Am I remembering things, or wasn’t something like this floated during the Bush years and quickly shot down:
The Obama administration has floated a transportation authorization bill that would require the study and implementation of a plan to tax automobile drivers based on how many miles they drive.
The plan is a part of the administration’s Transportation Opportunities Act, an undated draft of which was obtained this week by Transportation Weekly.
The White House, however, said the bill is only an early draft that was not formally circulated within the administration.
“This is not an administration proposal,” White House spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki said. “This is not a bill supported by the administration. This was an early working draft proposal that was never formally circulated within the administration, does not taken into account the advice of the president’s senior advisers, economic team or Cabinet officials, and does not represent the views of the president.”
I’d freak out about someone installing something to monitor how and where I drove if I wasn’t already convinced my cell phone and numerous other devices weren’t already doing that and if I thought there was a snowball’s chance in hell this would ever become a law. The latter will never happen in my lifetime.
Yutsano
Hmmm… so certain are you? Car rental companies already install units that measure where you are, your mileage, and your average driving speed. It wouldn’t be hard at all to install a unit like that in every vehicle.
Sloegin
Cost of implementing mileage tracking tax; millions to billions in devices, monitoring, tracking, reporting, and enforcement.
Cost of implementing a gas tax hike that accomplishes nearly the same thing; zero.
mds
Because … people who drive more produce more road wear-and-tear? Here’s a novel thought: given the twin threats of dwindling petroleum reserves and climate change, why not simply tax automobile drivers based on how much gasoline they use? This would still correlate with miles driven, but would provide some savings to drivers of more fuel-efficient vehicles. The tax could even be added in at the pump, rather than requiring the installation of government tracking devices in every motor vehicle. And it would segue more naturally into a general carbon tax. Crazy, I know.
ed
It’s been covered elsewhere, but taxing miles driven is incredibly stupid. Lower milage cars cause more damage to roads, the environment, and bigass New York buildings. So they should be taxed relatively more via the simple, cheap system of taxing gasoline, which is already in place. And oh, by the way, while we’re on the subject, gas is wildly undertaxed, but good luck with that one. We’re so fucked.
PS
Er, is this like slamming $5 a gallon on the gas tax?
Sentient Puddle
Wouldn’t a gas tax approximate the same thing, but with a much more elegant implementation?
Mike
This is a stupid idea that I wish would disappear from transportation policy discussions. Just raise the gas tax. It’s a good enough proxy for miles-driven and rewards efficiency too.
Poopyman
I thought we already had the functional equivalent in a gas tax. At least a gas tax has the advantage (IMO) of putting a heavier burden on gas guzzlers.
ETA: My slow typing skills put me way behind the previous comments. So sue me, or just take it as affirmation.
PS
Four (eight?) minds with but a single thought
mistermix
@Sloegin: But I wonder how many stories on this dumb proposal will mention that.
BGK
It was Schwarzenegger’s idea back when he wasn’t a RINO.
David in NY
Me too.
ED: That is, didn’t we all agree this was stupid years ago?
Omnes Omnibus
One could simply make it a part of the registration renewal process. Have people indicate the mileage on the odometer when they renewal. Have random audits that require people to bring their car in for verification once in a while. Require that mileage be recorded on any transfer of title and collect the tax on any disparity with self-reported mileage at that time. I am not saying the tax would be a good idea, just that it would not require a big brother device.
ETA: I concur that a gas tax accomplishes the same goals with less fuss.
Brachiator
Really? We’re creeping closer already.
An even more intrusive technology can be used to monitor the driving habits of teenagers.
And I’ve recently listened to tech podcasts where geeks talk about how the concept of privacy is outmoded, as long as you can do cool shit with technology and social media. And I have laughed my ass off listening to gamers more concerned with being disconnected from PSN than with the possibility of having their credit card and ID info stolen.
And more to the point of the specific issues here, I can easily see some goofball saying that it is only reasonable to tax people who use roads based on how much wear and tear they put on the streets with their cars.
