
Local Governments |
(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Revenue Decreases)
Responses
Received From
TRD
SHTD
SUMMARY
Synopsis of Bill
House Taxation and Revenue
Committee Substitute for House Bill 70 provides a
motor vehicle excise tax and registration fee exemption for dedicated
alternative fuel and gas-electric hybrid vehicles. For the purpose of this
proposal, “alternative fuel” means natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas,
electricity, hydrogen or a fuel mixture containing not less than seventy and
not more than eighty-five percent ethanol or methanol.
The proposal also
specifies that alternative fuel and gas-electric hybrid vehicles are not
subject to gross receipts or compensating taxes despite the motor vehicle
excise tax exemption.
FISCAL
IMPLICATIONS
TRD
and SHTD relied on numbers provided by the Energy Information Administration of
the U.S. Department of Energy that report there are approximately 5,600
exclusively alternative fueled vehicles in use in
Motor
vehicle excise tax collections are credited 100% to the general fund. Vehicle registration fees are distributed
approximately 2/3 to the state road fund and 1/3 to local government road and
general funds.
TECHNICAL
ISSUES
·
TRD notes that
the definition of “alternative fuel” contained in this proposal is not consistent
with the definition contained in the Alternative Fuel Tax Act (Section 7-16B
NMSA 1978), which provides preferential fuel excise tax rates for alternative
fuel buyers. For the purpose of this proposal, alternative fuel means “natural
gas, liquefied petroleum gas, electricity, hydrogen or a fuel mixture
containing not less than seventy and not more than eighty-five percent ethanol
or methanol.” Pursuant to the Alternative Fuel Tax Act, alternative fuel
means “liquefied petroleum gas, compressed natural gas, liquefied natural
gas, or a water-phased hydrocarbon fuel emulsion consisting of a hydrocarbon
base and water in an amount not less than twenty percent by volume of the total
water- phased fuel emulsion…”This
discrepancy may cause some confusion for taxpayers, motor vehicle division personnel,
and fuel tax administrators
·
A definition of “dedicated” should probably be included in the
proposal. For example, the Energy
Information Administration defines a dedicated alternative fuel vehicle as “a
vehicle designed to operate solely on one alternative fuel.”
·
Similarly a definition of “gas-electric hybrid” should probably be
included in order to establish specific guidelines for motor vehicle personnel
to identify vehicles qualifying for exemption.
OTHER
SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES
·
The state expects to collect $117 million from the motor vehicle excise
tax in fiscal year 2004. All motor vehicle excise tax collections are credited
to the state general fund.
SM/yr