Car Chat General discussion about Lexus, other auto manufacturers and automotive news.

Federal and global regulations costing consumers a FORTUNE for their cars

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-03-14, 10:10 PM
  #1  
bitkahuna
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (20)
 
bitkahuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Present
Posts: 75,174
Received 2,496 Likes on 1,641 Posts
Default Federal and global regulations costing consumers a FORTUNE for their cars

excellent video and article here.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014...0b-study-says/

explains why euro regs on hood height have changed the front of all vehicles and the entire design, making so many look alikes.
this is why we have so many big grilles.

Regulation is increasingly limiting the design perimeters for new cars, too. Testing has revealed that serious injury can result when a pedestrian's head strikes the hood. The hood itself acts as a cushion as it crumples, but that cushion effect ends as the hood impacts the engine block.
The new regulations require most new cars have a three-inch space between the hood and the engine block.
But designers can't just raise the hood line three inches without throwing the entire design out of whack. The windshield and windows must be smaller. The lip, where the sheet metal rises to the base of the windows, must be higher. The seats, too, must be higher so the driver can see over the higher hood, andthe wheels have to be bigger, lest they appear out of scale with the new proportions.
explains that 21% of a cost of a car is for regulatory compliance. guess who ends up paying that? YOU.

explains dealers pay about THREE BILLION a year to comply with regulations. guess who ends up paying that? YOU.

examples of such idiocy:
a state inspector recently found that [a dealer's] showroom roof needed to drain storm water more slowly to comply with state storm water drainage regulations.
While an applicant with a sketchy credit history can get a car loan, Department of Homeland Security regulations stipulate a car-buying terrorist must not get one. The dealership must report to DHS any potential car buyer who might fit a terrorist profile. But the regulations are not easy to interpret, a dilemma exacerbated by the fact that terrorists tend not to announce their occupation when filling out lending applications.
used car certifiers at his Honda dealership in Maryland were flunking a state-mandated test. One question in particular stumped his computer-proficient technicians. It asked what a "drag link" was. Drag links are steering components that have largely been phased out of most cars for 30 years or more.
and outside this article, of course we have dozens of different types of gasoline required around the country making refining a nightmare and costing consumers. we have ethanol LOWERING mpg and possibly increasing food costs.

if any of this bothers you, you should vote against politicians who favor all of this oppression and nannying.

Last edited by bitkahuna; 06-03-14 at 10:14 PM.
bitkahuna is online now  
Old 06-03-14, 10:30 PM
  #2  
spwolf
Lexus Champion
 
spwolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 19,926
Received 161 Likes on 119 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bitkahuna
excellent video and article here.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014...0b-study-says/

explains why euro regs on hood height have changed the front of all vehicles and the entire design, making so many look alikes.
this is why we have so many big grilles.

explains that 21% of a cost of a car is for regulatory compliance. guess who ends up paying that? YOU.

explains dealers pay about THREE BILLION a year to comply with regulations. guess who ends up paying that? YOU.

examples of such idiocy:


and outside this article, of course we have dozens of different types of gasoline required around the country making refining a nightmare and costing consumers. we have ethanol LOWERING mpg and possibly increasing food costs.

if any of this bothers you, you should vote against politicians who favor all of this oppression and nannying.
yeah, sucks to have all these crash test regulations, ESP mandatory and all those bad things. We should leave big corporations to give us whats best for us :-)
spwolf is offline  
Old 06-04-14, 05:03 AM
  #3  
4TehNguyen
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
 
4TehNguyen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 26,059
Received 51 Likes on 46 Posts
Default

so you think absent of these regs car makers would just make paper mache cars? Companies arent so stupid as to kill their customers that makes for bad business unless youre GM. People want safe cars you dont need to have govt to tell them this.

Last edited by 4TehNguyen; 06-04-14 at 05:07 AM.
4TehNguyen is offline  
Old 06-04-14, 05:45 AM
  #4  
rogers2
Racer
 
rogers2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Annapolis, Md
Posts: 1,268
Received 13 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

IMO it's all about balance. Trust me big companies are not going to gov themselves. All gov regulations aren’t bad. The car industries spend millions in lobbying for the things they don’t won’t to be passed. So moving on…

Last edited by rogers2; 06-05-14 at 12:17 PM.
rogers2 is offline  
Old 06-04-14, 05:58 AM
  #5  
4TehNguyen
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
 
4TehNguyen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 26,059
Received 51 Likes on 46 Posts
Default

its not over yet watch when we get deep into the CAFE requirements thats going to constrict design even more

spoken like a true bureaucrat trying to justify his job:
It's all money well spent, said safety expert Clarence Ditlow of the Center for Auto Safety.

