New York Crash Tax
FREE Car Insurance Comparison
Compare quotes from the top car insurance companies and save!
Secured with SHA-256 Encryption
UPDATED: Mar 13, 2020
It’s all about you. We want to help you make the right coverage choices.
Advertiser Disclosure: We strive to help you make confident insurance decisions. Comparison shopping should be easy. We partner with top insurance providers. This doesn't influence our content. Our opinions are our own.
Editorial Guidelines: We are a free online resource for anyone interested in learning more about insurance. Our goal is to be an objective, third-party resource for everything insurance related. We update our site regularly, and all content is reviewed by insurance experts.
If you live or work in or around New York City you may have heard about the proposal to levy a crash tax for FDNY service in the event of an auto accident.
Basically, the tax is a service charge the “at-fault” driver would be assessed for the Fire Department having to respond to the call.
Some estimates of the potential charges range from $365 to $490 per response.
Many Cry Foul
There are a slew of critics and organizations who disagree with this tax. It is widely believed that FDNY services are already paid for through sales and income taxes paid to the city and state.
The additional tax is being described as a hidden or double tax due to this line of thinking. Why should we have to pay twice for the same service?
Politicians disagree with the tax partly because it may be a slippery slope for charging additional fees for all sorts of public services already in place. These services may include 911 phone calls and garbage pickup for example.
Additionally, the current state of the economy may be forcing politicians to publicly disagree with a new tax on the already debt burdened in NYC.
Policy holders don’t like the tax because they will likely have to foot the bill themselves. Even if a particular insurance company were to pay this fee as part of the claims process, insurance premiums would be increased to reflect the additional costs.
The policy holder would be responsible for the additional cost in the long run.
Insurance companies across the country also disagree with this type of tax initiative.
As discussed above, it increases their payouts on insurance claims and forces them to raise rates, which never sits well with customers.
Senator Eric Adams (D-Brooklyn) intends to introduce a piece of legislation this month to block the tax.
Additionally, city council is attempting to gain authority over decisions regarding whether or not to allow the tax.
If approved, they will likely block the enactment.