I could also see someone claiming that a car miles tax might encourage people to use public transportation more.
Keith
We already do this in the form of the gas tax. Drive more, use more gas, may more gas tax. Want a tax break? Get a car with better mileage.
Zifnab
So there’s this thing called an odometer…
@Sentient Puddle:
There’s a concern that with vehicle mileage rising and road repair and maintenance becoming a more pressing issue we need to collect taxes on miles driven more than gas used. A truck getting 10 mpg won’t cause 2.5x the wear and tear as a sedan getting 25 mpg. And electric cars would skirt the gas tax entirely.
fasteddie9318
WE CAN’T HAVE MOAR GASOLINE TAXES ON TOP OF THE $372 PER GALLON TEH GOVT ALREEDY TKAES BECUZ AMERICA FUCK YEAH! AND FREEDOME ALSO, TOO!
Villago Delenda Est
@Sloegin:
Oh, but then the handful of fully electric cars would be driving the streets for free!
Never mind that their actual impact on road wear is non-existent compared to your average 18 wheeler.
It’s the DFHs freeloading again!
cleek
in NY state, they call it “the thruway”. your toll depends on the distance between the exit at which you got on and the exit at which you left.
so, to generalize this for the rest of the country, we just need to put toll booths at every intersection, on every road. every time you turn off a road, you pay a toll for the distance traveled on the road you’re leaving and start the meter for the road you’re entering. simple!
Xecky Gilchrist
Yup, put me in with the chorus saying the gas tax covers it.
Sloegin
@mistermix: Just because an idea is breathlessly stupid doesn’t mean it can’t happen. I’m reminded of the Brits and the yearly license they have to pay to watch TV (and the evasion and enforcement games that are played; TV detector vans roaming the neighborhoods, visits by “enquiry officers” if you have a flat but no license, etc).
schrodinger's cat
OT: Balloon Juice front pagers’ favorite blogger is now using his blog to advertise the virtues of Mitch Daniels
Shoemaker-Levy 9
Atrios blogs about this frequently and yes, it’s a stupid idea.
@Brachiator:
I’m sure as hell glad I was a teenager several decades ago and not now. We’re training entire generations to be mindless, obedient little citizens who don’t think twice about being surveilled. This won’t end well.
Dave
Gas tax would be better, but based on brand and type of vehicle. Problem with a flat gas tax is its regressive nature.
Roger Moore
@Omnes Omnibus:
In states like California, where there are mandatory smog checks, you could include the mileage check at the same time. The big problem is that people would start tampering with their odometers to avoid paying the tax. A gas tax is a much simpler way to go.
cleek
@schrodinger’s cat:
probably a coincidence, but i feel much happier now that i’ve started ignoring him.
Brandon
More likely you’d get taxed based on your odometer readings when you have your inspection, or something like that. So the only thing they would need to install is a more robust anti-tampering device. But even if that was the case, it would be unworkable for many practical reasons, like the fact that rural people are the people who drive most and rural jurisdictions are the least likely to requires vehicle inspections. While vehicle miles traveled is the key metric for efficiency, this is basically a tax on rural people. If you want to reduce rural driving, why not reduce the disproportionate subsidy spent on rural roads first?
PeakVT
@Zifnab: For now, I’m perfectly happy to EV skirt the gas tax. We want more. When we get a couple of million on the road it will be easy to sell some kind of mileage-based taxed on them.
One point to note is that road damage goes up by the 4th power of the axle load. Most of the damage (aside from weather) comes from heavy trucks, but cars use up most of the space.
NonyNony
@cleek:
Except that, since this is THE FUTURE, instead of a “toll booth” at every intersection you put a transponder that tracks the little “EZ-Pass” that is mandated to be installed in every car (“driving without your EZ-Pass will be a $1,000 fine for the first offense, with fines and jail time increasing from there…”). Couple it with cameras to take pictures of license plates of cars that show up visually but don’t seem to be “transponding” and you have an automated system for tracking.