"The cost of regulation saves lives, prevents injuries, prevents paralysis and overall the government takes into consideration and cost benefit already and if anything, there's too little auto regulation and not enough," he said.
4TehNguyen is offline  
Old 06-04-14, 06:00 AM
  #6  
Sulu
Lexus Champion
 
Sulu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,309
Likes: 0
Received 31 Likes on 24 Posts
Default

Here we go again!

Originally Posted by spwolf
yeah, sucks to have all these crash test regulations, ESP mandatory and all those bad things. We should leave big corporations to give us whats best for us :-)

Volvo introduced the 3-point seatbelt. MB introduced crush zones and ABS and airbags. All before, and all without regulation requiring them to do so.
Sulu is offline  
Old 06-04-14, 06:50 AM
  #7  
robert1408
Intermediate
 
robert1408's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Tx
Posts: 271
Received 36 Likes on 19 Posts
Default

What about the US safety requirements for protecting unbelted front occupants? That adds some weight and cost for European imports here. Their safety standards assume seat belts are being worn. If you're too stupid or obstinate to wear seat belts, we don't need your contribution to the gene pool.
robert1408 is offline  
Old 06-04-14, 06:55 AM
  #8  
LexFather
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Fox News loves scaring people lol....

OH NOES WE ALL ARE GONNA RIDE HORSES SOON!! Lol
 
Old 06-04-14, 06:56 AM
  #9  
LexBob2
Lexus Champion
 
LexBob2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Illinois
Posts: 11,251
Received 139 Likes on 113 Posts
Default

To revert back to the 60's, The Man is bringin' us down! This discussion has been going on for years.
LexBob2 is online now  
Old 06-04-14, 08:31 AM
  #10  
4TehNguyen
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
 
4TehNguyen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 26,059
Received 51 Likes on 46 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by LexFather
Fox News loves scaring people lol....

OH NOES WE ALL ARE GONNA RIDE HORSES SOON!! Lol
you realize that Fox didnt do the study, another outfit did. How about I link the same study but from an automotive website? Why shoot the messenger. Is it more credible if the same article was posted by ABC? This article is actually better since it posts more hard numbers. Note that this study only analyzes federal regs on dealerships. Not the actual manuacturing or state/local regs. $10B is just a tip of the iceberg of the total cost. Guess what that means. All the costs are passed onto you as a consumer.

http://www.autonews.com/article/2014...-billions-jobs

Study shows federal regulations cost dealers billions, jobs

Jamie LaReau Twitter RSS feed
Automotive News
May 30, 2014 - 6:00 am ET -- UPDATED: 6/2/14 4:03 pm ET -- adds details
Franchised new-car dealers in the United States spent a combined $3.2 billion in 2012 to meet federal regulations, a report released today said.

The report made no attempt to determine whether dealerships, the economy, or consumers benefited in any way from any of those regulations, however.

Dealers spent the money to comply with 61 major federal rules, the report said. As a result, consumers paid more and the U.S. economy paid in the form of 10,550 fewer dealership jobs, the research found.

“The additional costs for new-car dealerships to comply with federal regulations are passed along to our customers in the form of higher prices, which results in lower vehicle sales and reduced employment at dealerships,” said Forrest McConnell, chairman of the National Automobile Dealers Association and a Honda and Acura dealer in Montgomery, Ala.

‘Not a cost-benefit study’

NADA commissioned the study, “The Impact of Federal Regulations on Franchised Automobile Dealerships,” which was conducted by the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Mich.

The commission was very specific, said Kristin Dziczek, CAR’s director of the Industry and Labor Group. “This was not a cost-benefit study,” she wrote in an e-mail to Automotive News. “NADA only commissioned an estimate of costs.”

Therefore, any benefits to a dealership or society from complying with the mandatory and voluntary regulations reviewed by the study -- for instance, rules about handling the asbestos in older cars’ brakes, or laws regarding the hiring of illegal immigrants -- were not recognized by the study.

On the other hand, the study excluded costs of compliance with regulations required only to receive a benefit, such as paperwork associated with the Small Business Administration’s Dealership Floor Plan Financing Program, as well as new regulations for which the cost of compliance is not yet known, such as the Affordable Care Act.

Adding jobs to comply?

Moreover, while the study sought to identify how many jobs were lost because of higher costs resulting from regulations, “employment created by compliance,” say from hiring extra clerks or accountants, “would be in the benefits category, and we were not asked to measure benefits,” Dziczek wrote. “Some case study respondents did mention these positive effects, however.”

In 2012, the average dealership spent $182,754 to comply with federal mandates governing employment, business operations, vehicle financing, sales, marketing, vehicle repair and maintenance, the study said.

The regulatory costs equaled about 22 percent of the average dealership’s pretax profits, or about $2,400 per dealership employee. The average dealership needed to sell 106 vehicles in 2012 to recoup its regulatory compliance costs, the report concluded.

