Fair Market Value

[RagTopMan]

Finally. I'll be heading to my local DMV this week to register my TR250.

Quoting my DMV: "Fair Market Value for calculating excise tax on used cars is based on the value indicated in the current National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA) Business Guide for the Eastern Region."

Anyone have any idea if a '68 TR250 will be listed in this guide? If so, any idea what "Fair Market Value" is, according to NADA, for this car?

Just trying to get an idea as to how much I will soon be rendering unto Ceasar.

 

[TR_Jim]

Try this link...

NADA Price Guide

 

[TR4nut]

before you pay your dues, check if your vehicle is old enough to get around that - in Texas I'm able to register my TRs using a stated value - the fair market requirement kicks in for newer cars. Not positive but it may be a 20 yr limit for us.

 

[martx-5]

In NY State, we have a similar situation. After a car's a certain age, they don't go by the NADA guides anymore, just bill of sale. In NY, it's definitely less then 20 years, as I gave away my '96 Saturn (with 187k) to a fellow here at work that needed a car. You can't "give away" a car in NY unless it's to a relative or charitable organization, so I wrote out the bill of sale for $150 and DMV accepted it.

 

[Silverghost]

Here in Illinois, it is a flat rate depending on year. Cars older so much are $25. End of story.

 

[JohnnyMead]

Peter,
But Illinois is tricky, watch out for sales tax on a "collector car" in Illinois. I didn't include a bill of sale when I registered my TR3 and a few months later I got a scary letter and a big bill from the Dept of Revenue! I resolved it by sending them the bill o' sale.
John
Carbondale

 

[RagTopMan]

Thanks all. My DMV (Washington, D.C.), please no snikering, states that if the fair market value of a used car is not listed in the NADA guide, then the purchase price indicated on the reverse of the title is used to calculate the excise tax. Unfortunately none of the Rhodes Scholars I've spoken to on the phone can tell me for sure if the car is listed. Seems I'll have to find out in person whether I'm going to be paying 6% of $5,000 or 6% of who knows what!

Nor can I get a straight answer as to emissions testing. They state that "pre-1968" vehicles will not be tested and I would have to inquire further at the inspection station (we have ONE for the entire city so use your imagination as to what that is like) as to how they will handle my car which, as fate would have it, is a 1968 model.

Now my car is totally as original and unmolested. Not that there really was any emissions equipment on a TR250 but what there was is all new, piped and routed exactly as it rolled off the line.

So if I am tested, am I really going to be held to modern standards? Or will their equipment grade me on a curve so to speak, as per what the standards were in 1968?

 

[TR3driver]

Not that there really was any emissions equipment on a TR250

Huh? Emissions is the only reason for the TR250 to even exist! Without emissions equipment, it would be a fire-breathing, fuel injected TR5.

Should be a PCV valve and the funky vacuum advance/retard system with the retard vacuum controlled by a valve on the throttle linkage. Not visible will be the milder camshaft and reduced compression ratio.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:]So if I am tested, am I really going to be held to modern standards? Or will their equipment grade me on a curve so to speak, as per what the standards were in 1968? [/QUOTE]

Should be just the standards in 1968. That's what CA used, before they dropped the requirement to test pre-1975 cars. At one time, even my TR3A got tested and passed with flying colors, although it never had a hope of meeting modern car standards.

 

[RagTopMan]

Emissions is the only reason for the TR250 to even exist! Without emissions equipment, it would be a fire-breathing, fuel injected TR5.

Should be a PCV valve and the funky vacuum advance/retard system with the retard vacuum controlled by a valve on the throttle linkage. Not visible will be the milder camshaft and reduced compression ratio.

You are right of course. I do have the PCV valve, vacuum advance/retard and the vacuum control valve. I think I was meaning to compare my TR250 to say my old '75 TR6 with its flame traps, carbon canisters, and tubing out the yang.

Should be just the standards in 1968. That's what CA used, before they dropped the requirement to test pre-1975 cars. At one time, even my TR3A got tested and passed with flying colors, although it never had a hope of meeting modern car standards.

This makes sense and is hopefully what I will encounter. I can handle '68 standards!

 

[dklawson]

I cannot speak for DC but interestingly I am dealing with some of these issues myself at this moment.

Yes, there is a section of the NADA that deals just with collector/antique cars. I know because I found it online recently when looking up the value of our GT6. The Durham County, NC tax department sent us a bill where they established the value of our car at the TOP of the NADA guide for our 1967 car. Since they have never seen the car nor is it a pristine example, we are disputing the claim.

See:
https://www.nadaguides.com/classic-cars/manufacturers

 

[RagTopMan]

I cannot speak for DC but interestingly I am dealing with some of these issues myself at this moment.

Yes, there is a section of the NADA that deals just with collector/antique cars. I know because I found it online recently when looking up the value of our GT6. The Durham County, NC tax department sent us a bill where they established the value of our car at the TOP of the NADA guide for our 1967 car. Since they have never seen the car nor is it a pristine example, we are disputing the claim.

See:
https://www.nadaguides.com/classic-cars/manufacturers

Wow. So you escaped the registration process only to have the tax department subsequently send you an inflated bill based on the NADA classic car guide. Nice.

I am planning my trip to DMV for Friday but I'm going to try again on the phone. Two hours of waiting followed by a SURPRISE will not be a good thing.

 

[Andrew Mace]

The Durham County, NC tax department sent us a bill where they established the value of our car at the TOP of the NADA guide for our 1967 car. Since they have never seen the car nor is it a pristine example, we are disputing the claim.

Seems a rather "slippery slope" for your County! Do they employ competent, trained and certified vehicle appraisers? :wink:

 

[MikeP]

Your biggest problem for emmisions testing may be finding someone at the station that knows what to do and knows what the 68 emmisions setup looked like to know it's as original. When we had testing here the guys doing it seemed to know little more than plug in the cable and let the computers figure it out and pass/fail a car.

 

[dklawson]

Seems a rather "slippery slope" for your County! Do they employ competent, trained and certified vehicle appraisers? :wink:

I am sure they don't. I placed my letter contesting the evaluation in the mail today. I fully expect them to respond that the only way I can have it re-valued is to have a professional appraisal done. They are probably smart enough to realize that the cost of the appraisal will be more than the tax bill which in most cases would prompt a person to drop the contest. However, I do have an appraisal from 2005 and I will be more than happy to send them a copy of that!

 

[Brosky]

In Mass, I had to use my bill of sale for the tax on the TR8 when I bought it from Mickey. I don't look at what is on the TR6, nor do I complain about it.

 

[dklawson]

Unwanted Update:
The Durham County tax office accepted my dispute concerning the value of our GT6 and has lowered it to the NADA "average" value instead of the pristine top of the line value they used at first. I'm glad this didn't turn into a prolonged losing battle.