• FireRetardant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    The loophole is many who own their own trades business still drive them for personal uses because they can’t afford (don’t want) another car.

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      That’s not a loophole. If the truck wasn’t driven to this movie theater for work purposes, then it wasn’t driven for work purposes.

      • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        Its same as business owners writing things like toilet paper for their house off as a business expense. Its almost impossible to enforce. He could pop into a dollar store, buy a pack of zip ties, and claim they are for work and justifies using the work truck.

        • scarabic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          It’s a myth that you can write anything off as a business expense and the IRS can’t do anything about it.

          • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 days ago

            See you say that, yet many people get away with it all the time because it isn’t enforced. It is illegal, but no one is chasing it down. Work from home/business located on the same property? People get their water systems serviced and installed under their company name as a “business expense” even if 90-99% of the water use is personal. Same with gas in the work truck even if you brought the kids to soccer after school in it etc etc. If it isn’t enforced, it isn’t a myth. The IRS CAN do something about, but only once you frauded enough to be worth their time.

            • scarabic@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 day ago

              Just because you can think of ways out of enforcement doesn’t mean all enforcement is impossible. If there’s a plumbing truck parked at the movie theater, management is going to damn well know if plumbing work is occurring. I know it makes us feel smart to think of loopholes but we don’t need airtight enforcement in order for a law to make sense. There are tons of laws on the books that aren’t actively and exhaustively enforced, and they exist to give authority to those who would take action in situations where they can.

    • MML@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      Yes very specifically had one modified to fit the height of loading docks with a hydraulic gate, to move heavy ass things and a crew of workers, maybe in some cases another vehicle would make sense but we had to get equipment to some pretty remote places as well. Of course one of our employees took it home everyday to do burnouts or whatever. To a certain extent cops are more lenient to a commercial vehicle.

    • vorpuni@tarte.nuage-libre.fr
      link
      fedilink
      Français
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      They’re only common because of tax laws. Everyone else in the world uses box vans for most “work” purposes, and if not box vans, the same frame with something else in the back. Pickup trucks have their uses but they’re worse than vans for most trades.

      • arrow74@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        For my field pickup trucks are the way to go, but we often have to go off road to reach a site.

        That said this truck is still too large. While we mat need the extended bed for additionally equipment storage, the front and basically porfile/height could still be reduced significantly. It’s a huge issue with modern truck design

        • DiarrheaSommelier@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          If function were a priority at all for pickup trucks they would have stubby sloped noses like Sprinter vans have. But no, they need to have massively elongated and elevated hoods because the vast, overwhelming majority are sold exclusively as penis prosthetics.

          It’s comical how empty the engine bay is under those stupid hoods. On Rams with the V6 I can literally stand on the ground in between the radiator and the front end of the engine and still have room to move around.

      • Drusas@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        Don’t I know it. Most of my male family members have been tradespeople and all but one chose/chooses a van over a pickup truck.

    • CalcProgrammer1@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      If only the people who drove them for legitimate work purposes owned them, even as their only vehicle, it would be a huge number off the roads.