Biggies: Employment, accounting, financing

Regulations on employment, accounting and vehicle financing made up nearly two-thirds of the estimated federal regulatory compliance costs, the study said.

The study estimated the overall impact of these costs on the 2012 U.S. economy at $10.5 billion in lost economic output and more than 75,000 fewer jobs.

“Automotive dealer-specific regulations cover a broad range of issues -- including environmental concerns, tax and finance rules, and various consumer protections,” the report said. It noted that among those regulations, some are mandatory, in which fines are levied for noncompliance; some are required only to receive a benefit (such as a loan or tax credit); and some are voluntary.

“There is a range of effort required to comply with each regulation -- from very low efforts (refraining from prohibited practices), to very costly process burdens (capital expenditures, documentation and filing evidence of compliance with government agencies),” it said.

8 dealerships studied

The appendices list the regulations covered, including, for example, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act and workplace health and safety standards.

The compliance cost estimates were based on a study of eight dealerships: one in Maryland and the rest in Michigan and Ohio. Dealers interviewed in 2013 and 2014 were asked to estimate costs and were “encouraged to substantiate costs, where appropriate,” the study said.

The study did not analyze the cost of mandates, such as fuel economy and safety rules, on manufacturers. It also did not study state and local regulatory mandates.

Last edited by 4TehNguyen; 06-04-14 at 08:38 AM.
4TehNguyen is offline  
Old 06-04-14, 09:07 AM
  #11  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 91,426
Received 87 Likes on 86 Posts
Default

Bitkahuna has a point. It's hard to justify idiotic practices like this:


a state inspector recently found that [a dealer's] showroom roof needed to drain storm water more slowly to comply with state storm water drainage regulations.


While an applicant with a sketchy credit history can get a car loan, Department of Homeland Security regulations stipulate a car-buying terrorist must not get one. The dealership must report to DHS any potential car buyer who might fit a terrorist profile. But the regulations are not easy to interpret, a dilemma exacerbated by the fact that terrorists tend not to announce their occupation when filling out lending applications.


used car certifiers at his Honda dealership in Maryland were flunking a state-mandated test. One question in particular stumped his computer-proficient technicians. It asked what a "drag link" was. Drag links are steering components that have largely been phased out of most cars for 30 years or more.
This makes about as much sense as trying to use a castrated ox to try and breed cattle.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 06-04-14, 09:47 AM
  #12  
bitkahuna
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (20)
 
bitkahuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Present
Posts: 75,174
Received 2,496 Likes on 1,641 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 4TehNguyen
you realize that Fox didnt do the study, another outfit did. How about I link the same study but from an automotive website? Why shoot the messenger. Is it more credible if the same article was posted by ABC? This article is actually better since it posts more hard numbers. Note that this study only analyzes federal regs on dealerships. Not the actual manuacturing or state/local regs. $10B is just a tip of the iceberg of the total cost. Guess what that means. All the costs are passed onto you as a consumer.
it's easier to attack/mock/dismiss an internetz link domain, not the information.
bitkahuna is online now  
Old 06-04-14, 03:20 PM
  #13  
bagwell
Lexus Champion
 
bagwell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Woodlands, TX
Posts: 11,205
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

LMAO, you could always go buy a pre-1968 vehicle
bagwell is offline  
Old 06-04-14, 03:38 PM
  #14  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 91,426
Received 87 Likes on 86 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bagwell
LMAO, you could always go buy a pre-1968 vehicle
Actually, it's not necessarily LMAO. Though they didn't have the reliability of today's cars (and could be a PITA with stumbling carburetor cold-engine starts/warm-ups and constant tune-ups), there's still a lot to be said for them. They had soft, cushy seats, markedly better ride comfort than most of today's cars, and their large ladder-frames (except for the unibody Chrysler and a few GM products) were tough and could take a lot of punishment and towing. I learned to drive on these cars, and, to an extent, have missed them ever since.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 06-04-14, 04:45 PM
  #15  
bagwell
Lexus Champion
 
bagwell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Woodlands, TX
Posts: 11,205
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mmarshall
Actually, it's not necessarily LMAO. Though they didn't have the reliability of today's cars (and could be a PITA with stumbling carburetor cold-engine starts/warm-ups and constant tune-ups), there's still a lot to be said for them. They had soft, cushy seats, markedly better ride comfort than most of today's cars, and their large ladder-frames (except for the unibody Chrysler and a few GM products) were tough and could take a lot of punishment and towing. I learned to drive on these cars, and, to an extent, have missed them ever since.
oh no doubt,,,,they were tough cars yes... but in those days in a bad accident, the occupants would be severely injured or killed but the cars would be relatively fine.

and 1968 is a significant year.

Last edited by bagwell; 06-04-14 at 04:59 PM.
bagwell is offline  


Quick Reply: Federal and global regulations costing consumers a FORTUNE for their cars



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:06 AM.