Subaru Ascent Forum banner

1 - 20 of 48 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,304 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Hey all, just an FYI for those of you who do your own taxes. No matter what the internet says, the Ascent is absolutely not eligible for the Section 179 IRS deduction. There's even a lot of accountants, and the others are definitely wrong. The weight range for the deduction is definitely 6,001 to 14,000 pounds, inclusive.

You will note that coincides with US Department of Transportation's Federal Highway Administration's Class 2 (6,001-10,000 inclusive) and Class 3 (10,001 to 14,000 inclusive) vehicle designations.

The Ascent is most definitely a Class 1 vehicle, in all configurations, regardless of any options or accessories. It always has an exact GVWR of 6,000 pounds, even if you add a thousand pounds of options and accessories. There is no way of adding that one pound of GVWR without doing a vehicle modification requiring a vehicle class change and then getting that certified by whatever agency your state requires and getting that certification filed with your state's motor vehicle department. That's not happening.

This is directly from the IRS, publication 946, page 20 (link below):
Sport Utility and Certain Other Vehicles
You cannot elect to expense more than $25,000 of the cost of any heavy sport utility vehicle (SUV) and certain other vehicles placed in service during the tax year. This rule applies to any 4-wheeled vehicle primarily designed or used to carry passengers over public streets, roads, or highways, that is rated at more than 6,000 pounds gross vehicle weight and not more than 14,000 pounds gross vehicle weight.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. :crying:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
160 Posts
Sadly that 1 pound of rating will most likely translate to 2 ascent sales lost in MN over the next 1-2 years from me alone. Being able to take a $25K deduction up front and depreciate out the balance vs. depreciating out the entire purchase will make me consider a slightly different vehicle. The deduction does make the vehicle more "affordable" when all things are taken into consideration. I am surprised that Subaru did not give this consideration and get that extra pound of rating.

On the other side of things, our Chev 2500HD is rated at 10000 GVWR. I strongly believe GM did this, because if it is 10001, it is required to fall under DOT regulations at all time they are being used for business use. This means: Daily Logs, driver having a DOT health card, mounted fire extinguisher, flares on board, business name and DOT number on the vehicle.... With it being at 10000 we only have to be DOT compliant if we have a trailer hooked up to the truck.

Maybe Subaru will realize this potential issue and find a way to make an adjustment. Is there any other requirements for the manufacturer by creating a Class 2 vehicle over a Class 1?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
313 Posts
I'm curious if Class 2 vehicles are automatically more expensive to insure and higher registration tax/fee, depending on state and locality, (among other implications) that would out weigh the benefit to the relatively small number of people that would take advantage of this.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,304 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
If I had to GUESS, I'd guess they will not, and that's because, in a variety of states (such as NY), it's a pain to get a Class 2 vehicle insured or registered as a passenger vehicle with passenger rates, and the process for getting the vehicle certified in each state (by the manufacturer) as passenger vehicle eligible varies... whereas 6,000 pounds or less is automatically within the federal weight ranges that most states use for such determinations.

My brother has a Dodge RAM 2500 King Cab with the full big back seat and four doors. NYS insists it needs to be registered as a commercial vehicle unless he jumps through a ton of hoops, including installing a camper cap and a seat back on the bed.

In the NY Metro area, that means there's a LOT of highways one cannot legally drive the vehicle on (all of our parkways). Some people get away with it for a bit, but that's decreasing with the more prolific use of license plate scanners. My brother has been pulled over for it.

Sadly that 1 pound of rating will most likely translate to 2 ascent sales lost in MN over the next 1-2 years from me alone. Being able to take a $25K deduction up front and depreciate out the balance vs. depreciating out the entire purchase will make me consider a slightly different vehicle. The deduction does make the vehicle more "affordable" when all things are taken into consideration. I am surprised that Subaru did not give this consideration and get that extra pound of rating.

On the other side of things, our Chev 2500HD is rated at 10000 GVWR. I strongly believe GM did this, because if it is 10001, it is required to fall under DOT regulations at all time they are being used for business use. This means: Daily Logs, driver having a DOT health card, mounted fire extinguisher, flares on board, business name and DOT number on the vehicle.... With it being at 10000 we only have to be DOT compliant if we have a trailer hooked up to the truck.

