Resident Opposes Proposed EV Fee in HB 5,544, Says It Could Discourage Sales

A Connecticut resident testified to the Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee in opposition to House Bill 5,544's proposed fee and tax on electric vehicles, saying an annual fee in addition to a tax could discourage adoption and penalize plug-in hybrid owners.

Paul Palmer described himself as the owner of a plug-in hybrid and told the committee he supported a tax that replaces foregone gasoline taxes but opposed an additional fee component. "The fee is the part that I object to because in other states, they've imposed these fees and some of these fees are anywhere from $12 to $400 a year. And that's very punitive," Palmer said.

Palmer also said high residential electricity rates in Connecticut reduce the financial benefit of charging vehicles at home, making the economics unfavorable compared with gasoline prices. He noted the bill did not specify the size of the fee and called that uncertainty problematic.

Speakers

Paul Palmer, Resident and EV owner (citizen)

Nut graf: The witness supported replacing lost motor fuel tax revenue from EVs but opposed an unspecified annual fee on plug-in vehicles, saying such fees can be punitive and discourage adoption.

Details: Palmer said Connecticut residential electricity rates make charging costly and that if the state imposes a flat fee without regard to usage it could require owners to pay for a service they do not use. He asked lawmakers to consider fee size and unintended effects on consumer choices.

Ending: The committee heard testimony from additional stakeholders later in the hearing; no formal action on HB 5,544 was recorded during this testimony segment.