Is it worth doing? No, of course not. If you really wanted to track “mileage” you just make it a requirement that cars be inspected and have their odometers read every time they’re registered.
Still bone-stupid even if it’s technologically feasible. A gas tax is a better way to implement this in the short term. If you’re worried about low-mileage cars not “contributing” their share to road maintenance in the long term (in the short term the trade off gets people into smaller cars, which is good) then you increase the cost of registration with that money specifically marked for road repair. You can even go so far as to couple the registration increase with an odometer check so that you charge more to people who drive more.
b-psycho
Two thoughts:
1) Fuck no.
2) I strongly suspect that if it turned out this had a chance in hell, businesses that rely heavily on trucking would get a big phat exemption. Because paying for the costs you incur is for little people.
JR
I agree with the chorus who’d prefer to just see a gasoline tax increase, and I agree with the commenters who have noted that requiring taxpayers to report their odometer readings accomplishes the same thing without scary New World Order monitoring.
And you know how agreeing with more than one camp on these threads makes me feel. Ick!
debit
I do wonder, and will probably be blasted for it, how much people drive when they don’t have to. I’m guilty of it too; the local store/deli is 7 blocks away. If I need something, I could just walk there and back. Most times I do. Sometimes, when I’m in a hurry or lazy, I drive, especially in the winter. I tell myself it’s okay because I commute by bike the entire summer, but honestly I don’t need to drive as much as I do.
Roger Moore
@Brandon:
I think you’re missing your own point. There are two ways of decreasing the rural subsidy: decreasing spending on rural areas and increasing taxes on rural areas. Maybe you would prefer the reduced spending outcome- a shift to low tax low service- but increasing the taxes- a shift to high tax high service- is an equally valid way of reducing the subsidy.
David Fud
Sometimes I wonder why they do this, because it is obvious to anyone that a gas tax, as mentioned many times in comments before mine, is much more efficient and simple.
Do they want to make the gas tax seem like a viable alternative or something? Why float a balloon like this at all unless you are attempting to make something else look good?
Halteclere
I’d just start driving my ’60’s car more often (which would negate all advancements in cleaner-burning cars). Good luck hooking up any computerized device to that thing!
Oh yea, and the odometer is off – the slower I go the more it is off. At 80MPH it is correct, but at 60MPH it says I’m travelling 55MPH.
Downpuppy
Kent Conrad proposed; the Administration disposed.
Conrad is an ass and/
orsome of his heavy metal drivin’ constituents have been grousing.David Fud
wow, moderation for a non-pr0n, non-curse, non-controversial comment.
FYWP!
ed
Ah, but a truck getting 10 per may cause 2.5x the total externalities as a sedan getting 25 per. These externalities include, but are not limited to: wear and tear, local pollution, global pollution, lunatics flying planes into big buildings, traffic congestion, trucks taking up more space on the road and at the gas pump, MTBE, and what have you. YMMV. And even if this isn’t 2.5 times the total externalities, this doesn’t alter the fact that taxing gas is simple and already in place.
You mean both of them? Gee, if there were only some other way to tax energy consumption.
Cackalacka
+ eleventy on the putting a proper fuel tax.
Martin
NY used to set vehicle registration based on how many axles the vehicle had. Heavier vehicles had more axles, caused more wear, got taxed higher. Applied to rates on bridges and tunnels as well.
@Halteclere: Changing the size of your tires changes your speedometer/odometer readings since the odometer is based on turns of your drive axles multiplied by the circumference of the manufacturers recommended tire size. I put larger tires on my car, so I actually go further on each turn of the axle than the mfg expects. Sounds like in the last 50 years, the circumference of your tires changed to throw off the speedometer at 60. Older speedometers are notoriously inaccurate at higher speeds, so I think it’s only correct at 80 by accident.
Cackalacka
and +1 for EVs’ being, for the time being exempt.