Maybe Subaru will realize this potential issue and find a way to make an adjustment. Is there any other requirements for the manufacturer by creating a Class 2 vehicle over a Class 1?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
160 Posts
If I had to GUESS, I'd guess they will not, and that's because, in a variety of states (such as NY), it's a pain to get a Class 2 vehicle insured or registered as a passenger vehicle with passenger rates, and the process for getting the vehicle certified in each state (by the manufacturer) as passenger vehicle eligible varies... whereas 6,000 pounds or less is automatically within the federal weight ranges that most states use for such determinations.

My brother has a Dodge RAM 2500 King Cab with the full big back seat and four doors. NYS insists it needs to be registered as a commercial vehicle unless he jumps through a ton of hoops, including installing a camper cap and a seat back on the bed.

In the NY Metro area, that means there's a LOT of highways one cannot legally drive the vehicle on (all of our parkways). Some people get away with it for a bit, but that's decreasing with the more prolific use of license plate scanners. My brother has been pulled over for it.
Thanks for the reply. I had no idea that things such as this varied so much state to state. I have a buddy in Chicago that drives a Honda Ridgeline and because it is a "truck" it cannot be driven on certain roads. This must be similar to the parkways in NY. I can see as a manufacturer how they would want to keep things as simple as possible. As noted above, the benefit of remaining as a "class 1" vehicle most likely outweighs the benefit of those of us that prefer a deduction.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Robert,
When googling "what is the gvwr of the 2019 Subaru Ascent" is clearly shows 6001. I took delivery of mine last month and was so impressed my brother in California just put a deposit on 1 and plans on taking the tax deduction as he'll use it in business. Your statement confuses me.
Ed
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
313 Posts
Robert,
When googling "what is the gvwr of the 2019 Subaru Ascent" is clearly shows 6001. I took delivery of mine last month and was so impressed my brother in California just put a deposit on 1 and plans on taking the tax deduction as he'll use it in business. Your statement confuses me.
Ed
The internet can say whatever it wants, look at the placard inside your driver side door, it will state the GVWR is 6000.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,304 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Bad news

Robert,
When googling "what is the gvwr of the 2019 Subaru Ascent" is clearly shows 6001. I took delivery of mine last month and was so impressed my brother in California just put a deposit on 1 and plans on taking the tax deduction as he'll use it in business. Your statement confuses me.
Ed
The internet can say whatever it wants, look at the placard inside your driver side door, it will state the GVWR is 6000.
Yep, every trim level of the Ascent is exactly 6,000 pound GVWR, and absolutely no Ascent is eligible. Anything else is sadly false. Be warned - even some accountants misread the regulation (which is why I posted it above). Sorry for the bad news. :crying:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
813 Posts
Now this makes me wonder if the 6,000 GVWR is not suspension related, but was rather done that way to keep it out of the Class 2 status?

People who are towing may not be as bad off if it is say really rated for 7,000lb but Subaru wanted to keep it as a Class 2 so rated it as 6,000lb?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ctpreviti

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
This one smells fishy to me. There are several Car sights like Car & Driver that list the GVWR at 6001lbs. I took into account the Ascents GVWR when I purchased this vehicle. Someone leaked to these various Car sites that the GVWR was 6001 lbs.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,304 Posts
Discussion Starter #12 (Edited)
Alas, they are incorrect... the Ascent is ALWAYS 6,000 pound GVWR

This one smells fishy to me. There are several Car sights like Car & Driver that list the GVWR at 6001lbs. I took into account the Ascents GVWR when I purchased this vehicle. Someone leaked to these various Car sites that the GVWR was 6001 lbs.
Someone is misinformed. Absolutely every production and press and demo Subaru Ascent ever built for sale and/or use in the United States, regardless of trim level, accessories or options, is always and exactly 6,000 pounds GVWR.

This is the Touring. More specifically, this is MY Touring, which has almost every available option and accessories, factory installed.

This may also be confirmed with Subaru of America, which we have already done. This can also be confirmed by going to any Subaru dealership in the United States and opening every drivers door on every trim level Ascent on the lot. They will ALL have the same GVWR of 6,000 pounds. Just like mine:



I think some of the confusion was because some *Canadian* publications and some publications using Subaru Canada's releases miscalculated the GVWR in pounds. When they did the conversion to pounds from kilograms, they rounded up.

