Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Paying per mile may replace taxes at gas pump

Expand Messages
  • Chris Radcliff
    Lloyd has a good point. It all depends on which costs you re trying to internalize. Charging tolls spreads the cost of emissions unevenly, just as charging
    Message 1 of 5 , Oct 8, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Lloyd has a good point. It all depends on which costs you're trying to
      internalize. Charging tolls spreads the cost of emissions unevenly,
      just as charging gas taxes spreads the cost of road infrastructure
      unevenly.

      Additionally, charging a toll by mileage sounds like a bigger challenge
      than they may imagine. Taxes at the pump are easy to implement because
      there's already a measured monetary transaction involved. Tolls are
      notorious for creating bottlenecks unless there's a high-tech (and
      difficult-to-implement) automated system in place. It's hard to
      imagine the embedded GPS receiver approach the article mentions gaining
      wide adoption very quickly, and partial adoption would make the system
      even more unequal.

      At the core, something tells me this is less an issue of fair payment
      and more a response to the difficult time governments have increasing
      taxes. Shifting to a new system gives them the opportunity to set a
      higher price without having anything to compare against.

      Cheers,
      ~chris

      Lloyd Wright wrote:

      > It seems like this tax policy will benefit SUVs and other vehicles
      > with poor
      > fuel efficiency. Essentially, a small, efficient hybrid vehicle (at
      > 70 mpg)
      > will pay the same tax as a Hummer (at 7 mpg) when travelling the same
      > distance.
      >
      > I agree that electronic tolling of this sort is appropriate for pricing
      > congestion and road construction since these costs are borne by the
      > distance
      > travelled and the time of the travel. However, it does nothing to
      > account for
      > air emissions which are related to fuel usage. I would suggest that
      > it would
      > be better to charge both a petrol tax and a road usage tax. Of
      > course, even
      > these only begin to account for the true societal costs of motorised
      > vehicles.
      >
      > Lloyd
    • CEB
      Hi, On a related note the discussion in the European Parliament about kerosene tax for airlines, at least within the EU, is heating up a bit.... Todd
      Message 2 of 5 , Oct 8, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi,

        On a related note the discussion in the European Parliament about kerosene tax for airlines, at least within the EU, is heating up a bit....

        Todd

        ______________________________________________________________
        > Od: Chris Radcliff <chris@...>
        > Komu: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com
        > Datum: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 12:20:40 -0700
        > Předmět: [carfree_cities] Re: Paying per mile may replace taxes at gas pump
        >
        >
        > Lloyd has a good point. It all depends on which costs you're trying to
        > internalize. Charging tolls spreads the cost of emissions unevenly,
        > just as charging gas taxes spreads the cost of road infrastructure
        > unevenly.
        >
        > Additionally, charging a toll by mileage sounds like a bigger challenge
        > than they may imagine. Taxes at the pump are easy to implement because
        > there's already a measured monetary transaction involved. Tolls are
        > notorious for creating bottlenecks unless there's a high-tech (and
        > difficult-to-implement) automated system in place. It's hard to
        > imagine the embedded GPS receiver approach the article mentions gaining
        > wide adoption very quickly, and partial adoption would make the system
        > even more unequal.
        >
        > At the core, something tells me this is less an issue of fair payment
        > and more a response to the difficult time governments have increasing
        > taxes. Shifting to a new system gives them the opportunity to set a
        > higher price without having anything to compare against.
        >
        > Cheers,
        > ~chris
        >
        > Lloyd Wright wrote:
        >
        > > It seems like this tax policy will benefit SUVs and other vehicles
        > > with poor
        > > fuel efficiency. Essentially, a small, efficient hybrid vehicle (at
        > > 70 mpg)
        > > will pay the same tax as a Hummer (at 7 mpg) when travelling the same
        > > distance.
        > >
        > > I agree that electronic tolling of this sort is appropriate for pricing
        > > congestion and road construction since these costs are borne by the
        > > distance
        > > travelled and the time of the travel. However, it does nothing to
        > > account for
        > > air emissions which are related to fuel usage. I would suggest that
        > > it would
        > > be better to charge both a petrol tax and a road usage tax. Of
        > > course, even
        > > these only begin to account for the true societal costs of motorised
        > > vehicles.
        > >
        > > Lloyd
        >
        >
        >
        > To Post a message, send it to: carfree_cities@...
        > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: carfree_cities-unsubscribe@...
        > Group address: http://www.egroups.com/group/carfree_cities/
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
      • flyboy472@juno.com
        To me it makes much more sense to stick to the current system of charging taxes on gasoline. What they need to do is up the gas tax but they know that all the
        Message 3 of 5 , Oct 9, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          To me it makes much more sense to stick to the current system of
          charging taxes on gasoline. What they need to do is up the gas tax
          but they know that all the SUV drivers will cry fowl if they do.