I’ve always had a soft-spot for any idiot who has bought a large SUV or a V8 since, oh, mid-September 2001. Their seems to be a strong correlation between that type of creature and the desire to bitch about fuel taxes.
Turbulence
@Omnes Omnibus: One could simply make it a part of the registration renewal process. Have people indicate the mileage on the odometer when they renewal.
You don’t even need to do all that. In Massachusetts you have to get your car inspected every year by law. Part of the inspection involves reading your odometer and the state passes the certified odometer reading to your insurance company. That way, you can get a low-mileage insurance discount without having to coordinate getting your car inspected by the insurance company. It would be trivial to make your annual vehicle excise tax depend on the mileage driven.
Cris (without an H)
I denounce odometer monitoring.
Mouse Tolliver
You think mileage tracking is creepy? How ’bout this? A young couple bought a computer from a rent-to-own store. After they completed the plan and owned it outright, the store tried to improperly repossess the computer. The repo man showed the owner a picture of himself using the computer that was taken with the computer’s webcam. The rent-to-own store put spyware on the computer that allowed them to log keystrokes and activate the webcam whenever they wanted.
Ivan Ivanovich Renko
@Shoemaker-Levy 9:
No, we’re teaching them how to be really good at finding ways to beat, co-opt or suborn the system.
Interesting times!
Omnes Omnibus
@Turbulence: In Wisconsin and Ohio, the only states in which I have registered cars, yearly inspections are not mandatory.
RSR
This is a huge, terrible, invasive, privacy-shattering premise designed to enrich some politically connected skimmers running some semi-autonomous bureaucracy which will then turn around and sell off the data they collect on your driving habits to the highest bidder (or give it to the ‘authorities’ if/when they think you’re up to ‘no good’).
As Atrios has noted–probably dozens of times by now–the gas tax already achieves simply and efficiently nearly everything a miles-driven monitoring system would.
But in corporations-before-people America, private enterprise, as with public education, prisons, military resources, etc, can’t leave a big pile of money just sitting there untapped in the governments hands.
Halteclere
@Martin
Actually the mechanism in the odometer that dampens the rotation of the spedometer cable, and translates the revolution speed of the spedometer cable into the correct position of the speed indicator (and which also turns the odometer) has weakened over time. For some reason it is more accurate at higher spedometer cable revolutions.
Concerning NY, toll rates for vehicles travelling from New Jersey to NY are based both on the number of axles, and if the second axle has dual tires (i.e. identifying heavier trucks).
Woodrowfan
what a truly awful idea…
Turbulence
@Omnes Omnibus: Whoah. If you don’t have to get your car inspected every year or two, then how does the state get dangerous clunkers off the road? Do insurance companies even offer low-milage discounts where you live?
When I was a kid I got a real kick out of going with my Dad to get his car inspected and watching them test that the brakes could actually stop the vehicle in time.
lllphd
um, am i confused? or is john over-reacting here?
from what you posted (i admit, did not go to the source), what they are proposing would not require any new equipment. i mean, what do they want to do that a standard odometer could not do?
so mileage is recorded when we get annual inspection. what’s the big deal on that? actually sounds like a reasonable option worth considering, tho there are folks who have to commute for hours to work, but couldn’t they get some sort of prorate?
the benefit of this would be to dampen the number of miles people drive. i know it would make me more conscious of that. but then, i have a prius.
;-)
Halteclere
At one time Arkansas did away with vehicle inspections, which I was happy about because my car didn’t have a reverse (which I don’t think was an issue), didn’t have a horn, and didn’t have an emergency brake. I don’t think it had seatbelts, either, when I first got it.
But that was better than other cars I saw, such as a car that had a large gas plastic gas can strapped to the roof and a tube running down to the engine, and another car who had a rope running between both windshield wipers which then passed through the vent windows and passed through the cab. The owner said that his arm would get tired pulling the rope back and forth when he was driving in the rain.
I’m a big fan of vehicle inspections, for I know first-hand the dangerous types of vehicles people would drive if allowed.