In other cases, it was wishful thinking, specifically for the tax deduction that does NOT apply to the Ascent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
Not doubting what you are saying. If you go and Google Subaru Ascent GVWR like I did before I bought mine all you see is 6001 lbs. right or wrong (wrong in this case). My question is what was the source of the 6001 lbs? It almost feels like intentional to get folks to look at the Ascent instead of say the Toyota 4runner.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,304 Posts
Discussion Starter #14 (Edited)
Simple answer: They did the math in the wrong direction...

Not doubting what you are saying. If you go and Google Subaru Ascent GVWR like I did before I bought mine all you see is 6001 lbs. right or wrong (wrong in this case). My question is what was the source of the 6001 lbs? It almost feels like intentional to get folks to look at the Ascent instead of say the Toyota 4runner.
I am pretty sure it's Canada that's the problem. :tango_face_wink:

Not really Canada the country, but that a lot of the info the early articles were based on was combinations of US and Canadian market info. The Ascent GVWR in Canada is 2,722kg. That translates into 6,000.983 pounds. Or, the 6,001 pounds some early articles claimed.

They did the math (conversion) in the wrong direction, lol.


The Ascent is a US built car. Its GVWR is 6,000 pounds on the dot. BUT, when you then convert THAT figure to kilograms for Canadian sale, you get 2,721.554 pounds. JUST enough that it rounds up to 2,722 pounds for the Canadian door tags.

The number was never meant to be converted from KG to pounds. It started in pounds and was converted to kg for Canada. So, in losing those ever important decimal places, re-converting from kg to pounds doesn't work.

You can see this on some of the sites that list both figures. I guarantee you, like how Wikipedia can do, they have a built in conversion script. You enter a weight, and a unit of measure (eg: "2,722" and "kg") and the site code does the rest. That doesn't work in this case. Had they instead entered "6,000" and "pounds", it would work, since KG would be converted and rounded to "2,722".

And sorry I misunderstood your initial post. Hope this sufficiently answers it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
That makes sense for the conversion from pounds to kilograms, but why would they need to convert back to pounds if that spec is already published?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
160 Posts
thanks. I just texted my brother. They're going to be po'd at me.
Keep in mind that you can still use and deduct any business vehicle. It has to be GVWR of 6001+ to qualify for the $25K up front deduction.

For vehicles that qualify $25K is deducted that year and the balance is scheduled over a period of time. Anything under 6001 can still be deducted but the entire deductible value is scheduled over time.

At least this is based on what our CPA has informed me of.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,304 Posts
Discussion Starter #17 (Edited)
Because the Canada numbers came out first.

That makes sense for the conversion from pounds to kilograms, but why would they need to convert back to pounds if that spec is already published?
Because it wasn't. Canada released some of the specs before the US did. These numbers were pre-production numbers that started hitting the two markets in November onwards. In this case, the Canada numbers showed up first. So, Subaru Canada converted to KG from the unpublished Subaru Indiana Automotive number (6,000 pounds) that no one else had seen. Then, the news outlets ran with that number (the Canadian one) and converted that number back to pounds, not realizing that the kg number was rounded up.

I knew the numbers because I'd already seen the car, and took pics of the door tags on a Touring and Limited and spoke to some of the product managers way back in April 2018, but, alas, as far as news articles are concerned, I am not an official number source. :tango_face_wink:

While the door tags are not in this gallery (because they were boring and no one asked), I also took measurements of the interior:
https://www.facebook.com/pg/SubaruAmbassadorRobert/photos/?tab=album&album_id=1972371322803883

But, short version is, Subaru Canada converted the US GVWR to kg, released that info, and news outlets mis-converted it back to pounds. And THEN Subaru of America released the detailed specs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
Thanks, I get it but don't like it. I am sure there are other people than myself that were looking at this as part of the decision making process.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
8,304 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
I know...

Thanks, I get it but don't like it. I am sure there are other people than myself that were looking at this as part of the decision making process.
Believe me, I know. It's exactly what prompted me to make this post and pin it, to hopefully fix the confusion caused by poor reporting. The media dropped the ball on this one, and they don't always go back and fix old articles.

It's not like a number of us didn't know the real numbers, or like they couldn't have asked SoA for the numbers. They just didn't. :sad:

If it were 5,000 pounds vs 5,001 pounds... then, whatever. But this was an important weight barrier that literally changes the class of the vehicle, as well as the tax liabilities.
 
1 - 20 of 48 Posts
Top