          Things to consider with the current gas tax:
          1) Easy to implement...like someone else said, it's tied in with a
          transaction that is already occuring...the purchase of gas.
          2) The amount of tax is almost directly based on how many miles you
          drive because a certain car will average a certain gas consumption
          per mile...this can vary though...
          3) As I said in #2, this can vary, but this variable is an ADVANTAGE
          because vehicles that use excessive gas, like SUVs, will have to pay
          more in taxes. Cars stuck in traffic will also consume more gas, and
          likewise pay more tax, so people are encouraged to drive during
          offpeak hours and use more efficient vehicles.

          Things to consider with the proposed mileage tax:
          1) Difficult to implement. Like someone said in an earlier post, it
          would either require building many toll stations, or equipping each
          vehicle with a GPS system to measure how many miles they drove. If
          the GPS system is used, there also needs to be an entire government
          (or privately contracted) entity whose purpose is to figure out how
          many miles you drove, how much you owe in taxes, and then make sure
          that you actually pay the government. Can we say inefficency?
          2) As someone said earlier, people who drive super gasoline efficient
          vehicles, like hybrid cars, are taxed just the same as people who
          drive super-inefficient vehicles like SUVs. This makes no sense as
          it does not encourage people to use less gas.

          What we need to do is first raise the gas tax by a small amount,
          maybe 10 cents per gallon (I know some people already think that's a
          HUGE amount...just wait). The extra money can be used to build a
          public transit network nation-wide...something on the scale of the
          Eisenhower Interstate System...perhaps even a network of trains along
          the same right of way as the interstates. Once there is an
          alternative form of transportation available to people, the gas tax
          should be raised by a large amount (perhaps in the vicinity of 50
          cents to a dollar per gallon). This tax would more realistically
          reflect the actual costs involved in driving a vehicle.

          This is a radical approach but it would (a) encourage the majority of
          people to use public transit, (b) solve our gasoline/foreign affairs
          problem, and (c) help us to begin healing the environment. Thoughts
          anyone?

          --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, Chris Radcliff <chris@g...>
          wrote:
          > Lloyd has a good point. It all depends on which costs you're
          trying to
          > internalize. Charging tolls spreads the cost of emissions
          unevenly,
          > just as charging gas taxes spreads the cost of road infrastructure
          > unevenly.
          >
          > Additionally, charging a toll by mileage sounds like a bigger
          challenge
          > than they may imagine. Taxes at the pump are easy to implement
          because
          > there's already a measured monetary transaction involved. Tolls
          are
          > notorious for creating bottlenecks unless there's a high-tech (and
          > difficult-to-implement) automated system in place. It's hard to
          > imagine the embedded GPS receiver approach the article mentions
          gaining
          > wide adoption very quickly, and partial adoption would make the
          system
          > even more unequal.
          >
          > At the core, something tells me this is less an issue of fair
          payment
          > and more a response to the difficult time governments have
          increasing
          > taxes. Shifting to a new system gives them the opportunity to set
          a
          > higher price without having anything to compare against.
          >
          > Cheers,
          > ~chris
          >
          > Lloyd Wright wrote:
          >
          > > It seems like this tax policy will benefit SUVs and other
          vehicles
          > > with poor
          > > fuel efficiency. Essentially, a small, efficient hybrid vehicle
          (at
          > > 70 mpg)
          > > will pay the same tax as a Hummer (at 7 mpg) when travelling the
          same
          > > distance.
          > >
          > > I agree that electronic tolling of this sort is appropriate for
          pricing
          > > congestion and road construction since these costs are borne by
          the
          > > distance
          > > travelled and the time of the travel. However, it does nothing
          to
          > > account for
          > > air emissions which are related to fuel usage. I would suggest
          that
          > > it would
          > > be better to charge both a petrol tax and a road usage tax. Of
          > > course, even
          > > these only begin to account for the true societal costs of
          motorised
          > > vehicles.
          > >
          > > Lloyd
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.