Omnes Omnibus
@RSR: While I tend to agree that a gas tax would be the simpler way to accomplish the same goal, i think we have established that it is possible to track mileage without being big brother.
Dennis SGMM
Sure, as long as I get a credit for the number of miles I walk or ride my bike each year.
artem1s
I imagine that this idea keeps getting rehashed because a gas tax is universal. A per mileage tax would be bracketed and deducted to death by corporations and business men. Remember the ‘truck’ deduction a few years ago that every small business owner used to buy an Escalade? It will be the same thing. Individuals will get to deduct ‘business’ use and CEOs will get a company car and the Corporation will deduct everything against their profits. Gas tax fixt. It’s just another way for the Richie Riches to get out of paying taxes and shunt them off on the working poor.
Turbulence
@lllphd: from what you posted (i admit, did not go to the source), what they are proposing would not require any new equipment. i mean, what do they want to do that a standard odometer could not do?
I think the bit that you’re missing here is that there are a bunch of companies that are pushing tracking technology to Congress and state legislatures pretty hard. The idea is that you put a “tamper-proof” tracking device in your car that can be used by the state and municipal governments to bill you for vehicle miles traveled.
Plus you can also use it to bill people for other things like parking lot usage. And once you have this device transmitting fine-grained location data to a central authority, you can do some really fun stuff like automatic speeding tickets.
That’s the context you need: this isn’t some random idea that just popped into Congress’ head one day; it is a scheme that is being pushed hard by for-profit companies that think they can make a killing.
RobertB
Don’t know about low-mileage discounts, but here in Ohio, the answer to “how does the state get dangerous clunkers off the road” is, “they don’t.”
ant
nope cole, not the bush years.
It’s that same fucking jackass, lahood, or whatever the fuck his name is, that does transportation for the Obama administration that keeps pushing this.
IIRC, it was one of the only republicans Obama put in his administration.
He look like a first class idiot, from where I sit.
Brachiator
@Shoemaker-Levy 9:
Worse, we are training entire generations to be mindless, obedient little consumers who don’t think twice about being surveilled, and who are mocked when they offer the slightest resistance to technology “optimized” to track our every move and sell us stuff especially selected for us based on our movements on the InterTubes and social media sites.
normal liberal
This idea has been around for a while – Boxer was pushing a variant when the last transportation re-authorization was being negotiated and enacted, which coincided with the highway trust fund (funded by the gas tax) tapping out and requiring an injection of cash from general revenue.
The University of Iowa did a pilot study in ten states over two years with volunteers. It was a mess, with issues ranging from equipment failure (they installed a tracking device cobbled together from stock parts), non-compliance (people disconnected the widget) and terrible confusion resulting from attempts to allocate the tax revenue according to where people were driving. One of the lead researchers concluded that neither the technology or the tax structure could cope.
mcd410x
i’m just going to throw this out here: gas tax.
there, back to the simple answer.
Kent
This is MUCH more insidious than simply checking your odometer. By installing a GPS they can track which roads you are on at which time of day meaning that the highway authorities can set infinitely complex toll systems based on road, time of day, congestion, and day of the week. They couldn’t do that with just checking your odometer. I suspect they figure that “fine-tuning” the tolls for specific highways will be politically easier than raising the gas tax.
But it is still a horribly bad idea for a long list of reasons.
1. It will cost billions to install, maintain, and use these systems. Can you say corporate welfare? How much will the contractors take off the top of such a system compared to the ordinary gas tax?
2. It will inspire a whole new cottage industry of tax evasion. If they run off GPS I guarantee GPS jamming devices will appear on ebay in a nanosecond. Flip the switch of your GPS jammer and they never know you left your driveway. Or for that matter, what happens if I hit mine with a hammer or snip a wire? Do I pay no tax until it is fixed?
3. Privacy concerns. Who will have access to the data. Will the police be able to search the databases to see which cars were at a specific location during a certain time?
4. Business exemptions. Trucks and commercial fleets that pay ordinary gas taxes now will no doubt figure out a myriad of ways to exempt/deduct these things from their expenses. Given how lobbying works, this can only result in a shift in tax burden from corporations and industry onto the ordinary driver.
As a hundred other commentators have noted, just raise the gas tax and be done with it.
LanceThruster
Add a substantial tax for the dimwits installing mega-subwoofers and boom stereos.
Tax the manufacturers, the retailers, an annual registration fee, a rapidly progressive ticketing and fine assessment structure for noise infractions, and put some of the money towards noise and nuisance abatement programs as well as TSA’s reminding others “Don’t be bASS-holes!”
You could solve a lot of municiple fiscal crises with that approach.
THUCK YOUR FUMP, CHUMP!
TooManyJens
@Omnes Omnibus: Same for Illinois. I’ve never had to have one for as long as I’ve owned a car (18 years now, or thereabouts).
catclub
@Turbulence: “That’s the context you need: this isn’t some random idea that just popped into Congress’ head one day; it is a scheme that is being pushed hard by for-profit companies that think they can make a killing.”
And yet the Clipper chip was beaten down and has not (visibly) returned. It was both dumb AND unpopular.
Not the optimal combination.
Jim Pharo
@NonyNony: I’m amazed that more people aren’t PO’d about the tracking of EZ-passes that goes on. They have already put receivers everywhere and if you have an EZ pass you are already being tracked everywhere you drive.
And no one seems to care.
Dennis SGMM
@catclub:
OTOH, Donald Trump will be driving the pace car at the Indy 500 this year.
horatius
Atrios has been banging this drum for a while now.
Increase the ridiculously low gas taxes. It’s the fairest and cheapest way. ALl these stupid monitors are not even cost effective.
JoeG
why not just increase the tax on the oil/gas producers/companies since maintaining roads, highways, bridges, etc. is an integral part of THEM CONTINUING TO SELL THEIR PRODUCT to us…
I.e., you want to sell more gas? pay the taxes so we can fix the roads people drive cars on which by the way only operate with products you sell!
The Duc d'Fuck
LanceThruster: I’m guessing you want us offa yer lawn, too?
PeakVT
Has anyone looked at who might be a vendor for tracking devices and which Congresscritters they’ve donated to?
normal liberal
Another foray out of lurkerdom to note that the mileage tax was proposed in part to address the revenue shortfall from the gas tax when rising gas prices triggered reduced travel. (Yes, that would also mean reduced mileage tax, but supposedly clever souls have determined that the revenue impact is less catastrophic.) There is a related (although as yet too small to properly analyze)impact from alternative fuel vehicles which require little or no gas, and thus pay little or no fuel tax. Electric cars, and even hybrids, skate on the higher level of taxes paid by the hapless owners of gas-only vehicles. The revenue impact is exacerbated by the gas tax being a flat sum per gallon, not a percentage.
The shortfalls affect not just the Feds, but state and local governments, who receive a slice of the fuel tax revenue according to formulas so complicated that Mayan astronomers shake their heads in disbelief. A goodly portion of the road building and repair done by your state, county and city is funded this way – it goes on the books as local tax revenue, but it’s really a portion of the Federal fuel levy.
The real barriers include the cost of retrofitting our gazillions of vehicles, and the privacy concerns that many in this discussion have mentioned. And above all, the need to completely restructure how we finance transportation infrastructure in this country, which no one is in the mood to do.
I used to smother threads at FDL years ago. This may do it for this one.
catclub
@Dennis SGMM: Maybe he will crash it.
Davis X. Machina
It’s impossible. And in 20 years it will be universal, ubiquitous and an unqualified success.
MarkJ
Not to be too much of a devil’s advocate but . . .
The gas tax should be raised, I agree, but gas taxes don’t tax all the externalities associated with driving, at least not directly. Mileage taxes tax exposure to accidents, and their main intent is to reduce mileage driven and thereby improve highway safety. Gas taxes do this to some extent, but you could still kill someone with an electric vehicle whether or not you paid a cent in gas taxes.
I’m anti some sort of tracking device that monitors your every move, but have no problem with my odometer being read every so often. My mechanic does that every time I have my car serviced – they could use that data to levy the tax.
Ruckus
Track mileage?
I get a letter from my insurance co every year for every vehicle
askingdemanding my odometer reading and my estimated driving for the year. They set my rates based on this. It’s honorary but if I shortchange one year I have to make up the next and they raise my rates for the retroactive usage.What’s to stop a bill that all insurance cos have to do this and turn the info into the government? It is a way to find those uninsured cars and levy the tax through your insurance bill.
ETA And I agree that raising the gas tax is the easy, simple way. Which is why I suspect that we will have mileage monitors. Soon.
LanceThruster
@The Duc d’Fuck:
You could camp on my lawn as long as you did it quietly. The neighbor’s kid whose boom stereo I complained about actually did a “lawn job” on my property.
His constant “sonic assault” comes through my walls and disturbs whatever it is I am trying to do inside of my own home. The last straw was that his bass thump was louder than the D-Day scene of “Saving Private Ryan’ and my home theater sound system is fairly substantial.
Are you saying that you defend his toxic emissions and “air” pollution?
The physics of this low frequency signal is pretty simple. It has far more energy than the high frequency spectrum (hence the amp modifications needed). Any flat surface becomes a passive resonator. The wallboard over standard wood framing acts much like a drum skin.
How about I set up one of those baby monitors in your house, and subject you to whatever irritation I choose to inflict on you?
Would you be OK with that?
Uhh, I thought not.
Brother Shotgun of Sweet Reason
@Omnes Omnibus: I thought the annual tax on mileage made a lot of sense. I have to put it on my registration. Also, the mileage is recorded every year when the cars get inspected. What? Your state doesn’t require an inspection so things like brakes and tires work?
I’m moving there. This inspection stuff is a pain.
Shoemaker-Levy 9
@Ivan Ivanovich Renko:
We can hope, but my fear is that the kids who figure out how to defeat this stuff all end up working at CIA and Xe.
jak
Oregon was studying this a year or two ago.
D-Chance.
Just don’t rent a computer from Aaron’s.
Tom Betz
If the object is to tax based on the highway wear-and-tear of heavier vehicles, and to include electric heavy vehicles in the tax that the gas tax would miss, just tax every vehicle by useful-load weight category, and don’t tax the lowest category at all.
This incentivizes owning smaller cars that use less energy and wear the roads less, while having the potential to cover the additional costs of all heavy vehicles.
And the gas tax goes away.
JGabriel
Add my voice to the gas tax chorus.
.
Seanly
The crazy thing is that we don’t need that much more in the way of gas tax to increase highway funding. 50 or 60 cents extra per gallon (state and federal) would allow us to again have a great transportation system. There would be plenty left over for mass transit improvements.
What about cars with great mileage or electric vehicles? You’ve now incentivized increasing mileage. With well thought out indexing included, you can push the time frame for when increased efficiency becomes a problem.
The issue is that the trucking industry would go nuts having to pay another 5 cents per gallon much less 50. Plus the overall resistance to increasing gas taxes in our current insane political climate.
Seanly
Forgot to add that the increased spending would allow me to leave the ranks of the unemployed…
JR in WV
Well, I’m about the 85th person to point out that a gas tax does this for free as far as implementation costs go.
There’s already 50 different state versions of this, and a federal version; there’s also an apportioned mileage tax based upon miles traveled by commercial vehicles as they move from state to state.
You can see an “Apportioned” license plate on any 18-wheeler on any road in the country.
So we most certainly do not need a study group to recommend that GPS units be installed in every vehicle in the country. All that would do would be to exempt hackers from that tax, as their GPS units would all show that they never started their cars up in the first place!